Random Thoughts

Libertarian Paternalism

In yesterday's entry, I tore into the idea of "libertarian paternalism" and slapped Pejman Yousefzadeh around a little for offering such a lousy rebuttal. But today, I made a further interesting connection about the idea. Individual rights are based, ultimately, on man's rational faculty. For example, men must be free to profit from the use of their intellect (property) and express what they judge to be true (speech). Why? Because reason is man's tool of survival. To survive, man must think. As a living being, man must act to gain or keep the values necessary for his life. But what are his values? Those things he judges necessary for his existence. That is, man must be free to choose in order to live. Where do I work? Whom do I befriend? What do I eat?

An interesting thing about libertarian paternalism is that, unlike other excuses for government intrusion into our lives, it doesn't rely on altruism to induce the public to accept it, to choose, say, to pay higher taxes to help the poor. Rather, it uses data from sociological studies that "prove" humans to be incapable of making decisions as an excuse to not consider choice at all. Consider the fact that our system of representative government is based on choice. This is the most brazen attack on the concept of representative government I have seen in a long time!

Gettin' Schooled by Tracinski

Have you ever held your cursor over "TIA Daily" on my blogroll? There's a good reason I call Robert Tracinski the "800-pound gorilla of Objectivist bloggers!" Unfortunately, you might have to pay to see this whole example as it came out in the newsletter of which his blog is but a sample (and usually updated late at that). Today, he made the following fascinating integration concerning representative government. (Some formatting added.)

[T]he deepest virtue of representative government is epistemological. It is the only political system that mandates a voice for reason in the affairs of man.

This, as far as I know, is a new thesis in the field of political science, and my longer article for TIA explores the meaning and implications of this thesis and shows the evidence in recent world events that support it. It is also a thesis whose meaning I will be exploring, as relevant news stories arise, in future installments of TIA Daily.

I can't wait to see the forthcoming articles!

Mildly Amusing Thoughts on Benedict XVI

This is from an amusing exchange I had with a friend via email today.

My friend put the left's conniption fits over Ratzinger's papal election (or, as Kim Jong "Mentally" Il might put it, his "paper erection") into the right perspective:

[T]he best part of Ratzinger's election is that the New York Times is publishing paragraphs like this:

Pope Benedict's well-known stands include the assertion that Catholicism is "true" and other religions are "deficient"; that the modern, secular world, especially in Europe, is spiritually weak; and that Catholicism is in competition with Islam. He has also strongly opposed homosexuality, women as priests and stem cell research.

Can you believe it? The pope thinks Catholicism is "true!"

Heh! He asked me my thoughts, as an apostate Catholic, on the new pope. Here they are. These are to be taken with the requisite grain of salt.

At least I can respect him! If you're going to call yourself "Catholic," then what the hell does it mean if you pick and choose favorite doctrines like it's some kind of a cafeteria?

I would have made a fine fire-and-brimstone type of priest....

Then there's the saying, "Once a Catholic, always a Catholic." I have to say that I like his name choice. Leaving aside the symbolism, which is very good, it sounds old-school and hard-ass to me, which I like. (But there is doubtless some component of my own mental associations going on there.) I remember being mildly annoyed as a kid that John Paul adopted the moniker of his predecessor, which hadn't been ratified by centuries of use.

The choice isn't that surprising to me and with its rapidity, I'd have bet money on it had I been near that Irishman's betting table [link via TIA Daily] in St. Peter's Square!

His reply to this started out with, "[Y]ou're a fine fire-and-brimstone priest of Objectivism. "

Heh! Just call me "Father Gus!"

-- CAV