Jeff Jacoby takes the seventh-grader’s approach to politics today by arguing that the “government which governs least, governs best.” I hope this means that he’s headed immediately for Somalia, where nongovernance has turned the nation into a libertarian paradise.
I’ve sent him a snippy letter, of course, and if it doesn’t make it into the Globe I’ll post it here later.
I understand that the WSJ has to appease the bloodthirsty maniacs who constitute its core audience, and that explains (but does not excuse) the publication of editorials denouncing civil rights and social security as the products of drunkenly irresponsible legislatures.
But is there any reason for Jacoby to get a podium in Boston? If the Globe is so hard up for cash, why not drop the waste of space and put the savings into articles on items of actual local interest by decent writers with worthwhile opinions, like Joel Brown?
Secretly Ironic 
Are you serious?
Libertarians believe in the rule of law, distinct from statute, which rules out most of the third world.
Jeff Jacoby is no libertarian.
The Globe hired Jacoby to represent the other prevailing point of view in America because he’s an intellectual lightweight.
Surely you know all that.
As to libertarian ideas being tantamount to a seventh-grader’s: I can’t come up with a response without resorting to even nastier name-calling. My failing entirely. So sorry.
LikeLike
Libertarians are the thirteen-year-olds of the political universe: “Leave me alone! I’m totally independent! I don’t need you! Drive me to the mall! Rescue my storm-ravaged city! Now go away!”
Yes, I do suspect that Jacoby is a paper tiger installed by the Globe to provide an illusion of balance.
LikeLike
I guess there are libertarians like that: counterparts to chardonnay socialists, you could say. But overall it’s an unfair characterization. It’s people (not everybody, of course) with mainstream political opinions who favor isolationism and are against foreign trade and immigration, at least when they’re inconvenient. Or who demand, naively in my opinion, that the government continue to provide services that they’ve never actually been happy with (think: schools, transportation infrastructure, public health care, etc).
On the other hand, since you have to pay taxes whether you want to or not, it isn’t entirely unreasonable or hypocritical to grouse when you don’t feel you’re getting nearly your money’s worth.
But at least we’re in agreement about Jacoby.
LikeLike
Let me see if I understand this. You don’t like or agree with his opinion, therefore it should not be published. Is that right?
LikeLike
Murph: I think he’s a disingenuous fathead whose proper forum is messageboard trolling, not a respectable newspaper.
LikeLike