I am disappointed, outraged, and deeply saddened that the Cato Institute fired Don Armentano. David Boaz admits that the sudden dumping of the twenty year adjunct scholar, who specialized in antitrust matters, was prompted at least in part by an article he wrote calling for an end to the UFO cover-up. It should go without saying that this action by Cato is manifestly unlibertarian. Why would they want to distance themselves further from this issue of government secrecy than from support for warrantless wiretaps?
Because Cato is part of that God damn D.C. establishment where they need to be able to rub elbows with the cool kids. Cato has done good work in the past, but I've long been convinced that they're in it for the wrong reasons. While I thought Radley Balko's work on paramilitary police raids was great, a lot of what they produce seems so timid or concerned with the right kinds of government rather than shrinking government.
And too often it seems like Cato is determined to always deliver the watered down, establishment friendly version of libertarianism. A lot of the time the civil liberties and free market stuff seems specifically designed as cover for a pro-corporatist agenda. It's a kind of libertarianism that asks the government very nicely for a bit bigger prison cell and little bit more room in the straightjacket. And since it is not radical, it serves the interests of the establishment.
Well, this definitely crosses the line. I happen to think the evidence of a coverup in the area of UFO evidence is compelling. But even if you think it's all baloney, should we not, as libertarians, be interested in the ugly truth about government? Isn't that why we're libertarians? And if the institutions of libertarianism will not stand beside us in pursuing that truth, what in the fuck are they good for?
I salute Mr. Armentano for his courage and dedication to an unbiased search for truth. If Cato can't handle that, so much the worse for them and their corporate sponsors.
Read this article
