Pigs glide

I occasionally poke my head in at Digby's to see what's occupying the minds of liberals, and what should I see today but this:

There is, of course, an actual left libertarianism and it is best articulated by Noam Chomsky, not some wealthy twit like Mackey. Chomsky (and, in some respects, Ralph Nader) have made the case very well for a long time [...].

If you haven't read any books by Chomsky, now is a good time to do it since there seems to be a developing discussion of liberal libertarian philosophy in the commentariat. He's been writing about this stuff for decades and has a fully developed critique right there at the ready.

Digby approvingly mentioning Chomsky and Nader in a single posting?  Isn't this a sign of the end times?  Should I be watching out for the Midgard Serpent?  Really, you could have knocked me over with a twig.  Notice that she even included a link to Chomsky's Wikipedia page, apparently fearing—probably with good reason—that some non-trivial number of her regulars would have no idea who the dude with the zany Russian-sounding name was.

Is the great mass of Obama-backing Democrats on the verge of becoming deeply radicalized by exposure to reality?  Not bloody likely.  Still, I'd much rather see Digby quoting Chomsky than, say, Keith Olbermann.

(See here for some of Chomsky's fully-developed critique of right libertarianism, by the way.)

And a Happy New Year to you all...though personally I won't really be happy about a new year until 2013, when we can start using a sane decadal moniker again.

Comments

[john]

"And a Happy New Year to you all...though personally I won't really be happy about a new year until 2013, when we can start using a sane decadal moniker again."

And the same to you, sir. But perhaps it might cheer you, in these troubled times, to refer to this year, and the coming few, as the "pre-teens."

[Duncan]

I kind of like "the Naughties" as a name for the first decade of the century, but there's always "the Naughts."

[John Caruso]

...refer to this year, and the coming few, as the "pre-teens."

Until now I'd have said there was no good name for 2010-2012. You, sir, are a year-naming GOD.

I never really felt right about using Naughts (or derivations thereof); it just feels like stealing 1900-1909's word. Same for Aughts. As a computer geek I'm partial to the Nulls, though I haven't tried it in mixed company. I could maybe go for the Zeds, too. But if push comes to shove I'd just say the 2000s (well, actually I'd just do what I've been doing for ten years: avoiding referring to the decade by a single name at all).

[almostinfamous]

I prefer to call it the 'Dotties', though nobody ever knows what i'm talking about so i have a distinct advantage.

[Gnome Chomsky]

I have to give Digby a little credit here: I don't recall her ever indulging in the sort of Nader-bashing you can still see on any given day around the blogosphere. Hell, even the recently-former-hardcore-Republican John Cole got in on the act last week or so. I know she's not a leftist, despite all the ego-stroking "dirty fucking hippie" rhetoric, but at least she seems mostly sane on this issue. Yes, my standards are low, I know. I'm just so sick of seeing people foam at the mouth over it that I'll take even a semblance of reasonableness.

I mean, really - nine years out, and people still completely lose their shit at the mention of the man's name. As time goes on, Gore is increasingly becoming the guy who would have ended war, cured cancer, developed a perpetual motion machine, and given us all flying cars that ran on rainbows and unicorn poop, if only Ralph hadn't bolloxed it all up.

But here's what's really interesting: I'm almost dead certain I recall Digby saying, a few years back, that she had never heard of Chomsky before her (actual leftist) readers started mentioning him. I remember it because I was floored - how can someone in America with even mildly left-leaning politics get to middle age without ever having heard of him? But I guess you can take that as something to be cheered about. Even a lukewarm DLC Democratic voter like her can be pulled to the left, something that might not have happened pre-blogosphere.

[James Ferency]

Love the post, John. I learned something about libertarianism (via link), which I always instinctively understood as absurd for all the reasons Chomsky noted (corporate power resulting in LOSS of freedom, wage-slavery, etc.). I didn't realize there was a version of libertarianism different from what Ayn Rand shills have claimed in my lifetime. I shouldn't be surprised, I guess. Not here in America.

[John Caruso]

Yeah, I've never seen Digby slag Nader; to her credit, that's not her style. In fact in 2004 she wished luck to "the Greens and/or Nader voters, good people all," while declaring them "off my political radar screen because they are not persuadable" (to vote for her Democrats, that is). But this is the first time I've seen her mention him outside of liberal-approved contexts (e.g. as a strategic obstacle or a cautionary tale). If things keep going this way, maybe she'll end up admitting that everything he's been saying for the past decade is dead on.

I'll have to do a posting about Saint Gore some day, since it's not only delusional, it's the most dangerous delusion there is for Democrats seeking solace from Obama's sins. The other variant I've heard a lot of is "See, I told you we should have nominated Hillary!" Some people just never want to stop believing in Santa Claus.

And James, you're not alone; the right-wing variant of libertarianism has so taken over the word in this country that the phrase "left libertarianism" seems like an oxymoron to many people. Sort of like the way the current batch of Democrat-hugging liberals have covered "progressive" with so many cooties that actual progressives (like me) no longer want to go near the word.