Comment by intended
9 hours ago
HN, and most US centric forums online - have been anti regulation, for a majority of their history.
Straight up libertarian viewpoints were the norm during the earliest phases of the net. The anti-regulation view points are well known and well travelled.
I’ve seen them exported to conversations in other countries, which dont have the same shared historical context.
It was post 2008, that the zeitgeist began shifting in a durable manner, no matter what defense or arguments against regulations were brought forth.
I don’t think the average voter will trust a corporation, and the arguments against regulation are going to take a generation before they become popular again.
Anti regulation of a sort is still a popular position. It’s just the libertarian hands of regulation that has fallen out of favor. I don’t think it will return.
At first I wasn’t sure it would stick, the name isn’t very catchy, but I’ve heard some politicians mention abundance. There is and will be more calls for corrected regulation to improve building pipelines. From the left it will be for faster procurement of public housing. It’ll look different on the right.
You are surely not saying that because HN talks about it, it must be well-known and well-respected.
Other political positions related to libertarianism, as you name it, have the exact same fate: some states respect them, others don't, and the parts of the national government lower on the totem pole than the cabinet think it's some sort of skin disease.
You've never heard any mainstream pundit like John Oliver or Rachel Maddow ranting about overregulation; you've never heard anyone important in Democratic politics taking it seriously. The word 'abundance' in TFA was selected to deliberately refer to a book arguing for it, which nobody with establishment credentials had done until this year, and which is treated by the party as a brash bold unexpected controversial statement that should be treated with extreme suspicion.