Would it be easier to go through life as a libertarian? From the Libertarian Party web site:
We oppose all violations of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and freedom of trade, especially those done in the name of national security.
I agree with the first part of the sentence, but I think private property rights can be violated in the name of national security.
Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. We must accept the right of others to choose for themselves if we are to have the same right.
I agree in theory. Each of us is free to make choices and accept responsibility.
We condemn state-funded and state-mandated abortions. It is particularly harsh to force someone who believes that abortion is murder to pay for another’s abortion.
I’m still with them.
It is the right and obligation of the pregnant woman, not the state, to decide the desirability or appropriateness of prenatal testing, Caesarean births, fetal surgery, voluntary surrogacy arrangements and/or home births.
OK. But do they believe a woman has a right to kill her baby?
We oppose all laws at any level of government restricting, regulating or requiring the ownership, manufacture, transfer or sale of firearms or ammunition. We oppose all laws requiring registration of firearms or ammunition.
No I really dig this, especially as a supporter of the Second Amendment and single gal living in a dangerous city like D.C. But they lose me on this:
We call for the elimination of all restrictions on immigration, the abolition of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol, and a declaration of full amnesty for all people who have entered the country illegally.
They win me over again with this:
Individual rights should not be denied, abridged or enhanced at the expense of other people’s rights by laws at any level of government based on sex, wealth, race, color, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation.
Now this is radical:
All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor. Government activity should not include the forcible collection of money or goods from individuals in violation of their individual rights. No tax can ever be fair, simple or neutral to the free market.
And so is this:
We oppose U.S. government participation in any world or international government. We support withdrawal of the United States government from, and an end to its financial support for, the United Nations. We oppose any treaty under which individual rights would be violated.
And I could get into this:
We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended. We call for the repeal of the guarantees of tax-funded, government-provided education, which are found in most state constitutions.
But they hopelessly lose me again with this:
Individuals should have the right to use drugs, whether for medical or recreational purposes, without fear of legal reprisals, but must be held legally responsible for the consequences of their actions only if they violate others’ rights.
Are you a libertarian? Take this quiz. To libertarians in the audience, why have you chosen this ideology over liberalism and conservatism?
{ 1 comment }
I agree with you La Shawn, on all but two points.
You say this is radical:
We oppose U.S. government participation in any world or international government. We support withdrawal of the United States government from, and an end to its financial support for, the United Nations. We oppose any treaty under which individual rights would be violated.
But what’s radical about that? That is a statement against a world government. Now I don’t know your personal politics all that well because I’ve only just discovered your blog, but do you like the UN? And if so, why?
You say that libertarianism “hopelessly lose[s]” you with this:
Individuals should have the right to use drugs, whether for medical or recreational purposes, without fear of legal reprisals, but must be held legally responsible for the consequences of their actions only if they violate others’ rights.
One of the core foundations of libertarianism is personal property rights. Your body is your personal property. The greatest personal property you can lay claim to. It’s as simple as that.
Other than those two…you seem to be pretty much a libertarian. Libertarianism can basically be boiled down to: “You have a right to ownership of property and self and your rights end where another’s begins.”
Where people like me and you seem to differ the most from people who call themselves libertarian are issues of foreign policy. Libertarianism is flawed because it goes on the basic premise that we are all on an economic and sociologic equal footing. (Note: I don’t mean in the classic leftist sense of economic “injustice” here. Read on…) For example: Libertarians are against any form of tariff, economic sanction, or trade restriction between nations. But some of us realize that while tariffs never work and are counter productive in a truely free market, the reality is that the U.S. isn’t dealing with truely free markets. Often such ugly things like tariffs and limitations on immigration make perfect sense and benefit us as a nation.
That was a little too wordy but I hope you get the gist of what I was trying to convey.
Just for the record, I call myself a conservative libertarian.
Comments on this entry are closed.