I’ll address the merits of Christoph’s touching attempt to hang in the big leagues momentarily. First, though, I’m a little confused. From Minor League I we have
I think its time for people sympathetic to Andrew’s definition of the word (a group I suspect we both belong to) to lament its passing and move onto a new word, just as classical liberals did to libertarianism.
But hark! What is this in Minor League II?
As for “classical liberalism” vs. libertarianism, you are certainly correct that the latter has connotations of greater ideological purity (likely correlated with the small number of its supporters; iffy on the direction of the causal relationship there). But these are modest differences of degrees and you would have to be splitting hairs quite finely to argue that the two stem from different schools of thought. Libertarian shibboleth it may be that “liberalism” ever meant anything as stringent as their fine religion, but it is certainly true that the word referred to something identical to “classical liberalism” and still does in most of the world.
The two tunes lack congruence. When are you going to pay the piper, Chris?*
*The war-piper, given you just totally ICEBURNed yourself with your reflexive combativeness. Like a stupid child who ballcocks himself with nunchucks.
Leave a Reply