We might be using &quot;fantasy&quot; to mean different things.<p>I&#x27;m describing the libertarian fantasy such because it doesn&#x27;t reflect any history, and it doesn&#x27;t work out the way it&#x27;s supposed to wherever it&#x27;s been tried.  As best we have it, evidence simply doesn&#x27;t support that libertarian policy ideas work the way they&#x27;re supposed to.<p>As for &quot;statist fantasy,&quot; well, here we are:  through a long, slow process of democratic engagement, we have agencies that protect our environment, improve road safety, keep workplace hazards minimal, and work to minimize discrimination in the workplace.  None of them, of course, are perfect, but they all came about in response to something, some perceived imperfection in the world.  People voted in politicians who reflected their values, and that eventually filtered into what we have now.<p>But, you know, nothing&#x27;s ever perfect, and it&#x27;s always a process of refinement.  The difference between my &quot;statist fantasy&quot; and the libertarian one is that I see that, by means of government, we&#x27;re slowly getting the world we want.<p>Giving free reign back to big business, to turn the environment and workplace back into a free-for-all, how much sense does that make?