Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why I'm not a libertarian
WND ^ | June 18, 2002 | Joseph Farah

Posted on 06/18/2002 8:09:35 AM PDT by ZGuy

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

1 posted on 06/18/2002 8:09:35 AM PDT by ZGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
Farah's other piece that he referenced above, "Why I'm Not A Conservative".
2 posted on 06/18/2002 8:18:52 AM PDT by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
Libertarian checking in.
Farah's observations are right.
(just so folks know, we're not all blue face painting pagan savage hedonists. Some of us are Christians.)
3 posted on 06/18/2002 8:21:39 AM PDT by tomakaze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
I believe a nation's borders are sacrosanct. Without borders, there are no nations. We become one big global village

The Hillerytarians won't like that comment.

4 posted on 06/18/2002 8:26:23 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
I consider myself a libertarian, although I take strong issue with a numbher of issues in the Libertarian party platform. One area where I strongly disagree is their position favoring open borders.

However, one qualifier to their position which I think deserves more emphasis is their complete opposition to immigrant welfare.

I think if America really had the moral strength to ensure that no immigrant ever received a dime of US public assistance, Aztlan would be far less of a threat to our country than it is today.

Of course, I will always be in favor of almost any immigration policy that could effectively keep Muslim terrorists out.

5 posted on 06/18/2002 8:29:02 AM PDT by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tomakaze
I like the small l libertarian positions. Like the Republicans have factions within the party, so do we.
6 posted on 06/18/2002 8:32:09 AM PDT by steve50
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Maceman
However, one qualifier to their position which I think deserves more emphasis is their complete opposition to immigrant welfare.

The Libertarian Party in California opposed Proposition 187.

7 posted on 06/18/2002 8:36:04 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
Just as long as nobody confuses me with a Republican...

Open borders, bad idea.

Re-legalizing drugs isn't condoning drug abuse.

Self defense, good. Meddling with other countries, bad. (Remember what the first "W" said about that.)

Why does evry article like this completely omit any reference or hide any indication that there are church-going, military veteran, pro 2a, anti-IRS, college educated, family oriented, pro-life, libertarians, who, unlike their Republican counterparts, actually believe in a smaller, less intrusive government?

But let's remember, it was the Republican Party that brought the clintons to justice, and is currently leading the way to a smaller and Constitutionally sound government, right?

8 posted on 06/18/2002 8:38:42 AM PDT by Eagle Eye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
The Hillerytarians won't like that comment.

What is a Hillerytarian?

9 posted on 06/18/2002 8:40:11 AM PDT by southern rock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
The Libertarian Party in California opposed Proposition 187.

Well that's just nuts, if true.

But then again, GW Bush signed (and therefore supported) CFR.

What to do?

10 posted on 06/18/2002 8:41:01 AM PDT by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
RE:Re-legalizing drugs isn't condoning drug abuse
 
Farah was off base on that, but getting the feds out of it and making it a local/state thing was a decent "out".
It's only a threat to your kids if you didn't raise them right.
If it's a choice between letting junkies die in the street and not having to deal with no knock warrants, SWAT raids, random searches and other police state crap, I'm all for letting the junkies die in the street.
11 posted on 06/18/2002 8:46:07 AM PDT by tomakaze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
I think the attacks on Libertarians have more to do with maintaining the one party system, as does CFR
12 posted on 06/18/2002 8:46:19 AM PDT by steve50
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Maceman
Well that's just nuts, if true.

It's true.

http://www.ca.lp.org/min/ec19941119.txt

13 posted on 06/18/2002 8:48:39 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
"Would this country be better off with more libertarians? Absolutely."

Accentuate the positive. :-)

14 posted on 06/18/2002 8:52:00 AM PDT by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
Good analysis. In truth, libertarians are closer to anarchists than the republic that our founding fathers envisioned.
15 posted on 06/18/2002 8:53:36 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve50
There wouldn't be attacks if there was no perceived threat.

I'm actually more conservative than most Freeper Conservatives, yet too enamoured with the Constitution and personal liberty to be a Republican anymore.

One gets to make some choices in life. For me, I'd rather be called a dopertarian, pedophile, etc, etc, etc from the ignorant, than to be identified as a Republican. To me Republicans represent one of two heads of a giant siamese twin that is headed toward global socialism. One head says to-may-to, one says po-ta-to, but they both are headed down the same path joined at the hip, taking 85-90% of the people with them.

16 posted on 06/18/2002 8:56:10 AM PDT by Eagle Eye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
So, like Hayek, Kirk and many other great thinkers, Farah takes the line of Classical English Liberalism and would only be confortable with the appelation of "Old Whig". As Hayek pointed out, the Whiggish colors of blue and buff were actually purposefully chosen for the Continental Army...our founders knew the banner under which they fought.
17 posted on 06/18/2002 8:56:47 AM PDT by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
Why does evry article like this completely omit any reference or hide any indication that there are church-going, military veteran, pro 2a, anti-IRS, college educated, family oriented, pro-life, libertarians, who, unlike their Republican counterparts, actually believe in a smaller, less intrusive government?

Because he's writing about party platforms and the general stance the Libertarian Party takes, not what each individual member may personally believe about each specific issue, same as with any article that discusses political parties, not specific individuals. Farah also makes it clear that Libertarians believe in smaller governement and he calls that a 'good start'.

Don't be so defensive; it's a fairly reasonable analysis of how one man sees the Libertarians. Not all bad of course but flawed and virtually unelectable on a national level. He makes some excellent observations.

18 posted on 06/18/2002 8:57:24 AM PDT by Jim Scott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jim Scott
In the interest of full disclosure, I am a Libertarian and I've voted straight Libertarian in every election since I can remember.

That being said, I'm not sure that the party is unelectable on a national level. It's true, I think, that the party is some years off from success (winning federal elections), but I think Libertarians are making gradual progree: a two-steps forward, one-step back type of thing.

As the two major party grow more and more similar, it DOES seem to be moving our country towards a left-leaning, socialist-type economy with individual liberty quickly shoved out the door in the name of safety. I think Americans have tolerated this for a good deal of time, but I am sure the time will come when the people will wake up and realize just what liberties they have lost, and they'll turn to an uncompromising solution--the complete opposite. Right now, that is the Libertarians.

While I may give The People too much credit (like our founding fathers, I feel there is no underestimating the intelligence of the American people), I just can't go to bed every night thinking that this will only get worse; it's barely tolerable as it is.

Just a few thoughts from the far, far right-wing.

19 posted on 06/18/2002 9:05:01 AM PDT by Viva Le Dissention
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
I consider myself a Constitutionalist and a nationalist. Although I have some problems with the libertarian party planks I find them closest to my positions on most issues.

I'm debating about staying registered Republican for primaries but leaning toward re-registering with the .067% guys in the hope of sending a message.

I'm afraid we are to far down the authoritarian road for anything to make a difference tho

20 posted on 06/18/2002 9:08:02 AM PDT by steve50
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson