But the Libertarian Party contains some ideas which I cannot accept. Reminding me of the wisdom behind the philosophy just makes me sad that the Party is not something I can support.
Interesting, but similar to the Bull Moose party in effectiveness, if that.
The State, in short, was to be kept extremely small, with a very low, nearly negligible budget. The classical liberals never developed a theory of taxation, but every increase in a tax and every new kind of tax was fought bitterly — in America twice becoming the spark that led or almost led to the Revolution (the stamp tax, the tea tax).
The concept is pure poetry. Great article, thanks for posting it.
We need to consider a Constitutional amendment allowing the states to secede from the Union. I know, many feel the state's still have that right notwithstanding the Civil War. But an amendment would seal the deal. Once the Feds have to face that possibility, there would be more accountability to the states.
bttt--
Bump for later read.
Locke, for instance, didn't endorse religious toleration for either Catholics or Atheists. Hardly the man many libertarians would endorse today.
Likewise, many of the state laws grandfathered in after the creation of the Union would be anathema to libertarians. Read William Blackstone.
Finally, I must object to the depiction of America as an ideological nation with a set creed. If this is so, then I and many others are apostates.
bookmark.
I need to convince him of the folly of his ways. ;-)
Can anyone direct me to the Libertarian version of Free Republic?
Sadly, the concept of limited government is all but dead.
INTERESTING
"The State, in short, was to be kept extremely small, with a very low, nearly negligible budget."
The "State" was to have ALL the power it had before, even more. The state governments still had all powers they did not give to the new federal government, the new federal government had all the ones they did- plus some new ones.
Idiot libertarians- which let me make clear is not all libertarians- constantly throw this lie at ignorant people.
Sure, the federal government was very cconstrained domestically until the Civil war- but the states were not. The "State" consisted mostly of the states.
Homer: America, take a good look at your beloved candidates. They're nothing but hideous space reptiles.
[unmasks them] [audience gasps in terror]
Kodos: It's true, we are aliens. But what are you going to do about it? It's a two-party system; you have to vote for one of us.
[murmurs]
Man1: He's right, this is a two-party system.
Man2: Well, I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate.
Kang: Go ahead, throw your vote away!
[Kang and Kodos laugh out loud]
The next day, Kodos announces the result: "All hail, President Kang."
The field in front of the Capitol has now become a working ground where humans are whipped by aliens and used to carry materials.
The Simpsons family is working too, with Homer and the kids carrying wood, and Marge pushing a wheelbarrow of cinderblocks -- with Maggie on top.
Marge: I don't understand why we have to build a ray gun to aim at a planet I never even heard of.
Homer: Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
And if the Revolution had one philosophy, the Constitution and early Republic didn't necessarily share it. The Founders were concerned lest the country be too weak to fend off foreign adversaries or fall apart into bickering states. Whatever else you can say about Washington, Hamilton, and Adams, they weren't Rothbardians -- and we were better off for it.
"Liberty" can be an ambiguous concept. For one revolutionary it means freedom from all constraint. For another it means freedom from foreign oppression. So successful revolutions which throw off foreign rulers aren't necessarily going to pursue radically libertarian policies afterwards. If one doesn't grasp that it's going to be hard to understand the American Revolution and similar movements for national independence.
Rothbard doesn't try to understand how the people of a given era understood the world and their place in it. Rather, he ransacks the past for people who agree with him, and turns them into the virtuous and justified tradition and their opponents as the baddies. What he produces looks more like propaganda or a party line, rather than an attempt to understand what happened, how, and why. His books on history are of limited use in understanding the past.
Harry Browne, Libertarian Pres. candidate.
After 9/11/2001 he Blamed America.
A lot of these people are pointy headed intellectuals, who favor across the board legal drugs, open borders, etc.