In spite of its many and famous failures, the only-socialism-will-save-us-from-the-plebes mindset is still alive and kicking in academia. This time they're calling it "libertarian paternalism":

H.L. Mencken famously defined Puritanism as "the haunting fear that someone somewhere may be happy." Being a libertarian-conservative means being possessed of the haunting fear that someone somewhere is itching to play busybody on a level one might have once thought was inconceivable.

That fear becomes justified when one reads articles like this one by the New York Times ("Choice is Good, Yes, No or Maybe?"), which informs us that there is a movement afoot to limit our choices as consumers and citizens. You see, the fear is that we may not have the capacity to "choose properly" or that we may simply "refuse to choose." As a result, "government should limit people's choices. That is, choose for them." This is because "More choice can be worse than less choice," according to Columbia University psychologist Sheena Iyengar.

Which reminds me of an earlier quote on Instapundit's website: ""Every time I grow tired of the Republicans a lefty opens his mouth, suddenly I'm not quite as tired."

What's that you say? Libertarians aren't lefties? Aside from their questionable bona-fides, this may still be true. But collectivisim wasn't always a left-only concept. It had a right-side component too. They were called "fascists", and you know how well that turned out.

Via Instapundit.