Originally Posted by sslarson
I'm in the minority.
Only because of the extremism and the belief in a one size fits all (extra small, in this case) model of government.
Different states have different social, political and economic issues they are dealing with. What is right for Switzerland is not necessary right for Norway and is not necessarily right for Taiwan is not necessarily right for Somalia and not necessarily right for the US.
Really, the dogmatic libertarian movement has more in common with dogmatic socialists and communists than they are able to recognize. In both cases the gross ignorance of the extremist dogmatic ideology is hidden behind layers of quasi-intellectualism that churns out single-perspective, one-sided arguments to bolster their agenda.
It's really unfortunate, too, since what could be a set of good arguments are hijacked and turned into simple-minded rhetoric.
Personally, I'm bearish on the US in the long run. It'll probably bounce back from this mess and the shock waves will likely dissipate, but the US is already trailing many other places in standard of living and there are serious ongoing social and political problems (inner city and rural/exurban anti-intellectualism, crime, widespread political support for abuse of power by police, increasing christianism, to just name few) that likely won't be resolved any time soon. Shifting power from the federal government to the states probably holds the most promise to help parts of the country, but the only people pushing it are extremists who gloss over all of the major issues that absolutely will (and, throughout history, have) come up, which indicates they won't be addressed and will, therefore, result in regional instability.