In reading public opinion from some of my fellow Libertarians in the past week(s), I am growing ashamed to identify myself as one. I understand the desire to reduce government spending, and while I do not generally support economic stimulus (which I have long described as administering morphine to a patient in critical condition); I am pragmatic enough to realize that when you are just returning to work after an attempted coup, you have to make compromises. Sometimes you need to be realistic instead of idealistic.
Now I see Libertarians and fiscal Conservatives throwing Stephen Harper under the bus for doing what the majority of parliament demanded. So if the PM had snubbed the opposition and they voted against the 2009 budget, would we have been better off under a Liberal coalition with the NDP and Bloc? Absolutely not! Should we have stood up for fiscal conservatism when the big tax and spenders were at the precipice of forming government? And do I need to come out and say this every fucking week? Be frustrated if that's what suits you, but attacking the Prime Minister for doing what he had to do is ridiculous.
Which gets me to the Fraser Institute. I have supported them in the past, and I will not debate their assertions on the effectiveness of the Economic Action Plan (which they were against from the beginning, now finding data to back-up their initial claim) until I have had a chance to review the data. But regardless, our economic recovery has been one of the best in the world and our GDP growth is smashing expectations. What exactly are we complaining about? “Sure our recovery has been fantastic compared to the rest of the world, but here's what I would have done differently?” Maybe we would have been even better off without the stimulus, but our recovery has been success. That's like a hockey fan watching his team win 4-2 and saying "we should have won 7-2".
Come on Libertarians, where is the realism? We have a minority parliament and a borderline bipolar opposition that control a majority of the seats in our legislature. If you think Jack Layton or Bob Rae would have done better as Minister of Finance, then may God have mercy on your soul (if he exists)...
Dude - I cannot explain in words how awesome it is to hear someone else say exactly the same thoughts I have regarding patience and understanding with regard to the current administration! Really reinforces my belief that a world leader will never please everyone all of the time, so just relax a bit - anything is better than Dion, Ignatieff, Rae, or *shudder* Layton...
ReplyDeleteThere is no way of measuring the monetary results from consumer confidence.
ReplyDeleteThat confidence came directly from the Government's handling of the psycology factors in a recession.
PMSH went on the national and world stage and promoted Canada, while the opps went 100% doom and gloom.
That kept consumers and business up-beat.
That kept money flowing.
Libertarians are trapped in a black and white world, and are miserable because of it.
Iceman ... I am a "sort of" Libertarian myself but I am not on the side of those Libertarians who are now blowing their horns about the Harper govt not doing what they perceive the govt should have done IF the govt is a true Conservative govt.
ReplyDeleteThey don't stop even for a flitting second to reflect on what could have happened if the Harper govt had not conceded to the "blackmail" and arm twisting that happened just before the spending spree was announced.
Did the Libertarians wants the Lib/NDP/Bloc to govern them? Because, that is exactly what would have happened. I am amazed that they cannot see that simple clear fact for what it is.
*sigh*
Thank you Iceman. Well said.
ReplyDeletePersonally I think Libertarians are the only realists because they are the only ones who actually believe in our fundamental rights, such as property rights. It's everyone else who is unrealistic since they want to perpetuate the neo-feudalist society where we are merely servants of the State. Case in point - whenever government spending increases it is telling you how much of your earnings it is going to take, it never asks you how much it can have. So who is being unrealistic? Those that want to maintain the status quo, such as Harper, or Libertarians who see violations of fundamental rights? Who are the radicals, those who want to continue supporting a regime that has completely lost interest in fundamental rights (note that as of the November '08 rewriting of the Conservative Constitution Property rights are no longer included) or those who actually value and work towards those freedoms?
ReplyDeleteI think a Conservative is simply a practical Libertarian. While we would like the smallest possible government, we all know it's simply not possible in a democracy. I do believe that many are using this as a wedge issue though.
ReplyDeleteI agree and second the frustration.
Great post though.
No true Libertarian would be in doubt about what harper is doing. He is not even a Conservative let alone a Libertarian. You can justify it anyway you like. A socialist is a socialist by deed. How much further left would Harper go if those of us with some principles left did not point that out.
ReplyDeleteHey now. I'm a pragmatic libertarian, like you. Never mind those people who think they own conservatism or libertarianism or whateverism. We don't need their approval, at least I don't. If you do you'll always have to bow to them. Which libertarian likes to bow? Anyone? No we do not have infinite perception, nor do we have a grand unified theory of perfect Government. Anyone who fails to see the realities of today cannot even begin to plan for tomorrow.
ReplyDeletebtw Iceman I think I've figured out how to help with your book. How do I contact you? There's work to do.
icemanthe96@yahoo.ca
ReplyDelete