Available Now! (click cover)

America's Counter-Revolution
The Constitution Revisited

From the back cover:

This book challenges the assumption that the Constitution was a landmark in the struggle for liberty. Instead, Sheldon Richman argues, it was the product of a counter-revolution, a setback for the radicalism represented by America’s break with the British empire. Drawing on careful, credible historical scholarship and contemporary political analysis, Richman suggests that this counter-revolution was the work of conservatives who sought a nation of “power, consequence, and grandeur.” America’s Counter-Revolution makes a persuasive case that the Constitution was a victory not for liberty but for the agendas and interests of a militaristic, aristocratic, privilege-seeking ruling class.

Friday, October 24, 2008

Who Needs Evidence?

Around the corner from FEE's offices, on Main Street in Irvington, N.Y., there's a life-size statue of Rip Van Winkle awakening from his 20-year slumber. After reading Jacob Weisberg's Newsweek and Slate columns this week, I feel as though I must have been asleep for an equally long time. According to Weisberg, editor in chief of Slate, the financial turmoil taking place worldwide is the fault of . . . libertarians. That must mean libertarians have been in a position to repeal generations of deep-seated government intervention in the financial and related industries, including the Federal Reserve system. That would have taken a long time, yet I don't recall reading that a libertarian revolution occurred in the United States. Surely it would have been in the newspapers. Hence, I must conclude that I, like old Rip, was slumbering all those years. I missed the revolution! It's the only possible explanation. Unless Weisberg is wrong.
The rest of this week's TGIF, "Who Needs Evidence?" is at the Foundation for Economic Education website.

Cross-posted at Liberty & Power.


Fascist Nation said...

Got to blame someone, otherwise the unwashed mob might come after me. I know, I'll blame those SOB libertarians who have predicted this for years. Rude Assholes!

Joe said...

On a related note, take a look at this article by Liz Ann Sonders, economist at Schwab. She talks about the government being "cognizant of the 'moral hazard' involved in bailing out a badly managed business", but at the same time she complains the government "forced" Lehman into bankruptcy (or was "willing to force", as if they gave Lehman a push), and thus caused terrifying "unintended consequences".

Also, I'm glad that according to High Frequency Economics that mythical person --the taxpayer-- stands a good chance of making a profit. Gee, I wonder if that means we can all get a refund and stop paying taxes?