GRAN COLUMNA DE JONAH GOLDBERG: por qué el liberalismo es realmente la única idea política nueva en los últimos 2000 años. Me gusta esta parte, que responde a una objeción típicamente superficial:

It’s true, no ideal libertarian state has ever existed outside a table for one. And no such state will ever exist. But here’s an important caveat: No ideal state of any other kind will be created either. America’s great, but it ain’t perfect. Sweden’s social democracy is all right, but if it were perfect, I suspect fewer cars would be on fire over there.

Ideals are called ideals for a reason: They’re ideals. They’re goals, aspirations, abstract straight rules we use as measuring sticks against the crooked timber of humanity.

In the old Soviet Union, Mao’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, and today’s North Korea, they tried to move toward the ideal Communist system. Combined, they killed about 100 million of their own people. That’s a hefty moral distinction right there: When freedom-lovers move society toward their ideal, mistakes may be made, but people tend to flourish. When the hard Left is given free rein, millions are murdered and enslaved. Which ideal would you like to move toward?

Leedlo entero. Ah, y nota para despistados: en inglés estadounidense, "libertarianism" significa "liberalismo", y "liberalism" significa "progresismo". Seguro que muchos de vosotros lo sabíais ya, pero prefiero aclararlo porque habría alguna parte del texto que no se entendería bien si no se tiene esto en cuenta.