The above passages come from an article written by Blake Smith for Aeon magazine titled, Slavery as free trade: The 18th-century thinkers behind laissez-faire economics saw slavery as a great example of global free trade.
The article goes a long way in explaining why, paradoxically, when libertarians and conservatives argue for “freedom,” “liberty,” or “free-trade,” what they’re really talking about is freedom FROM government preventing them from economically and/or politically dominating and ruling over other people. Capitalism is naturally exploitative. It just is. So it seriously angers me when libertarians who favor capitalism, for instance, put all of their energy into arguing for “freedom” when their philosophy by it’s very nature is a) unable to recognize power hierarchies and b) is metaphysically outdated which, therefore, unfortunately leads these people to argue for a very narrow concept of “freedom,” one that is very selfish, immature, and morally vacuous.
So yeah, it’s paradoxical to insist on a “hands off” approach to things (e.g. economics, politics, whatever…) because on one level letting people do whatever they want certainly is a type of specious “freedom,” but doing this, i.e. insisting that one is isolated and unaffected by things happening all around us, is to either a) say that one does not recognize this complicated, entangled messy situation we’re in (where things we do affect others in substantial and significant ways), or b) say that one does not care either way. Answer a is forgivable and understandable, but answer b, with it’s nihilistic indifference (reminiscent of Pilate washing his hands of Jesus’s blood), makes me seriously sick to my stomach.
0 Comments