3 ms·

It's premised on a distorted understanding of the world they live in, the spherical cow of politics and economics. Externalities don't exist, discontent leading

It's premised on a distorted understanding of the world they live in, the spherical cow of politics and economics. Externalities don't exist, discontent leading to populism isn't a thing that can happen, endogenous bargaining disputes can't exist, tragedy of the commons isn't a thing that can happen. It's why a lot of young technical-minded people are attracted to it. You need to be quite smart to understand the premises of libertarianism, but simultaneously, insufficiently educated in fields like history and economics to grok why it'd be a set of failed ideas in the actual real world. High idealism, low wisdom. A lot of modern right-libertarian thinkers realize their ideology will never get voted in, so they're turning to neoreactionary thought and are doing away with any pretence of wanting democracy.

7thaccount 3y ago
You stated it much better than I. There are some things I appreciate about Javier Milei (e.g. rejection of Communism, which has been disastrous), but it seems like he ignores the half of economics he doesn't agree with such as saying "market failures are impossible". That's an obviously false statement as negative externalities do most certainly exist and politics is a real thing. The only thing I can think of is that they're okay with the problems getting REALLY bad and then letting the market try to fix them, which is just dumb. If you made antibiotics super cheap and available to all and they became even more overused, millions could die from antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria. Sure that might spur some new developments, but it's no guarantee. We might just be back in the dark ages prior to having effective treatments for common ailments. But hey...at least the market isn't infringed on (sarcasm). I do understand their frustration with the beauracracy of government and how parasitic it can be.
acdha 3y ago
> It's why a lot of young technical-minded people are attracted to it. You need to be quite smart to understand the premises of libertarianism, but simultaneously, insufficiently educated in fields like history and economics to grok why it'd be a set of failed ideas in the actual real world. The other thing I’d add to your excellent comment is basically another social science gap (media studies) where it’s easy to read things which provide that quick hit of smug satisfaction and not ask how, for example, Reason has an entire business running stories about excessive government regulation and there are entire groups funded to generate academic-style publications supporting that mission. If you’re a 20 year old techie, you probably spend a lot more time sharing the “look at this idiot thing someone at the EPA did” post than checking the sources to learn what really happened, or that the writer gets a paycheck funded by donations from that industry.

7thaccount 3y ago

You stated it much better than I. There are some things I appreciate about Javier Milei (e.g. rejection of Communism, which has been disastrous), but it seems like he ignores the half of economics he doesn't agree with such as saying "market failures are impossible". That's an obviously false statement as negative externalities do most certainly exist and politics is a real thing. The only thing I can think of is that they're okay with the problems getting REALLY bad and then letting the market try to fix them, which is just dumb. If you made antibiotics super cheap and available to all and they became even more overused, millions could die from antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria. Sure that might spur some new developments, but it's no guarantee. We might just be back in the dark ages prior to having effective treatments for common ailments. But hey...at least the market isn't infringed on (sarcasm). I do understand their frustration with the beauracracy of government and how parasitic it can be.

acdha 3y ago

> It's why a lot of young technical-minded people are attracted to it. You need to be quite smart to understand the premises of libertarianism, but simultaneously, insufficiently educated in fields like history and economics to grok why it'd be a set of failed ideas in the actual real world. The other thing I’d add to your excellent comment is basically another social science gap (media studies) where it’s easy to read things which provide that quick hit of smug satisfaction and not ask how, for example, Reason has an entire business running stories about excessive government regulation and there are entire groups funded to generate academic-style publications supporting that mission. If you’re a 20 year old techie, you probably spend a lot more time sharing the “look at this idiot thing someone at the EPA did” post than checking the sources to learn what really happened, or that the writer gets a paycheck funded by donations from that industry.