Market libertarians: “A chief danger of a Trump presidency is that free markets will be blamed for the bad consequences of his policies.”
OK. But when has this not been the case? When have opponents of free markets not blamed the free market for bad consequences of government policy? When have they not placed the blame for the aspects of society which they dislike on free markets? What is not “neoliberalism” these days?
The chances of your individual vote effecting the outcome of the presidential election are infinitesimal. In a country the size of America, the odds of your individual vote mattering are billions, if not trillions, to one against.
Also, it’s, like, really, really, like, super important that you don’t cast your individual vote, in order to, like, you know, make a really, really, like, super important stand against the oppressive democratic system.
1) Pro-market, but not too pro-market
2) Pro-property rights, but not too pro-property rights
3) Individualistic, but not too individualistic
4) Pro-growth (to the exclusion of all else, see 1, 2 and 3)
5) Globalist in outlook, in spite of being “pro-property rights” and “empirical”
6) Focused on changing the world for the better, in spite of being “pro-market”, “pro-property rights”, and “individualistic”
7) Optimistic about the future, in spite of being “globalist in outlook” and “focused on changing the world for the better”
8) Empirical and open minded, but not too empirical and open minded (see 5, 6 and 7)
Bob Higgs rails against the insidious collectivism of “we”, “us”, and “our” in political discourse. Great stuff.
In other news, the official market libertarian position is (still) that we should open our borders because immigration is a benefit to us.