Libertarianism: The Oxymoronic Faith

Newsmax ^ | Nov 22, 2005 | Steve Farrell

[El Conservador]

Since many hardcore conservatives can't seem Libertarianism beyond issues like drug legalization, that's bound to happen.

I now consider myself a conservative-leaning libertarian, rather than a conservative.

[Lurker]

Oh goody. Another critique of Libertarian principles from someone who hasn't the first clue of what they actually are.

L

[ndt]

"but the problem is that the term "anarchist" has already been preempted by socialist proponents of mob rule"

How can you be a socialist anarchist?

[Lurker]

I've got to agree. Your father made a stupid statement.

L

[Mr. Mojo]

All Freepers can add keywords, not just the threadmeister.

[One Proud Son]

Liberatarians have some good ideals, but are too lazy to live by them.

[Sam the Sham]

Libertarianism is essentially the ideology of oligarchy so it really doesn't matter whether it actually makes sense. It is nothing more and nothing less than the selfish class interest of people who think they can live behind fortified walls with private police, private courts, private hospitals, private sanitation, private schools, private etc.

The core idiocy of libertarianism is what I like to call the Cultural Contradiction of Libertarianism. The Libertarian is a godless extreme cultural liberal. But he propounds a philosophy of government that can only work in a traditional religious culture where negative behavior is constrained by fear of ostracism and disgrace and the large extended family cares for its sick and its elderly. In a secular, individualistic culture of two child families, who will look after Mom ? The State will be the primary old age caregiver. The libertarian thinks you can have a Victorian government without a Victorian culture and society underneath.

[Shalom Israel]

How can you be a socialist anarchist?

Simple: abolish government and private property at the same time.

[sausageseller]

I once asked my father what the difference was between a Libertarian and an Anarchist.

Libertarian thinks you should not have your pot taxed and the Anarchist thinks it should be free.

[Shalom Israel]

You don't seem to have a very clear understanding of libertarians. Many of them are religious, for example. The believe in social enforcement of morés, in the form of ostracism and peer pressure--but not by means of violence.

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

Libertarianism may be different things to different people. Ayn Rand appealed to me in may ways, and Rand's economic libertarianism appealed to me. She recognized how destructive the Marxist/Communist/Socialist changes in the 20th Century harmed our free enterprise system. Where I deviate from Rand was that she opposed Antitrust laws. In that way, I suppose that I am not a pure libertarian. I liked Barry Goldwater's spin: keep the Government out of our pockets and our bedrooms. Legalizing drugs would not do away with the drug problem.
Still many of our Government Departments should be abolished. Why should the Federal Government be involved in Education? Why does it need to spend billions on subsidizing agriculture? Government is to protect its people from external (defense) and internal (police) threats. Some regulation is necessary to protect our environment. We do need a safety net for our disabled and those disadvantaged temporarily. Adam Smith and Milton Friedman believed in those principles. They had a moral code that called for the best policies for the people.

[plain talk]

thanks. After 8 years here I never knew that.

[Sam the Sham]

Libertarianism can only exist in a culture of large extended families. Without a culture of large extended families the state will become the societal safety net. So for small government you MUST have a government that aggressively defends traditional social mores.

And since when are libertarians religious ? Isn't the cultural agenda of libertarianism prostitution, sodomy and drugs ? Isn't it identical to the extreme "Too Many Christians, too few Lions" secularist left ?

[billbears]

There's so much wrong with this article it's not even worth discussing. He's cherrypicking from a few Libertarians to get his point across and assuming that all those that hold to that philosophy must be default have the same standards.

In effect many Libertarians (big or little l) I know have a strong faith in their religion. However they do understand the intended limitations of the national government, of which neither Republicans or Democrats do or even desire to do. If morality is to be legislated (which I won't necessarily say is possible) it could only be done from the state level. However Republicans desire to legislate at the national level. As the citizens within the respective states are so diverse from their counterparts this just can't be done with any reasonable success, no matter how much this author or any other Republican wishes it.

[308MBR]

I believe in a limited federal government. Therefore the elimination of the BATF, EPA, HHS, DEA, FDA, etc would be a great move. I can't even spray my roses without breaking a federal law due to these unelected bozos making rules in their little bureaucrated fifedoms. Give the people "working" in these agencies a job guarding the borders or keeping sewer treatment plants running.

Folks, these "rulings" by these agencies are simply legislation without representation.

[fizziwig]

"where he said that libertarianism is the heart of conservatism...or something close to that."

He may have made that statement, but I don't remember Reagan every advocating the legalization of drugs and prostitution...or gay marriage, or polygamy.

[Larry Lucido]

I agree with you, but anarchists are drawn to libertarianism like flies. The smart ones should cleanse the ranks once in a while.

Ayn Rand wouldn't have tolerated any anarchists in her ranks. But then, her "collective" had a tendency to purge anyone who sneezed wrong. :-)

[Shalom Israel]

Without a culture of large extended families the state will become the societal safety net.

Without large domesticated wombats, elephant meat will become the only source of protein.

In other words, would you care to prove your assertion, or do you claim papal infallibility?