Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Net Neutrality

Ron Swanson Slams Fan Ajit Pai Over 'Duplicitous Handling of the Net Neutrality Issue'

But would TV's favorite libertarian really favor federal regulation of the Internet?

Matt Welch | 12.8.2017 4:45 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Large image on homepages | NBC Store
(NBC Store)

It all started with Michael C. Moynihan, fittingly enough. The former Reasoner and current Vice News correspondent (and Fifth Columnist!) went to the office of Federal Communications Commission Chair Ajit Pai this week to talk about the fallout over last month's highly controversial announcement that the FCC would soon be voting on whether to rescind its 2015 Title II "net neutrality" regulations. Try to ignore the Judge Judy atrocities at the opening, and focus in on the pyramid on the wall beginning at about 0:46:

That's right, libertarians' very favorite government official is on the wall of one of their least favorite federal agencies; no big surprise, given Pai's ideological inclinations.

Never forget! ||| NBC Store
NBC Store

But one viewer who didn't enjoy the sight was Nick Offerman, who yesterday fired off a tweet saying:

Dear @AjitPaiFCC , I noticed your Pyramid of Greatness and thought it felt strange in your office, given your stance. So I went to see Ron Swanson to ask if he'd care to weigh in & he dictated the below to me

"I'm flattered that my pyramid of greatness has inspired you. I will remind you that the top category is Honor. Sadly, based on your duplicitous handling of the net neutrality issue, and the way you are willfully ignoring the public you claim to serve, I feel you may need that term defined. Which means, of course, that you don't have it."

Internet regulation is admittedly a complicated issue, but it's hard to square this sentiment with Swanson's stated belief that "all government is a waste of taxpayer money," and that the "perfect government" would be "one guy who sits in a small room at a desk."

Pai has discussed his net neutrality changes at length recently with both Nick Gillespie and The Fifth Column; Reason's work on the issue can be found here. Our Ron Swanson file, too, is as thick as a fine piece of carving wood.

And how is Pai reacting to the actor playing one of his fictional heroes trash-talking him on Twitter? "At this point," a spokesman told me this afternoon, "we don't have any comment."

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: More Details in the Trent Franks Scandal Emerge, Trump's Travel Ban Has Its Day in Court, and Tim Pawlenty Considers a Run for Senate: P.M. Links

Matt Welch is an editor at large at Reason.

Net NeutralityFCCLibertarianismTelevision
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (59)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Crusty Juggler   7 years ago

    But would TV's favorite libertarian really favor federal regulation of the Internet?

    Get that son of a bitch Macklin on the case.

    1. Half-Virtue, Half-Vice   7 years ago

      I thought he was dead? Plane exploded over the Bermuda triangle and he got eaten by a shark?

    2. neqir   7 years ago

      I've been working for this company online for 2 years, now i get paid 95usd/per hour and the best thing is cause i am not that tech-savy AGi ,It's been an amazing experience working with them and i wanted to share this with you, .

      Visit following page for more information>> http://www.startonlinejob.com

  2. Fist of Etiquette   7 years ago

    Offerman has to live with his wife and her colleagues from Will & Grace. You can't blame a man for not wanting to rock that boat.

    1. Carlos Inconvenience   7 years ago

      Sure I can. He could have just kept his mouth shut since Ron Swanson is, you know, a fictional character. No one expects, for example, the various actors who played Batman to chime in every time a real life politician has a piece of comic book memorabilia in their office.

  3. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   7 years ago

    Remind me now... my memory is a little foggy, which agency fines you for inappropriate content on broadcast television and radio?

  4. Eric Bana   7 years ago

    THE DEATH OF THE INTERNET!!!!!!!!!!!!11!!!1!!!

  5. BYODB   7 years ago

    The more ludicrous they wrote Ron, the more true to home his message became. I don't think the writers realized this though.

    1. BestUsedCarSales   7 years ago

      The ending was upsetting though. How he learns to love big brother.

      1. Square = Circle   7 years ago

        I thought the development of the characters over the life of the show was interesting.

        At first, Leslie was an object of satire - a tedious busy-body mired by an agency where her fellow workers were incompetent and apathetic.

        At the same time, Swanson was also a satirical figure - I remember in the first season, they visit his house and it's a mess of dangerous building code violations, which is of course what a libertarian's house would look like, and he winds up having to flee a building inspector.

        By the third season, both Knope and Swanson had become sympathetic characters - Knope had become hyper-competent and well-intentioned, while Swanson strolled past a Home Depot person confidently declaring "I know more than you."

        That was when the show got most interesting - when it showed honest points of disagreement between pro- and anti-government viewpoints.

        By the last season it just settled into a "gosh we love all of our characters, and in the end, when the rubber hits the road, they're all good Progressives at heart."

        1. Unlabelable MJGreen   7 years ago

          I thought it got to that point early on in season 4. That's why I BAILED.

          1. Square = Circle   7 years ago

            I'm slow to give up on things. A show has to annoy me for a long, long time before I stop watching it. I even watched the first several episodes of the final season of True Blood.

            *shudders*

            1. Square = Circle   7 years ago

              And, I stuck with Lost to the very end.

              *spits*

              1. Crusty Juggler   7 years ago

                Did you watch seasons 5-7 of Dexter?

                1. Square = Circle   7 years ago

                  Did you watch seasons 5-7 of Dexter?

                  That one I stopped following once John Lithgow murdered his baby-mama. "Dexter as single parent" wasn't something I was interested in watching.

                  That's one where I count myself as having stopped at just about the right moment.

                  But if I'm being honest, partly it's just because I switched cable services about then, and it dropped off of my DVR schedule.

                  1. Crusty Juggler   7 years ago

                    Re: Dexter: samsies.

                    1. Square = Circle   7 years ago

                      On the other end, I'm still not over the cancellation of Deadwood.

                      *stifles quiet sob*

                    2. Unlabelable MJGreen   7 years ago

                      I liked season 5 of Dexter, with what's-her-face going after the bros who raped her. I think I was let down by the hype for Lithgow's season, so it seemed better in comparison.

                      I stopped watching about 20 minutes into the season 6 premiere.

                      Last I heard, the Deadwood movie(s) are officially on, I think Milch even delivered a script. Fingers crossed it's not an embarrassment.

                    3. Crusty Juggler   7 years ago

                      Because of the current climate Milch Had to rewrite the script to remove every use of phrase "loopy cunt."

                    4. BestUsedCarSales   7 years ago

                      I'm always happy to work in a field where one of our technical terms has "Loopy" in it.

                    5. Square = Circle   7 years ago

                      I'd been exposed to no hype about Lithgow - I was actually caught by surprise, so I went in with no expectations. I do think Lithgow is a very over-rated actor, but he was a pretty good fit for that part.

                      I'm not sure at this point what you would do with Deadwood. I don't think you could really pick up the story where it left off, and I think historically all those people were about to scatter and/or get killed, anyway. IIRC, the historical Swearingen wound up homeless a few years after that, and I want to say he died of starvation on a train or some such.

            2. Unlabelable MJGreen   7 years ago

              Lost is good tho

              I'll usually continue watching schlock, and I did stay on with P&R until the first few episodes of season 5. I think we have different expectations with comedy and drama. It's easy to know when a comedy feels tired or doesn't make you laugh any more, while you might slog through bad storylines on a drama.

              1. BYODB   7 years ago


                I'll usually continue watching schlock...

                I actively seek it out to watch it. Do I detect that you might be a fan of Redlettermedia.com?

                1. Unlabelable MJGreen   7 years ago

                  RLM is probably why I used the word schlock, but I generally don't seek it out. The occasional 'guilty pleasure,' that's about it.

                  1. BestUsedCarSales   7 years ago

                    I use schlock because I used to like the "Gore Schlock" genre of films. Burning Moon, still great.

              2. Square = Circle   7 years ago

                Lost had its virtues. I thought the entire last season was pretty much a cop-out, though, and it pissed me off.

                It's pretty much what happened with the original Twin Peaks - the first twelve episodes were awesome, but I think Lynch was counting on it freaking people out and being cancelled, leaving a nice little "what if."

                People then didn't find him as freaky and incomprehensible as he liked to think, and his show got re-upped, and suddenly he had to find ways to tie up those loose ends and try to explain things, and the show went to shit almost immediately. In my opinion, he never recovered.

                Had Lost been cancelled after, say, Season Four, we would still be arguing about what it was all about.

        2. BYODB   7 years ago

          Fortunately I didn't watch the last season. I didn't see any point.

          1. Square = Circle   7 years ago

            You dodged a bullet - it was downright painful.

    2. Square = Circle   7 years ago

      I think you're right.

      Maybe the very best episode was the one where Leslie tries to save the bookstore and it turns into a government-subsidized porn-rental outlet, at which point Swanson gives her a little lecture starting out "Capitalism is the only way."

      Maybe the very worst was the series finale where he abandons his principles because a thinly-veiling Google is collecting data on people, and that's an outrage the way the private sector keeps people under surveillance like that.

      One of Parks & Rec's creators was Greg Daniels, who co-created King of the Hill, so I think that's where some of the libertarian cred came from, but I don't think he pressed it as hard as Mike Judge will tend to.

      1. BestUsedCarSales   7 years ago

        It's sad that all you need for libertarian cred is some doubt of government, and some faith in the average person to live their lives, and that this is a relatively rare quality.

        1. Square = Circle   7 years ago

          Yeah - that Parks & Rec counts as a kind of great victory for libertarians in that it had a libertarian character who sometimes expressed actually libertarian viewpoints and who wasn't either the villain or always the clown is kind of a sad reflection on our society.

          1. BYODB   7 years ago

            ^ This.

            Although maybe it says something about me that I usually root for the villain...

            1. lap83   7 years ago

              I rooted for the Captain Planet villains when I was a kid

              1. Crusty Juggler   7 years ago

                Great, now I'm attracted to you.

              2. Square = Circle   7 years ago

                I rooted for the Captain Planet villains when I was a kid

                Well, that's only natural.

                I feel blessed to have been a child in the 70s, when the content was expected to be mindless and amoral.

  6. Microaggressor   7 years ago

    Notably, the pyramid also has a cell for property rights.
    For those who don't know, government regulation is a soft violation of property rights because it restricts what you can do with your property, even in cases where there is no victim harmed by the activity.
    The fact that this property provides an essential service to customers doesn't change the second-order effects of regulation, most notably hindered innovation due to the difficulty of making every innovation compliant.
    Offerman, like most people on the subject, is simply uninformed and regurgitating the well-propagandized business interests of Netflix and Google.

    1. HeteroPatriarch   7 years ago

      Soft? Violate a regulation and tell me how soft it is.

  7. Rufus The Monocled   7 years ago

    Oh look. An actor being a run of the mill statist prog.

    Quelle surprise.

    1. Mickey Rat   7 years ago

      It is almost as if an actor is not the character he plays.

      1. Eidde   7 years ago

        Exception: Jack Nicholson.

        1. AlmightyJB   7 years ago

          Here's Johnny!

  8. Mitsima   7 years ago

    The best part of Free Speech is that idiots not only out themselves, they display their ignorance in grandiose fashion.

  9. DenverJ   7 years ago

    "I'm not a doctor libertarian, but I play one on TV."

  10. Arizona_Guy   7 years ago

    Seems everyone gets Nick Offerman and Ron Swanson mixed up, including Offerman.

    1. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

      willfully ignoring the public you claim to serve

      I guess it's been a while since Offerman's seen the show, because willfully ignoring the public is one of Swanson's key traits. One of the funniest scenes in the show's history has him turning his chair away from a member of said "public" that he's supposed to be serving.

  11. Arizona_Guy   7 years ago

    The other day I explained to my kid why the law is sometimes wrong. The missus told me I sounded like Ron Swanson. I'll take it as a compliment.

    1. Telcontar the Wanderer   7 years ago

      "Why, Dad?"

      "Because the people who write them are just like us."

      "OH."

  12. josh   7 years ago

    Of course, he could just be focusing on the process and not necessarily taking a stand against "NN" itself.

  13. Sevo   7 years ago

    As a courtesy to others who also had no idea what all of this meant:

    "Ronald Ulysses "Ron" Swanson is a fictional character portrayed by Nick Offerman from the situation comedy television series Parks and Recreation on NBC, created by Greg Daniels and Michael Schur."
    Wiki

    Maybe if I spent more time in the dentist's waiting room, I'd be more 'in tune' with the fictional opinions of fictional characters.

    1. AlmightyJB   7 years ago

      A primer

      https://youtu.be/oA9XQB12Q4U

  14. SparktheRevolt   7 years ago

    Nick Offerman is the last person I'd look to for advice on technology.

  15. JeremyR   7 years ago

    I thought Kennedy was TV's favorite libertarian?

    1. Eidde   7 years ago

      I thought it was Stossel.

      Or perhaps The Judge is the favoritest libertarian on TV?

      1. Telcontar the Wanderer   7 years ago

        Alex Jones. Duh.

  16. damikesc   7 years ago

    "I'm flattered that my pyramid of greatness has inspired you. I will remind you that the top category is Honor. Sadly, based on your duplicitous handling of the net neutrality issue, and the way you are willfully ignoring the public you claim to serve, I feel you may need that term defined. Which means, of course, that you don't have it."

    After this and the West Wing bullshit in regards to Sanders --- do these fucking monkeys not realize that THESE CHARACTERS AREN'T REAL PEOPLE?

    Nick, rest assured, nobody --- not even your own family --- gives two shits what you think about anything.

  17. Haha, charade you are   7 years ago

    Swanson had a lot of great lines that libertarians could agree with, but in the end, he is just a progressive caricature of libertarians. Offerman's comments are nothing more than pandering, and poor character analysis, given that "Swanson" was supposed to be a libertarian that hated govt. interference, and knew next to nothing about the internet, let alone computers.

  18. macsnafu   7 years ago

    Facts seem to mean less than ever, especially when it comes to Net Neutrality.
    What it seems to boil down to is that many on the left equate government regulation with freedom and actual freedom with tyranny. So removing or limiting government restrictions is, to them, an act of fascism.

  19. pasohe   7 years ago

    I have received $18234 in one month by working online from home. I am very happy thay i found this job and now i am able to earn more dollars online which is better than my regular office job ABe. Everybody can get this job and earn more income online by just follow this link and instructions there to get started.......... http://www.startonlinejob.com

  20. Carlos Inconvenience   7 years ago

    I used to like Offerman. But it is increasingly obvious that he, not unlike Norman Lear with Archie Bunker, thought he was creating a character that people would hate and didn't realize the character's message would resonate with a lot of normal Americans.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

'Banal Horror': Asylum Case Deals Trump Yet Another Loss on Due Process

Billy Binion | 5.29.2025 5:27 PM

Supreme Court Unanimously Agrees To Curb Environmental Red Tape That Slows Down Construction Projects

Jeff Luse | 5.29.2025 3:31 PM

What To Expect Now That Trump Has Scrapped Biden's Crippling AI Regulations

Jack Nicastro | 5.29.2025 3:16 PM

Original Sin, the Biden Cover-Up Book, Is Better Late Than Never

Robby Soave | 5.29.2025 2:23 PM

Did 'Activist Judges' Derail Trump's Tariffs?

Eric Boehm | 5.29.2025 2:05 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!