Matt Yglesias

24 Responses to “What to Do?”

1. Glaivester Says:
   September 2nd, 2008 at 5:54 pm

   I’m glad someone is mentioning Chuck Baldwin!

2. Don Williams Says:
   September 2nd, 2008 at 5:54 pm

   1) Matthew ought to read Chapter X of Hayek’s “Road to Serfdom”. Title of chapter is “Why the Worst Get On Top”. Best explanation of Bush/Cheney electoral strategy I’ve ever seen.

3. Rachel Says:
   September 2nd, 2008 at 6:04 pm

   Okay, this is really nuts. Just caught a segment on Hardball during which the commentators referred to the Alaska Independence Party, repeatedly, as the Alaska Independent Party. Meanwhile, they somehow neglected to mention that it’s a secessionist movement.

   What is wrong with these people?

4. Richard Steven Hack Says:
   September 2nd, 2008 at 6:32 pm

   There’s nothing wrong with them. They own the media and they want McCain to win. They’re acting in their perceived best interests.

   So they let ANYTHING McCain does slide and criticize Obama for saying anything.

   This is THE election where the “will of the people” (such as it is, which isn’t saying much) gets totally hijacked by the Powers That Be and the MSM they own (plus a little judicious vote fraud wherever possible, just like in 2000 and 2004.)

   Add a little Iran war, and Obama is doomed.

5. SqueakyRat Says:
   September 2nd, 2008 at 6:45 pm

   “classical liberal” = “libertarian”

6. Jorge Says:
   September 2nd, 2008 at 6:47 pm

   Among some ethical religious paradigms, the ultimate sin is despair. I’m not saying the election win for Obama is guaranteed, but note that 2006 did not exactly go according to “plan” for the GOP. They need this thing close enough to be able to steal, and the entire Obama strategy relies on swamping enough votes via ground game for that to be unrealistic.

7. MQ Says:
   September 2nd, 2008 at 7:07 pm

   “ego-driven interventionist” is actually a decent off-the-cuff summarization of McCain.

8. 24AheadDotCom Says:
   September 2nd, 2008 at 7:15 pm

   “classical liberal” = “libertarian”

   There are some differences, but I’m surprised MattY didn’t know that. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. Classical liberal is pretty far from “liberal” as practiced today. For examples, see MattY’s bosses’ habit of supporting restrictions on free speech, their constant attempts to smear “hate radio” (aka Rush), and so on.

9. Don Williams Says:
   September 2nd, 2008 at 7:21 pm

   Re Squeaky Rat’s comment ““classical liberal” = “libertarian”
   ———–
   Not really. Classical liberalism accepts the need for government –they just think that it needs to be a limited government. The argument of Hayek et al is that a more collectivist form of government (e.g, New Deal) will eventually be taken over by bad men and its powers used for malign, private goals.

   For example, that if you set up a Social Security system , bad men will steal $4 Trillion from it. Even if they are only in power temporarily.

   In which case, the system you initially set up for a good goal –care of the elderly — is used for bad ends and is turned into a con game. You’re partially guilty because your story was used to collect the money for the bad men to grab. Your story was what lessened the resistence of the working poor to having their wages taxed. The common citizen would have been far better off if he had simply bought gold –to guard against government run inflation — and buried it in the ground. Democratic programs hence aid and abet Republican crimes.

   The shortcoming in Hayek’s analysis is that ANY government set up for a nation of 300 Million people will be authoritarian. And if it is not, Republicans will start a nice brisk Cold War to move the historical process along.

10. Don Williams Says:
    September 2nd, 2008 at 7:28 pm

    1)For example, look at the USA Income Distribution over the last 25 years of the Cold War and then the subsequent two decades of the post-War American Empire:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:United_States_Income_Distribution_1967-2003.svg

    2) Does it look like the proletariat are getting a decent break? Under either the Republicans or Democrats?

11. Dan Kervick Says:
    September 2nd, 2008 at 9:01 pm

    Matt,

    Are you going to do a series of posts on the LaRouche contingent too? How about Falun Gong?

12. John Says:
    September 2nd, 2008 at 9:15 pm

    I don’t see how someone can be a “classical liberal” and even consider supporting the Constitution Party.

13. JoshA Says:
    September 3rd, 2008 at 1:53 am

    Props for mentioning he’s a classical liberal, Matt.

    Oh, and 24, do you really think that Matt didn’t know that there are a lot of similarities b/w libertarians and classical liberals?

14. Michael J Says:
    September 3rd, 2008 at 8:50 am

    Just thought wikipedia could help with “classic liberals.
    Classic and new deal and fair deal and great society liberals are all different animals.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism

    Back in the day, SDS was founded with “Controlling the decisions that affect our lives.” Lots of different ways that was interpreted and brought to life.

15. Molly Says:
    September 3rd, 2008 at 10:26 am

    Matt, I would also be happy to buy you a beer, and I promise I’m not a Ron Paul supporter. You should do a blog meetup!

16. Anarcho Says:
    September 4th, 2008 at 4:14 am

    “classical liberal” = “libertarian”

    Only in America and only since the 1970s. Before then, it was a case of:

    “libertarian” = “anarchist” = “libertarian socialist”

    As in Emma Goldman, Alexander Berkman, Peter Kropotkin and a host of other anti-state and anti-capitalist thinkers. They were just as much against free market capitalism as they were state socialism.

17. zyban Says:
    March 13th, 2009 at 6:57 am

    Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!

18. tramadol Says:
    March 17th, 2009 at 3:53 am

    I want to say – thank you for this!
    tramadol

19. tramadol Says:
    March 22nd, 2009 at 8:10 am

    tramadol
    Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!

20. cheap viagra Says:
    April 8th, 2009 at 7:04 am

    thanks !! very helpful post!
    viagra