Libertarianism Lives

The Wall Street Journal ^ | Tuesday, May 28, 2002 | EDWARD H. CRANE and ROGER PILON

[TroutStalker]

Political fashions come and go, but political principles endure. President Clinton noted some six years ago that the era of big government was over. Yet today, conservatives who should know better see a new fashion. George Will, high on his Hamiltonian horse in the Washington Post last month, seemed delighted that minimal-government conservatism was dead. And on these pages recently, Francis Fukuyama declared1 the libertarianism that followed the Thatcher-Reagan revolution to be in retreat. We're all Keynesians now, apparently.

[AdA$tra]

I really like much of what the Libertarians have to say. Especially the CATO guys. When are they going to get some candidates that have all their teeth and don't grease their hair?

[Kevin Curry]

The list could go on, but the point should be clear.

LOL!

In other words, "The list could go on, but then I'd be discussing our REAL agenda, i.e., the legalization of drugs, sodomy, and gay marriage--and genuine conservatives would tune me out."

The man isn't stupid. Disingenuous maybe, but not stupid.

[Kerberos]

Great article!!!!

Thanks for posting.

[dheretic]

There is no reason to license marriage other than to gain benefits under the tax code. If two gays want to get married, they can in effect get married right now. The only difference is that they don't have a license. There is nothing stopping a preacher from giving them a ceremony and them living as.. well.. whatever they live as. The government has no right to get its foot in the door to make sure that 2 consenting adults aren't having sex "the wrong way." Your love of big government is really showing! Good work pal, your comments are showing your state-worshipping side quite well. I thought you worshipped God, not Big Brother....

[MrB]

What the "legislate morality" crowd doesn't get is not only that morality cannot be legislated, but it doesn't NEED to be legislated.

The simple libertarian philosophy of individual freedom and responsibility. Morality is based on thousands of years of trial and error by the human race. Living a moral life has fewer negative and more positive consequences than living an immoral life.

The problem is that our society has increasingly tried to insulate and absorb (make others shoulder) the negative consequences of immorality and poor choices.
Remove the societal absorption (safety net) of negative consequences, and you'll see people (within a generation) living a more moral and responsible life.

[Reagan Man]

...Libertarian principles are here to stay..

Yes, libertarian principles are here to stay. Principles like, support for abortion rights, legalization of drugs and prostitution, open borders and unlimited immigration, and a strong desire to dismantle both America's criminal justice system and military armed forces. The problem is, these principles aren't supported by a majority of conservatives. Conservatives view these major issues that Libertarians support, as fringe political extremism. Even most American's don't want anything to do with such an agenda.

Libertarian politics doesn't have a major following in America and never will. In the last general election for president, the LP candidate, Harry Browne, received less then 400K votes, out of over 100-million total votes cast. That's less the .04%. Even Pat Buchanan received more votes then Browne. That doesn't say much for the future of libertarian politics in America.

[Destructor]

No mention is made of Satanic Druids, Illuminatis, armining criminals and crazies, or legalizing all drugs. This story makes Libertarianism sound like a rational political philosophy, once those elements are removed.

[aspasia]

Hear no evil, see no evil, have lots of fun!

[serinde]

Living a moral life has fewer negative and more positive consequences than living an immoral life. ... Remove the societal absorption (safety net) of negative consequences, and you'll see people (within a generation) living a more moral and responsible life.

I agree with this. But can't you just hear the screams, "I didn't know it would be like this! Someone help me, save me!!!"

Whatever happened to plain, simple, common sense? For example, there were lots of ads last week about the police enforcing seat belt use. IMO, if someone isn't smart enough to use the seat belt, they deserve the harm they get in a wreck. If they can't take care of themselves, the police shouldn't have to do it. There are lots of other, more serious crimes they should be dealing with, not taking care of some idiot with no common sense.

[Boxsford]

Yet the Founders who created this nation were libertarians. They didn't use that word, of course, nor did they call themselves (classical) liberals or democrats. But they stood for basic libertarian principles: the equal right of all to pursue happiness, free from arbitrary interference, and government dedicated to securing that right. Respect for government's limits is hardly hostility to government in all its manifestations.

If that were only true! These listed principles are hardly arguable. Many conservatives embrace these as well.

As far as I'm concerned Libertarians took several steps back when they showed their anti-American colors in support of Arabs and terrorists. They have it in their warped minds that it's okay to bomb anything American because whatever reasons they have for doing so is justified because America deserves it. They don't see or call the so called 'retailiation' a violent act. Peace is so precious to them but as long as an act of violence is directed at Americans/America then their philosophy quickly changes. It's hypocrisy!

Kevin, talk about disingenious you are always bringing up the same old same old nonsense about drugs, etc with libertarians. The arguement is not that limited.

[Beenliedto]

In other words, "The list could go on, but then I'd be discussing our REAL agenda, i.e., the legalization of drugs, sodomy, and gay marriage--and genuine conservatives would tune me out."

That is an absolutly absurd contention.

[MrB]

if someone isn't smart enough to use the seat belt, they deserve the harm they get in a wreck

Yep, my view is considered heartless. I consider it "tough love". Let those who choose poorly serve as an example to others.
It wouldn't take long. It would cost some lives. But then again, how many lives will socialism destroy?
If socialism is implemented nationwide - freedom is destroyed, and all lives are harmed.

[murdoog]

In other words, "The list could go on, but then I'd be discussing our REAL agenda, i.e., the legalization of drugs, sodomy, and gay marriage--and genuine conservatives would tune me out."

Why don't you critique the article based on what he *does* say instead of what you read into it?

[Salgak]

Marriage is a covenant between a couple and God (or the God or Gods of their choice, in any case. . . .). Why, pray tell, should the State be involved ?

The whole push for "gay marriage" is about Tax and Fringe benefits. . . .

And as for sodomy, last time I checked, us boring Heterosexuals often practice it too. . .

[aspasia]

Why don't you critique the article based on what he *does* say instead of what you read into it?

It's okay. Most people go wrong in what they forget to do.

[RJCogburn]

Libertarian politics doesn't have a major following in America and never will

You fail to distinguish the difference between ideas and elective politics. I agree that the LP is liikely to go nowhere, but it does appear that libertarian ideas are gaining, such as the ones the author listed.

If you try, you will be able to tell the difference. Try.

[Exnihilo]

Excellent article. When Libertarians stop pushing for legalized drugs and prostitution, they may actually find themselves getting elected! If nothing else they ought to have the political wherewithal to keep these two hot button issues on the Q.T. and always "hush hush". For some reason, they don't. They let drugs and hookers dominate the general public's perception of libertarianism, while their strongest arguments and issues are left out to dry. I don't understand it.

[steve-b]

Ironically, the 9/11 attacks constituted a massive failure of government to do the main thing libertarians call upon government to do -- protect us.

Obviously, wasting time and resources on trivia will degrade the ability to perform the primary task.