Sometimes there are threads that just take off in tail-chasing directions that nobody (especially not the author of the original post) anticipated. People get caught responding to increasingly tangential arguments and starting making more and more bizarre arguments, kind of like an out-of-control driver repeatedly over-steering until he slams into the retaining wall at 75 mph.
I usually chuckle at these feeding frenzies when they occur at Delawareliberal or DelawarePolitics, feeling mildly superiors (except of course when I'm directly involved; then naturally whatever I say is totally justified).
But the current triple set of threads at Thoughts on Freedom, the blog of the Australian Libertarian Society proves what a lot of people (Dana comes to mind) have said about Libertarians can't simply be discounted. Sometimes we, too, eat our own young.
It all started innocently enough: Indian Libertarian Sukrit Sabhlok posted on the same stats about prisons in America and China that both Dana and I wrote pieces on for our respective blogs. You'll note that neither Dana nor I provoked a hell of a lot of passionate debate on the topic (hell, we could barely get worked up about arguing with each other, which surely indicates a lackluster topic).
But the reactions among Australian Libertarians was fierce, prolonged (through two different posts), and often downright obscure (with my friend Jim Fryar of Real World Libertarian standing out as one of the few voices of reason), leading Sabhlok to issue a final sarcastic post declaring:
This, of course, has thus far produced 27 comments of its own.
So if you want to make fun of Libertarians and have half an hour to waste, wade through all 80 comments, have at it.
I think I'll take a nap instead.
I usually chuckle at these feeding frenzies when they occur at Delawareliberal or DelawarePolitics, feeling mildly superiors (except of course when I'm directly involved; then naturally whatever I say is totally justified).
But the current triple set of threads at Thoughts on Freedom, the blog of the Australian Libertarian Society proves what a lot of people (Dana comes to mind) have said about Libertarians can't simply be discounted. Sometimes we, too, eat our own young.
It all started innocently enough: Indian Libertarian Sukrit Sabhlok posted on the same stats about prisons in America and China that both Dana and I wrote pieces on for our respective blogs. You'll note that neither Dana nor I provoked a hell of a lot of passionate debate on the topic (hell, we could barely get worked up about arguing with each other, which surely indicates a lackluster topic).
But the reactions among Australian Libertarians was fierce, prolonged (through two different posts), and often downright obscure (with my friend Jim Fryar of Real World Libertarian standing out as one of the few voices of reason), leading Sabhlok to issue a final sarcastic post declaring:
Thanks for all the helpful feedback on my previous post. I will now be reforming my blogging style in order to make it more compatible with Australian libertarians.
From now on, I shall issue the “Aussie Libertarian Disclaimer” in all of my posts that criticise America. This will involve strategically placing a footnote with the words, “But China is worse, so that makes it OK”. It has to be an Aussie disclaimer because the pseudo-libertarians in America seem to think that all countries should be judged by the same standards.
So for example, if I was to comment on a news story involving an American soldier raping an Iraqi girl, I would at the end of the sentence place the appropriate footnote: “But China is worse, so that makes it OK”.
This should make my writing more compatible with common Australian libertarian practice.
This, of course, has thus far produced 27 comments of its own.
So if you want to make fun of Libertarians and have half an hour to waste, wade through all 80 comments, have at it.
I think I'll take a nap instead.
Comments