Topher Morrison
 |
| I tried to find another picture, but this is Mr. Bitterface's best. |
Today's Daily Drivel: in one of the most bizarre reads of the morning Dan Agin, we shall call him Mr. Bitterface, concocts a theoretical tragedy, which unfortunately takes place in a very real world. I will attempt to refrain from the all too easy and hopefully obvious ad hominem attacks - eh never mind.
There is a great joke in America and according to Dan Agin its "libertarian hypocrisy." Might be a joke, but its not very popular. Sorry Dan we libertarians don't get a lot of press, but we're getting more - thanks for the ink!
On Sunday, at the HuffingtonPost, Mr. Agin wrote "The Comedy of Libertarian Hypocrisy." It's not exactly Shakespear, but it is fiction. Apparently the libertarian movement is an ill defined "-ism", which covers a sordid spectrum of antigovernment individuals from "terrorist and bomb-thrower[s]" to "proto-fascists", my heart goes out to those poor libertarian souls in the middle!
While I tend to agree those who claim the libertarian banner do cover the gamut of political inclination in this country, doesn't every "-ism"? It is an odd critique indeed for Mr. Agin to group together members of an ideology based on individualism and then indite the whole based on its range or extremities for that matter!
No doubt, those who capture libertarian ideas also graft on non-libertarian ideas, those who use:
“…libertarian buzzwords to achieve a political agenda that would actually involve more government intrusion and not less government intrusion - intrusion to foster business and protect wealth at the expense of the unwealthy.”
This is a classic, but awkward attack against capitalism and libertarians and unfortunately for Mr. Bitterface (whoops I did it again) a bit of a straw man argument. Using government to buttress corporations and private companies, by extension the "wealthy", from inefficiency, competition or recessions is called crony capitalism (or government, j/k) and is antithetical to libertarian and capitalistic ideals.
Moreover the institutions, funding and mechanisms with which to accomplish this task are not available to a libertarian government; government departments are few and their powers limited, taxes are low and enforcement methods are locally or regionally based. Ron Paul, the ostensible leader of libertarianism in this country, is beyond reproach on this subject as he has time and time again excoriated the incessant intervention on behalf of banks, insurance, and the auto industry by special interests and their puppets in Congress and 1600 Penn.
We turn to Mr. Agin's tragic comedy:
“Consider a "libertarian" named Self Reliant [love this name!] Mr. Reliant, fifty-five years old, suffers a sudden heart attack. He calls 911, and when the paramedics arrive he directs them to the best hospital in town, which happens to be the university hospital attached to a state university. Mr. Reliant is rushed to this hospital and receives treatment in the emergency room that essentially saves his life.”
Brilliant, par for the course! Yet another way of lambasting libertarianism, find the most innocuous government program, which has absolutely nothing to do with printing money, forced medical procedures, soaring debt, foreign wars or unpopular bailouts (you know the big stinking issues) and have a libertarian defend his position on limited government. Gladly.
Self Reliant apparently commits a libertarian sin, according to Mr. Bitterface (dang it!), by "dialing 911 and asking for paramedics." Let's begin with the telephone (1876) used by Mr. Reliant to call for help, incidentally not a government invention (albeit heavily regulated by the FCC), but due entirely to the ingenuity and gumption of many scientists, most notably Alexander Graham Bell. The switchboard (1876), patented by a innovative Hungarian, Mr. Tividar Puskas, connected the call to the Emergency Medical Technician (EMT), which eventually saves Mr. Reliant.
The first EMTs were called emergency care technicians (ECT) in 1961 and worked in the emergency department at Alexandria Hospital, VA (now called Inova). Inova recently celebrated the 50th anniversary of their private innovation known then as the "Alexandria Plan", which set the standard nationwide for 24-hour emergency room care. It was only when these ECTs moved outside the ER and into their shiny life saving trucks (invented in the private sector, see "Puffing Devil") were they called paramedics or EMTs.
EMTs are often employed privately, but are predominantly employed by local government regularly as an adjunct of local fire department. But is calling an EMT necessarily asking for "help from local government"? Whether or not Mr. Reliant got a hold of a private or public EMT is based on his community not his ideology and in the end both public and private EMTs cost appropriately, an arm and a leg. Who pays for that? Oh yeah, Mr. Reliant.
The chosen hospital in Mr. Agin's story was, especially in the case of a heart attack, based on proximity, availability and capability. It is not always the case, as I have just shown, that the best hospital fits this description, nor are state sponsored hospitals the best as Mr Bitterface alludes. Take a look at this comparison between three hospitals near where I live, whom deal with heart attacks, this took me 5 minutes to look up. The Mayo Clinic received an 88% approval rate from its patients (19% higher than the national and state average) while Arizona Regional Medical Center ratings are below at 58%!
How Mr. Agin came to the conclusion "the federal government...funds nearly all the research and development in cardiac infarction (heart attack) emergency care" is anyone's guess, he provides no source. But I did do a little research on who invented the first defibrillator used to resuscitate victims of serious heart attacks. Guess what? A private research university named Case Western Reserve University employed the first internal defibrillator!
At the end of Mr. Agin's odd little story is his apparent view that libertarians subscribe to some kind of secular Christian Science wherefrom they refuse to use modern technology to save their lives, merely because government invariably meddles with it:
"Were Mr. Reliant a true libertarian, he would treat his heart attack himself (and most likely die), or at the least, when the paramedics arrive, he would direct the ambulance into the woods to die among the trees. (Actually, the woods may be off-limits also, since they may be maintained by a local, state, or federal forestry service.)"
Mr. Bitterface you make my point for me! Wherever we turn government is there regardless if we need it or not. The aforementioned examples show whether it be telephones, cars, medical devices, new innovative service models or even privately managing public forrests that private industry can and will make society better by offering a myriad of options and greater efficiency, a trend which never ceases, but merely slows as government moves in. Libertarians don't hate government, to the contrary we need government we simply just don't need it to be as big as it is.
No comments:
Post a Comment