Posted on 01/11/2002 8:57:38 AM PST by vannrox
(The party & philosophy)
Out of the many political philosophies that exist, one of the most misunderstood is libertarianism. It is frequently labeled part of the “extreme right”, or it is merely associated with drug legalization. Truthfully, there may be several definitions of the term, but in general, libertarianism encompasses all or most of the following: strong support of individual civil liberties, social tolerance, and private property; belief in the positive powers of the free market; and an espousal of constitutionally limited and greatly reduced government. To put it succinctly, the libertarian believes in the freedom of individuals to pursue their lives as they see fit, as long as they cause no harm to others, with minimal governmental interference.
Libertarian thought is rooted historically in the ideas of many of the Enlightenment thinkers, including John Locke, Voltaire, and Adam Smith, as well as many of the founding fathers of America, including Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and Thomas Paine. Many libertarians prefer to call themselves “classical liberals”. Their philosophy has also been influenced by writer Ayn Rand’s “Objectivism”, and various free-market economists, including Milton Friedman, F.A. Hayek, and Ludwig von Mises.
To more clearly illustrate libertarian thoughts and beliefs, it is helpful to see how these ideas would affect certain issues being debated at this time. Specifically, Freedom of Speech,
(Keep in mind that libertarians, like most people, don’t agree on everything. In fact, their emphasis on individualism gives rise to a great deal of disagreement.)
The international scene (including military defense),
Taxation,
and, of course, Drug Prohibition.
Libertarians are strongly supportive of the civil liberties detailed in the Bill of Rights of our Constitution. They maintain that the Constitution does not grant us these rights, but instead recognizes those rights we naturally possess by virtue of our humanity. Included in these rights is the freedom of speech. Unlike many other supporters of free speech, the libertarian sees it as having a connection with property rights. For example, many would claim that to deny the publication of a certain person’s ideas or works would be censorship. The libertarian would say that you can publish anything you would like on a printing press you personally own, but to force someone else to print it would be coercion.
Another area in which libertarians have a unique philosophy is that concerning international affairs, military defense, and police functions. Many in the libertarian movement believe that the only legitimate functions of government are to provide military protection and law enforcement. They would oppose those “entangling alliances” that Jefferson mentioned which lead to treaties like NATO and organizations like the United Nations. They believe these can lead to unnecessary entanglements with other nations, and may ultimately usurp the sovereignty of the individual.
When it comes to the issue of taxes, it is helpful to reflect on the libertarian’s view of property rights. The libertarian view is generally that an individual should have the right to do with his property what he will, as long as it is not causing harm to someone else. In this case, the property being considered is the money an individual has earned. If the result of your labor is money, then it belongs to you, not the government. If another individual came along and took your money from you without your consent, it would be considered theft by our legal system. The libertarian views it as no less a crime when the government takes your money without your consent via taxation. (In those cases where taxation is “necessary”, libertarians prefer the taxes to be low and only minimally intrusive.)
The aspect most often associated with its philosophy by people only marginally familiar with libertarianism concerns the subject of drug legalization. What should be remembered is that the libertarian advocates personal freedom, which they believe includes the right to make decisions concerning your own body. They would argue that today’s drug prohibition is very similar to the alcohol prohibition of the 1920’s, which helped spawn a great deal of criminal activity, profiteering for criminal gangs, and turned otherwise peaceful, law-abiding citizens into criminals. (Of course, if the use of drugs by an individual causes them to harm another, that person must take responsibility for their actions, and must make restitution or receive appropriate punishment.) They also believe that the “drug war” has largely been a failure in its goals, and has diverted law enforcement away from other, more serious crimes.
Libertarian philosophy can be applied to most any issue being debated in our time. By looking at the four areas of freedom of speech, international affairs, taxation, and drug policy, it is easy to see that libertarian thought at its most basic level agrees with Jefferson’s statement, “That government is best which governs least.”
Written by Deanna Corbeil
To the degree that tariffs on foreign products are insufficient to cover the legitimate Constitutional costs of the federal government, we will offer an apportioned "state-rate tax" in which the responsibility for covering the cost of unmet obligations will be divided among the several states in accordance with their proportion of the total population of the United States, excluding the District of Columbia. Thus, if a state contains 10 percent of the nation’s citizens, it will be responsible for assuming payment of 10 percent of the annual deficit.
The effect of this "state-rate tax" will be to encourage politicians to argue for less, rather than more, federal spending, and less state spending as well.
Now you espouse a tenet called "No force, no fraud", if you lived up to that tenet, you would have not used any force. Just like Libertarians tell us that drug users aren't bothering anybody and that no force should be used against them.
IMHO, to truly live up to your ideals as a Libertarian you are going to have to get rid of the tendency to help people.
I could almost be a libertarian but a few things don't make sense. If you had an ideal libertarian country but open borders and another kind of people moved in who preferred socialism, they would vote for socialists and you'd lose your libertarian country.
Also if a group of people wanted to have a "dry" county for example and got the majority to vote to have it that way, who can stop them? Would there be a large Liberarian federal police force that would keep control over that kind of thing so communities like Santa Fe would allow everyone to build their own style of home? With very limited federal government, how will you keep communities in control so the individual can do whatever they please?
Why? Helping people should be entirely voluntary. It's not helping if either side is forced into the help, at least if the giver of the help is forced.
Of course it would also force US corporations to become competitive (steel, auto, etc.), which they could....by firing all union member and rehiring the ones willing as private individuals. Lowering Cost and forceing survival of the fittest (and the most industrious).
Do you honestly believe that you are making valid points here?
If a person wishes to drink, they may do so anywhere. No one can stop them. Therefore, a county may not go "dry", because that would infringe on an individual's inalienable rights.
Uh that was not the question. The question was if anybody who goes 100% for the "no force, no fraud" Libertarian tenet should "help" people.
Isn't "forcing" yourself into anothers life a violation of that tenet?
Total rubbish. The Liberteen panacea has Big Gubmint first and foremost. Don't let 'em fool ya...
No. There would simply be a guy sitting on his front porch drinking a fifth of Jack Daniels with one hand, and maybe his shotgun in the other. No army necessary.
You see, our rights are inalienable. No one can take them away from us. While a state or county may have rights over the Federal government, they have no rights over the individual. Where the state outranks the Fed, the individual outranks the state/county. Laws that violate one's rights are unconstitutional, and may simply be ignored. A county may pass any "dry" law it wants. It is automatically null and void, because I have a right to drink, buy, or sell booze without government permission.
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.