Mr. Lee, there is also Gary Johnson and the Libertarian Party as a much more viable third party…
Stephen Kent Gray
11

No, libertarianism is not “more viable”. Just look at how Paul Ryan’s infatuation with Ayn Rand only translates to more neoliberal economic policies that favor the rich, and Rand Paul’s mad recommendations to privatize everything from social security to marriage only gets the interest of the already rich or the bigoted.

Libertarianism is based on an inaccurate understanding of the history and mechanisms of capitalism and a fantasy of free markets that never has been, and never will be. It ignores the fact that the state is an agent of the ruling class, not a neutral arbiter, and can never be anything else, given the incentives and power structure of capitalism itself. It has no concept of the fact that it is human labor is that creates wealth, meaning that all profits made by the bourgeoisie are actually theft from the working class. It has no historical explanation for the rise of monopolies other than the fantasy that they are a distortion of “real” capitalism rather than the inevitable result of it. If you want a revolution, it will have to be a working class revolution that overthrows capitalism itself. People with power and money will never vote themselves out of power and money.

Beside all of this, libertarians favor privatization of all federal lands, meaning that the highest bidder could turn the Grand Canyon into a strip mine, or the Everglades into a swimming pool. The 2 bourgeois parties are threat enough. Libertarians can go away and sulk because they don’t have the power and freedom to use the planet like a kleenex the way the super rich do. Socialists like myself will fight for true democracy, based on human needs, not private enrichment.

Like what you read? Give Edward Lee a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.