[High Praise! to Transterrestrial Musings and the Cato Institute]
Top 10 Ways to Talk about Libertarianism
Full disclosure: I’m not so much a “Conservative” as I am a “Libertarian Hawk”. By which I mean that unlike that pacifist nutjob Ron Paul, I don’t think America’s right to defend its liberty stops at it borders. I’d be fine with invading and conquering every third-world hellhole on the planet and cramming the benefits of modern civilization and its institutions down everyone’s throat.
Worked pretty good on Japan.
Wouldn’t mind seeing how it worked on DC.
[Think you have a link that’s IMAO-worthy? Send it to harvolson@gmail.com. If I use your link, you will receive High Praise! (assuming you remember to put your name in the email)]
I like this rarely quoted line from Ayn Rand:
Oh come now. Rand HATED libertarians. Called them pathetic losers who tried to mimic her philosophy but lacked any of the conviction to actually do it. ie. Ron Paul and his army of idiots.
You don’t preserve freedom by tolerating the existence of people who openly announce that they’re hellbent on taking it from you. You preserve freedom by shooting those people in the face.
Oh Harvey honey, libertarian, conservative, or whatever, you sir are a gentleman and a scholar and one of the shining stars in the IMAO firmament. ; )
If Harvey is a “Libertarian Hawk,” what are Frank and Basil? “Constitutional Eagles?”
Me – I’m a “Philosophical Buzzard.” I eat everything.
What is a libertarian?
Half libertine, half librarian.
Partly antic,
Part pedantic,
One for the books. A contrarian.
@1 – Rand used to call Libertarians “the hippies of the right”.
Her main complaint was that Libertarians would glom onto her Objectivist politics, but then completely ignore the philosophical underpinnings that made them necessary.
I can see where someone who wants “less government” only so he can sit around smoking pot all day instead of being a productive human being might offend her sensibilities.
My main objection to Libertarianism is Ayn Rand’s influence and Objectivism. My objection to Ayn Rand’s Objectivism is that it’s the source of the philosophy in The Satanic Bible. And that is a fact. The Satanic Bible is just Ayn Rand-ism.
Libertarianism and Christianity are not compatible in anyway shape or form.
Also, the Church of Satan calls itself a Libertarian Organization. Most Satanists are Libertarians. That is not good. That is very very bad!!
Maybe its time for a NEW NAME for the political philosophy commonly referred to as LibertarianISM because it will never get rid of the Satanic baggage it carries. Christians will NEVER vote for Libertarians.
@6 – I hadn’t heard of any connection before, so I checked Wikipedia for an overview:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Bible
I’m not really seeing a connection.
Objectivism is basically “live today in a way that will make you be better off in 20 years”.
Satanism is basically “do whatever you want, consequences be damned”.
Not even close to being the same thing.
Well the connection certainly exists at the ChurchOfSatan dot com.
The ChurchOfSatan acknowledges that Ayn Rand’s Philosophy is the foundational philosophy that Satanism is built on. I’ve known that for 30 years. And Anton Levay admitted that he just copied Ayn Randism when he authored the Satanic Bible.
Ok now I’m NOT saying that Libertarians sacrifice babies to the Devil or that they promote ritualistic perversion and homosexuality. That is what Liberals do!
And I’m NOT saying that Libertarians worship False Idols (and celebrities, and sports stars, and money and sex and..). Once again, thats what Liberals do! The Liberals dance around the Pagan Golden calves.
Liberals are a billion times worse. But that connection through Ayn Rand does exist.
Japan was already modern. duh!
Harvey, As you know I am not a big Ron Paul fan, however, you are mis-characterizing his stance. He was not a pacifist, nor an isolationist. He was simply a constitutionalist and a non-interventionist. I listened to him when he was given more than a few seconds and what he said made sense. He said, we are capable of being anywhere in the world with a missile or plane in a matter of hours, so why should we waste billions of dollars on bases we do not need. He also said that it is congresses job to declare war, and without that declaration, there should be no action. Sounds kinda like a constitutionalist to me. Anyway, I like to be fair to those that have earned the wrath of the marxist media.
Now back to the osamba bashing!!
@10 – I apologize for treating Ron Paul so flippantly, he’s been a good Representative during his career.
I do disagree with the notion that establishing a physical presence with a military base is a waste of money. There are costs and benefits to both approaches, and I think Ron Paul is too quickly dismissive of the benefits.
Satanism cannot be based on Objectivism. Objectivism is atheist.
There are many routes to libertarianism. One does not have to be an objectivist or agree with objectivists to be a libertarian.
There is no contradiction between libertarianism and Christianity. As a Christian you are supposed to act to achieve your goals, not force others to act to achieve your goals.
seems pretty Christian to me