You are falling into myour own trap tarian.
> edited <
You are clearly on the libertarian side of things yourself and are idealistic about it. I share your faith in people letting one another crack on but from a different perspective.
You make some interesting points.....
...but I'm not sure what "trap" of mine I am falling into. Perhaps expand
I'd like to think I'm both idealistic and realistic.
In an ideal world there would be no need for Yellow Lines.....
......with everyone (ideally) subscribing to "
do no harm to others".
But with imperfect information, we may think that this bit of parking does no harm - but it may, so even in a libertarian world a few YL may be acceptable.
(
For the record, IMO, most YL are OTT for the harm to be prevented.)
... the longer they hold office the more they veer towards the authoritarian. It's nothing to do with left and right but obviously the other lot are always more authoritarian and it's all because of their politics.
i) Is that objectively true ?
As someone who believes that Yes Minister was a documentary....
(
and has seen it's truth at close hand in Local Govt.),
....I believe that Civil servants are
always trying to accrue more power and influence.
(
I can expand with examples if challenged)
The only problem with "holding office" for some time, is a tendency to go native, i.e. lose touch with the customer / taxpayer and instead buy-in to the Official's narrative.
(
"That would be brave Minister".)
Things have got a bit weird with the identity and gender debates because some on the left thought they owned all struggles for equality and freedom, which is nonsense.....
Johnson is a startling case of a self identifying liberal with libertarian tendencies, who has all but donned the epaulettes, medals and big hats once he got his feet under the table.
A government that sets about allowing Assange to be extradited, restricts the right to protest in petty, restrictive and partisan ways, that changes laws when they don't suit the particular moment, denigrates and threatens judges and employs NDAs and super injunctions hasn't a libertarian bone in its body.
1) The "
identity and gender" debates are not about "freedom".
They are an excuse for left activists to tell others what to say and think.
i.e. a justification for authoritarian practices - and if they could, laws.
2) "self-identifying liberals" are almost always the opposite of "liberal" see 1)
If by "
donned the epaulettes.. etc" you mean "
become dictatorial"...
what is the evidence for that from Johnson ?
Surely the ONLY plausible evidence is Lockdown - which was pressed upon him by a subset of Advisors...
- who were briefed to highlight a "
worst case scenario - where nobody takes any mitigating action"...
- rather than "
likely scenario, where some people behave defensively".
Starmer and Co bagsed those "
epaulettes and medals" first - with their frequent demands for earlier and harsher Lockdown.
3) "
allowing" Assange to be extradited....
(
under a Treaty - which apparently is "International Law" - which apparently would be appalling to "break".....)
....is rather different from "expediting".
Several years different !
4) Which protests have been restricted: "
in petty, restrictive and partisan ways" ?
Most people think that this Govt has been soft on the likes of Extinction Rebellion and the M25 road blockers.
No thought of "
do no harm to others" from those *#*@ers !
As for "partisan ways"....
How was it that BLM rallies got such light touch policing - while other peaceful protests didn't ?
Labour has its fair share of authoritarians and Blair followed the pattern of all leaders who hang on for a long time. Further left the examples are grimmer and the same applies to the right. I can think of Tory and Labour politicians that I wouldn't trust with my liberties and equally ones from both parties that I would trust.
I'll ask again.
Please describe a "right wing" authoritarian.
If you do, I would probably agree that they were undesirable....
....but probably see more in common with a left Dictator.
The
moral corrective would
not be any form of collectivism - as that would be just swapping one bunch of "
epaulette" wearers for a different lot.