Everyday, the political debate (or lack thereof) in the United States goes on. It ebbs and flows, heats and cools as time goes on. High points of political debate (election time) and low (the middle point where there are no elections) follow each other with regularity. This political debate most often seems to center around two major points of view- Republican or Democrat, "conservative" or "liberal", right or left...
Yet a growing faction of the American population increasingly turn away from these "traditional" labels. Refusing to define themselves with the narrow strictures of a set roster of ideas and a political moniker that goes with them, these people strike out largely on their own. Several things unite these freelancers, though what has come to be called the Libertarian movement has people ranging from the anarchist to the near-Republican to the near-Democrat. Yet most Libertarians can agree on three things-
- Personal liberty is the most important thing
- The Constitution of the United States is a pretty good model for a non interventionist government
- For America to survive, even in her current state of semi-decay, she must return to some semblance of what she once was
There is much dissension among Libertarian ranks; so much so that sometimes, Libertarians can seem to be broken down into several parties of thought rather than just one. This is, perhaps, one of our greatest strengths. Rather than being slaves to a central party doctrine that reigns paramount over our own thoughts, feelings, beliefs, and convictions, Libertarians have comparative freedom to decide their own way.
One instance of this is embodied in the Libertarian Party platform. All individuals are sovereign over their own lives, the passage reads, and defense of each individual's choices and rights is paramount: more important than any personal conviction. Of course, one thing must be stated right now- that, though each individual's choice is defended, each individual also cannot trample on the rights of another. That would not be freedom; that is anarchy.
I myself became what could be termed a Libertarian, soon after my "political awakening." (In other words, when I became a political junkie and couldn't stop thinking about it.) I didn't like the Republican platform (no freedom of choice, morality, or thought), nor did I care for the Democratic stance (no economic freedom, curtailed freedom of speech). And so I went somewhere out in the netherworld, and found the Libertarians.
That is, to me, the most beautiful thing about the Libertarians: they are neither Republican nor Democrat, but neither are they in the center somewhere. The major parties have, over the years, drifted closer and closer to one another, and by now, little true difference between them exists. The Libertarians, however, act as a replacement for an old, worn-out system that is doing little for the American people beyond sinking them further into debt, corruption, and war. And yet Libertarianism is not so exclusive in its ideology and party structure that it does not negate voting for another party if one believes said party would more aptly fit ones view of our country.
I am a Libertarian in large part because I don't believe there are any other options (Republican or Democrat, or even the Constitution Party) that truly fit what I believe. I believe, like the Libertarians, that each human being on the globe has a right to do whatever they want so long as that does not interfere with the rights of another. I think that government should play only a minor role in the lives of its citizens- and certainly not as much as it is playing now.
I love this article!!! Wonderfully written. Really far more meaningful than any articles like this one.
ReplyDeleteI probably won't be becoming a Libertarian anytime in the next year, but you got me thinking about the things we do need to fix in this country.
Once again--great article.
Why thank you Christopher. That really means a lot, considering I wrote it in...10 minutes. :P
ReplyDeleteI would like to give a huge thumbs-up to this post!!
ReplyDeleteI think the Libertarian Party is going to experience a huge amount of growth in the next few years, merely from the number of people fed up with both mainstream parties.
What is your opinion of Thomas Jefferson? I've become a hug fan over the past few years, though to be honest I have yet to read a full compilation of his works. It is absolutely amazing to read two-hundred-year-old descriptions of the current political situation.
Thomas Jefferson is awesome, totally and completely. There are a few things of course, it's like "Wha-?" when reading him, but the comparisons between what he saiad then and what's going on now are amazing!
ReplyDeleteI don't believe that real meaning can be found in being able to say, "I am not..." There can't always be negatives, there must always be a positive to go with it. No one has the right to say "I am anti-abortion" if they cannot also say something along the lines of "I have adopted a child." Not enough to say, "They are doing things wrong," we must also be able to say, "this is the way things should be done."
ReplyDeleteWith the Libertarian Party, you need to watch out for people who think only in terms of "I am not such-and-such," and remind them that it isn't who you don't agree with but what you actually advocate that makes the difference.
Not all Libertarians will describe themselves as "political junkies" as our good Liberty does, and not all will really be thinking about their convictions about how freedom should be fairly maintained. Watch out for those who are just jumping off the Republican or Democrat bandwagons for the sake of getting away from those associations, and watch out for those who can do nothing but bitterly complain about the mainstream parties, but do not advocate a decisive view of their own in their lives.
I have never read such a load of unsustainable bullshit as this Libertarian platform. It will not work and to pretend that if we believe and clap our hands the dying nation will not be taken over by Communists is the height of simplicity and ignorance. The Socialist side has a guide book, "The Communist Manifesto" does the conservative side have a guide book? What is it?
ReplyDeleteRe: Anonymous' comment: I think the conservatives do not have, as you say, a guide book because the very nature of conservatism (the kind I prescribe to, anyway) is against the idea that one ideology fits everyone.
ReplyDeleteThe principle of self-government is inherently prone to disagreement. This makes it very difficult for any one manifesto to sum up the conservative argument and provide, as it were, a rally-round-the-flag moment for its adherents.
I would be interested to learn what you think is the better plan, I agree that the Libertarian party (GOP, even more) has problems but what would you say is the solution?
And in answer to Lissy above: I wholeheartedly agree with what you said about the Libertarian party being prone to a 'negative' avoidance of both parties' actions rather than positive standpoint of its own. When I try describe myself politically I find that 'I'm a moderate' really doesn't do it....there are things I agree with the GOP on and things (much fewer, hehe) that I would tend to go with the liberal viewpoint on.
I'm not middle-of-the-road, I'm spread-eagled over it with a foot in several camps ;-)
Bethany,
ReplyDeleteI remembered what I don't like about Ron Paul.
The man claims we can't get rid of Social Security because the government promised the people Social Security. But the government, also, promised our allies to fight with them, and he would have us pull out of the Middle East in the midst of a conflict that our allies are embroiled in, namely Israel.
We are a government of the people, for the people, by the people. We should always hold our word to others over our word to ourselves. The man would renig on a promise to foreign countries, but not on a "Great Evil" in our society. And that makes him someone I could never vote for.
I won't vote for a man who would break trust with an ally, because, "We should not have become allies in the first place."
Lissy- very good point. I think it is a sad fact that too many alternate political "camps" do take a negative view ("we're not") instead of having a concrete view of what they want to do. Of course, a lot of that might have to do with the fact that the Libertarians and many like groups are very diverse ideologically, and we have few people actually in office. Not that we will get in office if we don't have a game plan. ^.^
ReplyDeleteTragedy- I disagree with Ron Paul on many things as well. I frankly find his stances on some things rather...well, contradictory to my own values and ideas. But I think he is also one of the most liberty-minded people in office today, not to mention one with integrity who has actually stood by the same beliefs for the entirety of his career. That counts for something with me regardless of one's political affiliation.
I'm not sure when he said we shouldn't get rid of Social Security? Never heard that one before...but I do agree with him on foreign policy. We need to stop getting ourselves messed up in stuff that is none of our concern. Our current fights (Afghanistan and Iraq, soon to be Iran and Pakistan) had/have nothing to do with Israel. That's just our imperialism, period.
Hmm... new topic:
ReplyDeleteAmerica should have never gotten mixed up with Israel in the first place. The whole Zionistic movement is not based on good theology. Yes, the whole world owes the Jewish people a major, cultural apology for what happened, but we do not owe them a nation or protection as they invade another nation. The Palastinians have been holding that land fairly for hundreds of years, and it's completely not fair for Israel to come and try to kick them out.
All that said, can America break a treaty? What are good grounds for ending such an agreement? We can't just pull out of anything because we got our hands slapped, but we can't be bound to a nation so completely that we can't break the tie, else we cease to be America; we would become America+Israel.
Totally, totally agree Lissy. It's nuts how fanatical people are though, when the subject of Israel comes up. It's like either hate 'em, or love 'em...there's no middle ground there. But anyway...
ReplyDeleteI've never actually studied Israeli-American diplomacy in any great depth. I'd have to research it a bit, and go into the nature of the treaty between us and all that. With that said: most treaties have an expiration date. And we need to let said treaty expire when the time comes, not renew it, because renewing it wouldn't be a smart move. Secondly, we need to not back up Israel in her wars of conquest. That may be in the treaty though, so that might not be an option.
The thing I like about the Libertarian party official positions is that it is based on Liberty (the idea not the author of the post ;).
ReplyDeleteBoth the Republican and Democrat parties try to impose their own moral ideas on the entire nation via law. This is contrary to the ideals our country was founded on. As a sociaty there must be some moral base we all share (the right to Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in our case), and some laws have to restrict total liberty in order to have any kind of civilization.
Liberty is not for the lazy or those adverse to conflict. Liberty requires us to debate ideas, it requires us to participate, and it requires us to allow others to disagree. The problem comes when a party uses the governemnt to bully others into behavior that they prefer (and both Republicans and Democrats do this).
The LP comes closest (IMHO) to having a platform that protects our liberty without choking it to death in the process.
Good post Liberty ;)