Posted on 12/11/2006 11:27:25 AM PST by neverdem
First, libertarianism is to be distinguished from liberalism.
Libertarians do not believe in the welfare state, and - perhaps in a sneaky way - support legal immigration because it would accelerate the bankruptcy of the welfare state.
Libertarians often say, in debates with liberals, if poor people should have a right to health care, does this pertain to all poor people in the world? (Obviously it doesn't since the average cost of health care in the U.S. is greater than the average income of people in the world, and thus would be impossible to provide to everyone.)
Liberals, on the other hand, don't give a dash about raising taxes on the middle class, and would be happy to see immigrants come here and necessitate the raising of taxes.
(I should point out that the connection between immigration and the looming bankruptcy of the welfare state has turned itself on the head in recent years, since Liberals are looking to bring in more young immigrants to add to our workfore in order to pay the bills of an aging domestic population.)
Now, with regard to saying things such as abortion is or was part of the libertarian agenda, the Libertarian Party was organized in 1971. I don't know how we managed to gain a majority on the Supreme Court so fast.
In the original Libertarian Party platform, abortion was to be allowed during the first 100 days of prenancy (approximately equal to the first trimester), out of concern for the right of privacy. This did not say that abortion was good, only that the state, as a practical matter, couldn't do anything about it.
(That was the original LP platform. Don't blame me for its current platform.)
Libertarians would allow people to do things that they might not agree with, as long as its in private and with or among consenting adults. Therefore, allowing behaviors doesn't imply approval.
Liberals, on the other hand, are happy to prohibit or mandate, tax or subsidize behaviors according to how strongly they approve or disapprove of the behavior.
Therefore, it is a completely different thing to say that a Libertarian would legalize something versus that a Liberal would legalize something.
I think there's a difference between big- and small-l libertarians. It seems as if the small-l's tend to congregate here (because libertarianism in the form of favor for small government has supposedly been a Republican ideal for a long time). The big-L's are mostly elsewhere. Sounds like it's a good thing, too -- eek.
LOL! Not if you don't know Haitian history.
Derb ping
I don't know. I consider myself a Libertarian and I strongly oppose illegal immigration.
Then again, I also support the WOT and that's counter to Libertarianism also, from what I hear.
Agreed. It'd be one of the faster way to commit cultural suicide. We have plenty of ways we are doing that already. No need to add another. Bush's Shamnesty program will do exactly that though...
I don't agree.
The national LP supports ending immigration quotas.
The main reason for opposing immigration restrictions comes from fundamental libertarian principle that sees such restrictions as immoral.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.