Readers might like to compare the more journalistic (and entertaining, IMO) 2014 piece on 'San Francisco’s tech-libertarian “Reboot” conference' from sadly defunct Pando, for example:
> At first glance it makes no sense to front a rabidly anti-gay candidate like McMorris Rodgers to sell the Kochs’ and the Paul family’s scrubland libertarianism to a Bay Area audience full of hip disruptors and “anarchist” practitioners of bohemia grooming fads.
> But that’s because what Silicon Valley folks think of when they hear the word “libertarianism” actually has very little connection to what the libertarian movement actually stands for, and has stood for since the 1970s.
...
1: https://web.archive.org/web/20141118174216/http://pando.com/...
The libertarianism the article speaks of at the end gave way to right-wing populism, while Silicon Valley moved into mixture of hard capitalism and social justice (dodging taxes and monopolizing while showing pride flags)
I think this utopian techno-libertarian is more like a relic from the 90s nowadays.
edit: on the other hand… it gave rise to bitcoin/cryptocurrency, which is like the culmination of both techno-utopianism and libertarianism. So, maybe you are right
It seems the system co-opts everything, including rejection of the system.
Classical liberalism was a naturalistic belief in market supremacy, understood to be a colossal failure by the middle of the 20th century. It was associated with the Gilded Age, which spawned the so-called Progressive Era, the ideological camps that followed, and the catastrophe that was the world wars.
Neoliberalism is what the capitalist class have insisted is a reformed liberalism, invincible to the problems that classical liberalism motivated. It is a far more centralized, 'managed' market supremacy without the naturalistic perspective. Neoliberalism claims to acknowledge that markets are not natural and must be tightly managed by experts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_General_Theory_of_Employme...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_business_cycle_theory
That'd be equivalent to grow America's M2 ($20 trillion) by 12 trillion in just 4 years. 2019 to 2022 wasn't even that intense and, well, we can see how ugly things have gotten.
the ruthless capitalist approach led to the development of communism as a reaction. but communism had its own faults and, to many, egregious failures as well.
Mussolini -- who was literally the editor of a socialist newspaper -- grew disillusioned with socialism, and proposed a 3rd way by mixing chunks of capitalism that he liked with the chunks of communism that he liked, as well as a good healthy dose of machismo and nationalism to paper over the gaps.
similar approaches were taken in Germany, and there was a Nationalist (right wing) Workers Party (left wing) called the NSDAP that tried to do the same thing. Instead of pure corporatism they made it ethnic, but had vaguely similar approaches to corporations and the state, which often meant whatever they felt like at the time.
In fact, his channel profile now simply says "English liberal."
Wikipedia begs to differ with all that...
I don't think the alt right can be said to have "claimed" it as much as the left is rejecting it and there is no other home in a 2-faction classification.
[0] https://www.politico.com/news/2020/08/17/statue-removed-fran... Note the name Voltaire
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson#Memorials_and... Note the name Jefferson.
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#Notable_t... Note the names Jefferson, Voltaire.
Not really. It says that journalists describe him as “far right” which by current journalistic standards is a superset of classical liberalism.
Computers merely allow us to lie - and forget the lies - at light speed. This will eventually replace all other cultures - neoliberalism especially ...
A river is made up of different water molecules every day, yet it's the same river over millennia.
In the same way, countries (and other abstract entities such as companies) exist in the dynamics of human interactions.
So yes, humans must perpetuate the concept by re-telling it, but somewhat paradoxically it's not a lie as long as they do so.
Heraclitus would like a word with you.
It’s amazing to me people agree on definitions for anything, given people have been having the same basic abstract arguments for what makes thing A thing A and distinct from thing B for thousands of years.
Rerun the human race 1000 times. Do you think Russia will show up more than a handful of times?
It only takes a few days in the bush, out back, to realize just how futile it is to consider any one culture superior to another...
