The Fantasy Lives of the Galt and the Lamers 0

I am always fascinated by rational, kind, sane persons who call themselves “Libertarians” and who are unable to see that Libertarianism is little more than an elaborate rationale for “I’ve got mine and to hell with you.” I know a few folks like that.

I stumbled over a Mother Jones interview with Jeopardy champion Arthur Chu which was a more interesting read than I expected. I was particularly taken with this nugget, in a series of questions about Gamergate and related issues.

They discussed why some internet users insist on threatening and harassing those with whom they disagree from behind a curtain of anonymity, then become upset when called out about it and defend themselves by contending that harassment, misogyny, and sexism in the world of computer games is somehow not real because it’s done from behind avatars. It was in that context that Libertarianism appeared:

Being a nerd meant being good with computers, book knowledge, and data, and being bad with people. So the idea was that if you got really good at working with things and manipulating objects, you’d reach a point in life where you wouldn’t need people to like you. You’d win purely by merit. There’s nowhere on Earth where this is actually true, but there’s people who believe that.

That’s why so much of nerd culture involves these power fantasies full of magic—literally reshaping the world through thinking about it—and superheroes with super abilities. It’s also why a lot of the people in geeky subcultures gravitate towards libertarianism. There’s a strong ideological belief in wiping out “politics,” because politics means having to interact with people, and negotiating with people who have different interests.

I commend the rest of the interview to your attention.