The Limits Of Mediocrity

Source: Will Moyer

Though my relationship with the ideology has been stormy to say the least, I ultimately concede my politics and philosophy to be libertarian.

Despite my blatant polemics, inevitably I uphold liberty, the quality to control one’s actions, as the highest end.  Human society cannot work without human action, the limitations of civilization require a degree of freedom for it’s citizenry.   A coherent society must seek and maintain a middle ground between these two forces.  While I maintain that our current incoherence is due to embracing individual hedonism over social standards, I cannot agree with an argument that the hierarchy must always supersede the individual.  From what I have seen, to invert the poisoned beliefs underling the anarchist milieu will only serve to accomplish the very same deconstruction of both man and state.

That said, I find that there is no limit of charlatans and morons willing to remind me why I took issue with libertarianism to begin with.

Many “libertarians” today have either misread or inserted progress into the ideology.  They tend to mistake quality for quantity, they argue that liberty is not a matter of agency but of distribution.  Like the vulgar liberals, they insert society where individual qualities vary or lack.  They argue that those who are deficient in the agency required to participate in society are deficient because of oppression or some other elusive or illusory bugaboo.

These hyphen-loving humanists want more of the “rights” and comforts they enjoy today without accepting the coercion, exploitation and unfairness underlying them.   They want to believe that man has been artificially evolved, that nature has molded itself to our feels.

[![Liberty has molded itself to Kevin Carson's soft, shitty body.](http://res.cloudinary.com/trs/image/upload/v1428560359/carson_exgjtk.jpg)](http://res.cloudinary.com/trs/image/upload/v1428560359/carson_exgjtk.jpg)
Liberty has molded itself to Kevin Carson’s soft, shitty body.
To sell people on their perverted libertarianism, they appropriate and butcher common sense language to present what on the surface resonates with human action.  A little scrutiny will reveal the monster lurking beneath.  That monster is mediocrity, liberty without agency. That Moyer’s article received the accolade of Jeff Tucker’s pet parasite was my first hint that his work would be yet another creeping horror.
[![rentseekerwitz](http://res.cloudinary.com/trs/image/upload/v1428560369/rentseekerwitz_lncaac.jpg)](http://res.cloudinary.com/trs/image/upload/v1428560369/rentseekerwitz_lncaac.jpg)
Source: [Statist Idiot of the Day](https://www.facebook.com/StatistIdiotOfTheDay)
Rentseekerwitz’s response is rote at this point: I can imagine her dead, hooker stare as she composed that tripe.  The screencap STotD attached is what I will focus on, here. How do humans flourish without property rights? Pretty sure ownership and the competition that arose from it had a heck of a lot to do with getting humans out of the caves and into civilization.   The cornerstone of property and ownership is family, which seems to accomplish a lot of that “take care of each other” crap.  Today we see clearly what happens when a society starts devaluing the family. I (*don’t*) wonder, how can humans flourish if they have no stable and oppressive home to develop in? How can humans learn to value anything if no one values them? How can humanity flourish if you destroy that which provides the means to flourish? Moving on, WTF is a “flattened hierarchy?” That’s easily the most oxymoronic thing I have ever encountered in years of dumpster diving the left for it’s smelliest ideas.  How would such a not-hierarchy engender human dignity,  a state of quality that is inherently of unequal value? What kind of mind can seriously conceive of liberty as a philosopher’s stone, transmuting individual human actors into something both uniform and good? It is rather hilarious to realize people are taking what was historically a vehemently anti-Communist philosophy and arguing that it could accomplish the anarchist society envisioned by the Communists.  I can hear fellow contributor Michael Enoch[ laughing ](http://therightstuff.biz/2013/03/03/in-a-mirror-darkly-marxism-and-libertarianism/)as I write this. I will agree with the parasites that the removal of state coercion does make it possible for one to “redefine social standards.”  I will agree with Rentseekingwitch that this movement toward progressive utopianism has definitely taken a strong hold of libertarianism.  I will continue to strongly disagree that such redefinitions and progress are *a priori* good, I will continue to balk at the notion that such things have anything to do with actual human liberty or social advance. Sorry to rain on the progress parade, but I don’t think the end result will be very amazing, guys.  Mediocrity has a limit, and historically it is never a pleasant limitation.
[![fall](http://res.cloudinary.com/trs/image/upload/v1428560346/fall_bzovzo.jpg)](http://res.cloudinary.com/trs/image/upload/v1428560346/fall_bzovzo.jpg)
“It’s going to be amazing. We’re already doing it.”
Author image
Bulbasaur is a blue collar worker and part-time polemicist from the Southern U.S.