Replies

Why do they so hate George Bush? Why is he, rather than Saddam Hussein, the object of their most intense loathing?

They hate him because he is too American. "

This is a really interesting article. I thought about you because of your balanced take on libertarianism. Though this article is an indictment against liberal democrats I could see how this same line of thought could be applied to the hatred libertarians have toward Bush and Republicans. Maybe not because they see themselves as 'internationalists' but instead their hatred stemming from the very idea that any country should be superior to another. I suppose that's the same sort of idea of 'internationalist'.

Definately and interesting article, thanks for the ping.

First let me say it is difficult for me to put myself in the shoes of a libertarian who hates G.W. Bush. I have a hard time hating anybody and I don't hate Bush, and I certianly like him a great deal more than Clinton. Not wanting to damn GWB with faint praise since Clinton represents such a low bar, let me say that Bush's balance with me is in the positive and I'd like to explain why. Doing so will help frame why I don't have Bush and why some other libertarians seem to do so. My evaluation of GWB comes down to Afganistan and Iraq. Whatever his domestic policies might be, it is of enormous value that GWB acted after September 11th, that he got permission from Congress to do so, and that he allowed his generals to do their job. I cannot emphasize enough the importance I place on these qualities. That have been said I do not agree with him on a number of important domestic issues, I believe he is wrong on some things and on others I believe his positions are too weak. These are not minor issues, but compared with foreign affairs they are of less import.

While libertarians who hate Bush may not believe themselves to be 'internationalists' or 'world socialists' (a better description I think) they do share one important quality with the lefists who hate Bush, and that is they see themselves as 'intelligentsia' or intellectual elite. I'd like to contrast this group from those who oppose foreign military activity with suspicion but do not have Bush as a person. I do not want to paint all libertarians who were opposed to declaring war as the same as those who hate Bush. The libertarians who hate Bush, whether objectivists or pacificists or whatever faction do so because they have succumbed to the same hubris as the Bush hating lefists. They see most Americans as 'not like them' and that they are more politically sophisticated. It is really the same thing, just that the political lean is different, the elitism is the same. Instead of being un-American instead they are a kind of super-patriot who knows better than the great unwashed, Republicans included. These libertarians give me and my kind a bad name. Despite the fact that I am part of the kick-ass-and-take-names faction, I know that there are moderates and pacifists that do not hate Bush. Those that do engage in the same fear and self-loathing (excuse the reference) as the leftist, and believe that if they were in charged things would be different.

Fortunately, most libertarians don't go this far but the ones that do get all the air time. I felt personally shamed by Browne's comments after September 11th and it was enough to make me burn my membership card. The national party seems to be populated with these types. What good does it do to haggle over roads when there are people who want to kill us? Bah. I think that most libertarians are, if not pragmatists, realists. That seems to be why most of them still vote Republican as I do -- and even if they don't they know that the world socialist is a bigger enemy than the Republican. That's why there are so many Republican Liberty Caucus and Libertarian Party types on FR to begin with. It's sometimes a rocky relationship but I think we know we need each other. Those libertarians or Republicans who don't are approaching the same hubris as the world socialist.