Where is John Galt?

The recent Chinese hacking scandal brought to mind a libertarian Zeitgeist that was sweeping the web a few years back.

In '06 and '07, blind faith in emerging market growth and in the assumed superiority of emerging market governments became so contagious that even libertarians caught the bug. I remember reading reports from prominent libertarians who had scoured the Third World in search of Galt Gulches. Their optimistic report: nations like China and Argentina were evolving into safe havens from collapsing Old World powers like the US. Everyone in Asia was a Confucian Steve Jobs. Argentina had learned from the sins of Peron. If I had done a push up each time I saw a sentence giddily comparing "capitalist China" to “anti-capitalist” America, I'd be strong enough to cradle the globe after Atlas shrugged.

Never mind that China still had a command economy. The biggest risk was remaining in the US, and so libertarians who complained about government spawned real estate bubbles in America started fawning over all the government spawned building in China (a place famous for ghost cities). People concerned about US currency debasement talked of seeking refuge in a place that famously suppresses the yuan; treating its citizens to riot-inducing inflation.

Reinforcing the idea of superior freedom and opportunity in the emerging world was the idea of decoupling: The tired West would collapse under the weight of its colossal debt and old ideas, and the vibrant East would suddenly develop a middle class big enough and rich enough to support its continued rise; a rise largely independent of the West. The very people who praised globalism and the opening of more markets were suddenly declaring that the closing (or impoverishment) of Western markets wouldn't matter much. The people who laughed at the idea of Fortress Europe effectively endorsed Fortress Asia.

The key piece in the puzzle of emerging market freedom and prosperity was the Internet. Just as blue jeans supposedly helped topple the Soviet Union, the power of the Internet was going to plant tiny Adam Smith seeds throughout the emerging markets, leading these newly capitalist minds to start utilizing the best aspects of Western thought. Forget V for Vendetta; we were going to have B for Bandwidth.

When the 2008 crisis hit, the emerging world didn't decouple. Most of it collapsed much harder. China didn't look to Adam Smith. They looked to Keynes; launching the largest stimulus in the country's history. And it turns out Argentina didn't reject Peron. Since 2008 Argentina's government has toyed with pension seizures, price controls, nationalization, and capital controls (even going so far as to use currency sniffing dogs to keep evildoers from carrying cash across the border).

It seems these libertarian optimists incorrectly assumed that the merger of a rising emerging world and an exploding Internet was necessarily going to have a libertarian bent. They seemed to think we were poised for a Libertarian Spring. But why should anyone have expected such an outcome? Couldn't Twitter just as readily be used to spread pro-government info.? Couldn't "tax the rich" also go viral? Wasn't uber-statist Barack Obama hoisted into the White House with a huge boost from social media?

Internet tools like Twitter and Facebook are used by people, and most people, wherever they reside, conveniently endorse receiving things paid for by other people. The free market that libertarians rightly celebrate continues to get a lukewarm reception in the marketplace of ideas. Even in the US, anti-libertarian moves likes increasing the minimum wage are condoned by the majority, so it seems predictable that more pro-state ideas are going to be spread online than libertarian ones; just look at Occupy Wall Street and its Internet-generated offspring throughout the world.

To witness this phenomenon at work, visit reddit.com and click on the Politics header. Not a subcategory (subreddit) like “Conservatism” or “Liberal.” Just click plain old Politics. What you will see is a long list of touchy-feely, MORE GOVERNMENT, PLEASE! sentiments dominating the headlines, despite the fact that reddit is outside the system, man!

It is hard not to notice a certain irony in China’s using the Internet—the state’s worst nightmare!--to violate the non-aggression principle. I guess we’ll have to wait a bit longer for the Middle Kingdom to become the Switzerland of the East.

When it comes to popular uprisings--"springs"--, regardless of where they happen or which tools are used to fuel them, it is naïve to presume they will necessarily usher in profound new freedom. Let's not forget what happened at the end of the Prague Spring; the Soviet Union invaded and turned off the spring.

Romney should have used some of his money to buy a calculator

Today I read a line in the New York Times saying that Obama's easy win is the result of the "McGovern coalition coming of age." I would say the victory is the result of trends predating 1972.

Forty+ years of turning public schools into factories for manufacturing politically correct robots has worked. Doctrinaire egalitarianism now starts in kindergarten, not college. College is merely the honeymoon after thirteen years of egalitarian courtship. Today even cultural conservatives unthinkingly use the language their opponents have prescribed for them.

Why haven't conservatives won a lasting battle in thirty+ years? Under Bush II, when supposed conservatives had all three government branches, the government expanded dramatically. The clock was hardly “turned back.” Why?

Because the war of ideas was lost a very long time ago, through the children. The very premise of even nominal conservative government could only be upheld so long as there were enough Americans with a less jaundiced view of pre-sixties America to keep voting to preserve what was left of it. They are now dead or outnumbered.

Home schoolers comprise a very small sliver of the population, and they are viewed with some suspicion (even by some conservatives). The vast majority attend public schools, where the war of ideas is long over. Yet conservatives continue to pat themselves on the back each time some minuscule home school "victory" happens somewhere. And they complain about liberals being unable to do math...

The conservative platform as it now exists can't be effectively transmitted to children. Vague lines like "class warfare" and "We're on the road to socialism!!!" aren't ideas, and certainly have no resonance with kids. Liberal principles are easily converted into talking points that can be repeated and spread. Example: Climate change and its implications is an idea. Saying it doesn't exist isn't. A kid can't really make an "I don't believe in climate change" macaroni and paste mosaic for his parents' refrigerator (and if he did his teacher would flunk him).

As for entrepreneurship being "the American dream," most humans don't have the constitution to be entrepreneurs. Most people hate their boss (they see themselves as the little guy oppressed by their boss), so pinning your fortunes on a campaign that emphasizes bosses as "the backbone of America" is numerical folly. Saying "entrepreneurs built this country" makes many younger people automatically think wicked robber barons. Saying "rugged individuals built this country" makes many younger people automatically think murderous pioneers (famed "pioneer" state Colorado went to Obama). Thus, building your platform around these memes is a horrible strategy. America is a mob rule republic. Numbers matter.

Nearly all of the money and cultural influence now resides in NY, MA, DC, and CA. The most conspicuous liberals are elected there; Pelosi, Schumer, etc. These politicians roughly reflect the opinions of those who set the national agenda. This doesn't look likely to change.

The war of ideas is lost for conservatives, and with it the numerical battle. John Galt ain't gonna show up to save anybody.