When people like Tim say they are classical liberals, I always laugh

 Open the history...''https://www.highratecpm.com/rf1dj1x06?key=0aa16a7c0f0000b2fe614084b07ab273

The term "classical liberal" has become a curious linguistic phenomenon. Once a badge of honor for those championing individual liberty, limited government, and free markets, it's now often invoked by individuals whose beliefs seem to bear little resemblance to the original philosophy. It's a label that's been stretched, twisted, and ultimately, diluted to the point of meaninglessness.

Take Tim, for instance. A self-proclaimed classical liberal, he rails against government intervention in the economy while simultaneously advocating for strict social regulations. He champions free speech, but only for views he agrees with. He extols the virtues of individual responsibility, yet demands government bailouts for businesses he favors. It's a perplexing cognitive dissonance.

Classical liberalism, at its core, is about individual autonomy, limited government, and economic freedom. It's a philosophy that celebrates the diversity of human thought and action, recognizing that the best way to progress is through competition and innovation. It's a worldview that is deeply skeptical of concentrated power, whether it be in the hands of the state or corporations.

But the "classical liberals" of today often seem to have a selective memory. They cherry-pick the elements of the philosophy that suit their worldview, discarding those that don't. It's as if they've constructed a distorted funhouse mirror image of classical liberalism, one that reflects their own biases and prejudices.

For example, many of these modern-day "classical liberals" are ardent supporters of free markets, but only when it comes to consumer goods and services. When it comes to labor markets, however, their enthusiasm wanes. They're quick to denounce government regulations as stifling business, but they're equally quick to support policies that limit the bargaining power of workers.

Similarly, these individuals often champion free speech, but only for those who share their views. Those who dissent from their orthodoxy are often labeled as "enemies of liberty" or "dangerous radicals." It's a curious definition of freedom that allows for the unfettered expression of one's own opinions while simultaneously seeking to suppress those of others.

The problem with this distorted version of classical liberalism is that it undermines the very principles it purports to uphold. By selectively adopting elements of the philosophy while discarding others, these individuals create a contradictory and incoherent worldview. It's a philosophy that is ultimately self-defeating, as it leads to a society that is neither truly free nor truly just.

So, when someone like Tim proudly proclaims themselves a classical liberal, I can't help but laugh. It's a label that has been so thoroughly emptied of its original meaning that it's become little more than a hollow slogan. Until these individuals are willing to embrace the full spectrum of classical liberal principles, they should perhaps consider adopting a different label.