Posted on 07/30/2002 6:46:04 PM PDT by RANDomScout
In this, my last scheduled contribution to Editor’s Links, I want to say a few nice words about libertarians – a much-maligned, funny, quarrelsome lot of people who were kind enough to foot my bills this summer.
One of the great things about laissez-faire types is that they’re not in power and – truth be told – they have no desire to be. This is seen by some as a bad thing; a sign that libertarians aren’t “serious people.” But the approach is not without its benefits.
Right- and left-wingers are tethered to partisan political movements or political parties, which can be a weights of albatross-like proportions. Advancing a party’s propaganda and interests often contorts and warps reality all out of recognizable proportion. For instance, a recent Washington Monthly review of right-wing bomb thrower Ann Coulter’s new book Slander relayed her claim that “for about twenty years now, all new ideas have bubbled up from the right wing.” The incredulous reviewer asked “All new ideas? All? Air Jordans? The Macarena? Pizza Hut's Stuffed-Crust Pizza?”
Across the aisle are odious pundits like Joe Conason who, in his Salon blog today credited “big government” with saving the Pennsylvania coal miners, reminded readers that Ted Bundy was a young Republican (only one step removed from Ralph Reed), and compared the Bush administration’s attempts to have hiring and firing flexibility in the newly created Department of Homeland Security to the anti-union “obsession[s] of totalitarian regimes and their imitators.” He justified this last charge by explaining – I am not making this up – that if Ann Coulter could be nasty then so could he.
Libertarians are sometimes damned as purists, but at least they aren’t as predictable or as boring as their sniping counterparts on the right and left. They’re also – and I say this from experience – a whole lot more fun. They lack the anti-corporate nervous tics of progressives (“Oh, I couldn’t order Dominos. Do you have any idea what kind of causes they finance?!”) and the woe is us moralistic hang-ups of conservatives (“There was sex on TV last night! We’re doomed.”).
A startlingly diverse group, the only common ground that all libertarians share is a desire to live in a society in which people are truly free – of wars, of petty government regulations, of a creeping Puritanism that holds suspect any fun activity. That might be a pipe dream, but it's one I’ve come to share.
Jeremy Lott is Reason's 2002 Burton C. Gray Memorial intern.
Doper Alert!
Sure they are. They're the first to whine about their "rights" and the last to acknowledge any responsiblity.
Right in the 10 ring.
Based on this post, I would say you know very little about what libertarians believe. What "their 'rights'" are you refering to? Responsibility for what, exactly, are they not acknowledging?
How about:
Liberty-it's everywhere you want to be.
Where do you want to be free today?
Liberty is Job 1!
Anyone else?
LOL..and truth be told they really would like power but can't garner more than .03% of the vote.
You're a liar, Willie. If anyone is against
government nannyism protecting the
individual's self inflected boo-boos,
it is the libertarian.
Ah! You confuse the little l's with the big L's. Certainly, there is a good deal of overlap between those that espouse libertarian priciples and those that are active in the LP. I, myself, am not a joiner. I don't belong to any political party, have never held or sought office, and vote or not depending the issues or candidates at hand. I don't want power, I just want to live my life, peacefully and with respect for the rights of others around me to do the same. One more thing, one presidential election is not necessarily indictative of the support of any party, especially this last election.
Actually, I had a much higher opinion of Libertarian philosophy prior to engaging many in discussion on a wide variety of issues on this forum. Based on that experience, I've come to the conclusion that Libertarian philosophy is an excercise in narcissistic irresponsibility -- a distinctive lack of moral compass and self-restraint that precludes any sense of obligation to the community. In fact, they are often the most vocal defendents of behavior that lower community standards of decency, all in the name of "liberty".
No, I've learned quite a bit about libertarians on this forum.
IMHO, libertarians damage their own image with the example they set.
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.