Spot on. This will be and is being used to justify a world of luxury for the 1% and a world of pain for everyone else who isn't "perfect".
I personally believe we should strive to create a better world for 100% of the population, not justify the shortfallings of the current mixed-capi-soci system.
Okay, I set myself up for this by saying "absolute worst", but this strikes me as so unlikely that it's not really worth worrying about. After all, someone could make a new account using your name (+ some numbers) /right now/!
Maybe that's partly because Haskell can easily become a bit too elegant. Between all the currying and combinators, the type helps to understand code "top down", i.e. when you don't have studied and memorized all "bottom up" component parts.
I'm not personally a conservative, but I'm pretty sure conservatives are not all hardcore libertarians or objectivists. Some of the intellectual brain-trust of conservative thought is libertarian or objectivist, but a lot of the broader conservative movement is not.
Certainly not in the way "statically typed" is usually understood.
Containers (outside of specialized arrays) aren't parameterized, so every time you extract a value from a list or map, the "static type" is the top type. SBCL remains essentially unityped with islands of type propagation for better performance of (mostly) numeric code.
Almost all languages. There is one language that can be typed without a type, the empty language.
Since the empty language contains no programs, it follows that "Untyped Programs Don't Exist".