True. But it is both liberalism and a con. The con is in branding it as something other than liberalism, which he was able to do by conflating positive and negative freedoms.
Well it’s definitely not liberalism. It’s such an extreme, it’s well past what liberals would consider effective policy. It’s way beyond laissez-faire capitalism, which is typically the rightmost edge of liberalism. Dunno what you’d call that, but liberalism it ain’t.
Being a con doesn’t mean it’s liberalism. It just means it’s a con.
True. But it is both liberalism and a con. The con is in branding it as something other than liberalism, which he was able to do by conflating positive and negative freedoms.
Well it’s definitely not liberalism. It’s such an extreme, it’s well past what liberals would consider effective policy. It’s way beyond laissez-faire capitalism, which is typically the rightmost edge of liberalism. Dunno what you’d call that, but liberalism it ain’t.
To me laws establishing private property rights in a capitalist framework are the NAP in actual practice, so I think we can agree to disagree.
To me a cheeseburger is a helicopter