Archive for the ‘Libertarian’ Category

Libertarians Just Aren’t Cool – Being Libertarian (satire)

I know that as soon as you saw the title of this article you thought to yourself, This isnt about me. Well I hate to break it to you, but it most likely is so shave your neck beards, burn your fedoras, take the hot pocket out of your mouth, and listen up. If libertarianism is going to grow we must address the biggest hurdle that we face today: how to market libertarianism. There are a number of issues that must be dealt with, but the one that seems most glaring and which has lead to the stereotypes that I have used to get your attention is that libertarians are just not cool.

As libertarians we must realize that our message is not mainstream yet, and therefore each of us is an ambassador when marketing it. Being an ambassador comes with a certain amount of personal responsibility to be self aware so that you do not completely disenfranchise someone you are engaging with. No one wants to be around a person who causes them discomfort, whether that is because they are a socially awkward basement dweller, a loud obnoxious internet troll, lack personal hygiene, or just generally unaware of normal human behavior.

Dont despair, however, for it is possible to change your ways and I am happy to be your guide in this endeavor with a few simple tips:

If we ever hope for the message of liberty to become mainstream we must focus on marketing, and the most important part of marketing is to be presentable. So, please, libertarians, try to be cool.

* Christopher Lee McKitrick is a writer and political commentator. He is a New Hampshire native, beer enthusiast, and lover of freedom. You can follow him on Facebook @mckitrickliberty.

Like Loading...

Read more here:
Libertarians Just Aren't Cool - Being Libertarian (satire)

The Necessity of Libertarian Thought – The Libertarian Republic – The Libertarian Republic

LISTEN TO TLRS LATEST PODCAST:

by Ram Jayaraman

It seems nowadays that people cannot have a conversation about politics without setting fire to any possible notion of perceived tranquility. Debates seem to irrevocably devolve into ad hominem assaults. However, in the interest of tranquility, I ask that you humor me while I try to describe my political inclinations, and why I think libertarianism is essential to free thought.

The concept of libertarianism is eponymous. At the core of the movement is the idea that ones liberty must be unfettered, necessarily unrestricted provided it does not interfere with the liberty of another. Very broadly speaking, this aligns mostly with the social perspectives of modern liberalism and the economic perspectives of modern conservatism. However, there is an important distinction that must be made which is best highlighted through example. Take the recent gay marriage ruling, for instance. The socially conservative stance, owing primarily to the philosophical tenets set forth by the Judeo-Christian pantheon, posits that marriage is an institution between a biological man and a biological woman. The socially liberal stance posits that marriage is an institution of love and therefore is not confined to heterosexual norms. In contrast, the libertarian stance is simply that the government has no business telling you who you can or cannot marry in a consensual relationship. At first glance, one would argue that the liberal and the libertarian perspectives are synonymous. However, upon closer inspection, this argumentation is deemed specious. Under liberalism, marriage between homosexuals is permissible; id est there exists an implication that the government is allowing its existence. Alternatively, libertarians advocate that the government should not have any leverage to regulate the institution of marriage. This example highlights, in brevity, what libertarianism is: provided I am not harming anyone else, the government should not act to restrict my agency.

Let us take this example a bit further. Assume that someones family does not condone homosexuality and views the practice as an abomination against God. He considers it nothing less than mortal sin, and to those for whom he cares, he vehemently preaches these beliefs. In the system of libertarian thought, his views are irrelevant. Regardless whether he thinks that LGBTQ+ people are destined for eternal damnation, their activities do not disrupt his agency. If one were to assume that these two constructs are mutually exclusive, consider this. The libertarian party has been pro LGBTQ+ rights for decades longer than either of the current duopoly. However, at the time, a sizable proportion of libertarians did not personally espouse gay marriage; they just advocated that they had no business enforcing their beliefs on others.

The current system of political duopoly in the United States has developed the false notion that the government need function as a moral executor. However, morality is relative. Our cultures and our beliefs are relative. My criteria for morality is not necessarily congruent to yours. As such, assuming that neither of our practices harms the other, there is no logical reason that the government should interfere. In the common vernacular, there is no logical reason, within the sphere of libertarianism, to enforce punitive measures for victimless crimes. Moreover, there is also no need to enforce such measures resulting from differences in morality that do not result in a disruption of individual agency. This notion is antithetical to the current paradigm of the duopoly, culminating in the development of a false binary with regard to political ideology.

The hypocrisy of the political binary can be evidenced as follows. Currently, liberals appear to have a disdain for firearms, yet they also believe that Muslim people are not responsible for the acts of war that terrorist cells commit under some perverse banner of Islam. In contrast, conservatives tout the existence and usage of firearms, yet they believe in the restriction of Muslim entry to domestic territory. Statistically, an infinitesimal percentage of firearms that are used in the United States are used for nefarious purposes. Statistically, an infinitesimal percentage of Muslims act in the name of terrorism. If one claims that the potential damage of an event outweighs the statistical insignificance of its occurrence, this would logically imply that liberals would deny Muslims entry to the United States. Analogously, if one claims that the statistical insignificance of an event outweighs its potential damage, this would logically imply that conservatives would allow unbarred entry of Muslims into the United States. Obviously, this is not the case. Both parties exhibit hypocrisy in their logical reasoning.

In summation, here is why libertarianism appeals to me. I barely know what is best for myself. Why on earth, then, would I try to enforce my views on other people? Obviously, there are far more intricacies that cannot be described transiently, but the core of the philosophy remains. Your thoughts are your own. A political party does not own my ideologies. Why should they enforce them upon me? Let me think, and Ill let you think. Thats what libertarianism is: freedom to think, freedom to act, and freedom to be. Liberty.

libertarianLibertyphilosophythought

More:
The Necessity of Libertarian Thought - The Libertarian Republic - The Libertarian Republic

Peace in Korea – Being Libertarian

It is well known that the two Koreas have co-existed in a state of mutual disdain for each other since the end of combat operations in the region, just over 60 years ago. North Korea, backed by China, and South Korea, backed by the U.S., have constantly perceived any military buildup performed by the other to be aggressions on their respective sovereignties. This usually results in the nation that feels threatened engaging in a retaliatory action involving some form of military posturing that escalates tensions in the region for a time.

The most recent example of this scenario occurred Monday, March 6. According to a report by The Guardian, North Korea fired four missiles in response to an annual military exercise between South Korean and American forces. Meanwhile, according to Reuters, the U.S. has begun the installation of the Terminal High Altitude Defense anti-missile system, otherwise known as THAAD, in South Korea as a defense against the North. The military exercises, firing of missiles, and installation of THAAD are causing tensions to rise drastically between the countries involved in the region. According to the same Reuters article mentioned above, the North and South have expelled each others diplomats and prohibited the exit of each others citizens. Furthermore, China and South Korea have now entered into a diplomatic standoff with each other, which even involves China closing down some of the South Korean Lotte Groups retail stores.

All of these factors definitely make for a precarious situation among the four nations involved. However, it appears China is not yet ready to throw in the diplomatic towel. China has expressed frustrations with North Koreas attempts at developing a nuclear missile program and has even halted the import of coal for a year in an effort to get the North to abandon its nuclear weapons program.

China has recently offered a possible diplomatic solution to this whole situation. The Associated Press reports that Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has suggested that North Korea might stall its missile programs if the U.S.s and South Koreas military exercises are also stalled. It would seem that Wang and China would like for all the parties involved to sit down and discuss the issues between them. This offering by China may not only be a way to avoid conflict, it may also pave the way for a more peaceful co-existence in the region and provide the U.S. with the perfect opportunity to extricate itself permanently from the affairs of East Asia.

The U.S. has been presented with an amazing opportunity. Wangs solution is brilliant, as it has not only North Korea, but also the South and the U.S. end their strategic posturing. This simple act would not only show that all countries involved are willing to come together and work out their differences peacefully, but may also be the only chance for the U.S. to begin pursuing a non-interventionist policy in East Asia.

Chinas solution of having both sides halt their respective military activities would easily open the door to the lessening of hostilities in the region. With the lessening of hostilities, the next step would be to begin removing U.S. troops from the region in order to de-emphasize the threat a foreign army presents. This would establish an atmosphere where the work for peace could truly begin. This work toward peace should place emphasis on trade, for nations who are engaged in trade with one another are far less likely to go to war with one another.

Of course, the odds of North Korea accepting anything close to a peaceful solution are probably extremely long. However, this does not mean that the U.S. should not pursue the present opportunity. Any opportunity for peace, no matter how slim the chances, should never be ignored.

The U.S. military has been in and around the Korean Peninsula for over 60 years. Official policy is that U.S. troops are there to deter the North from invading the South. During that whole time, however, North Korea has done nothing more than isolate itself from the international community and act hostile to the presence of a foreign army near its borders. The interventionist policy of the U.S. is not working. North Korea will never be made less extreme by the military might of a foreign nation. The only way to accomplish that goal is through trade. The U.S. should significantly reduce its military presence in the region. Then, it should begin encouraging more trade in the area. China is already one of the U.S.s largest trade partners. There is no reason to think that China would say no to more trade with the U.S. Plus, once the U.S. ended its military intervention in the region, China and South Korea would no longer have reason to remain in a diplomatic standoff. They would begin engaging in business with each other again. Soon, North Korea would either have to watch everyone around it prosper or end its isolationism in order to join in.

However, none of this will ever have the opportunity to happen if the U.S. and South Korea brushed aside Chinas offer. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that they accept the offer for peaceful diplomacy. A peaceful solution must be sought, or we will see this opportunity slip away without another one in sight.

Libertarians everywhere would love to see the U.S. adopt a non-interventionist foreign policy. We all believe that such a policy would be ideal for this country. However, such a thing will not happen overnight. It will take liberty lovers pushing to slowly chip away bit by bit the interventionist policy of our leaders before our dream can be accomplished. Today, we have presented before us one such opportunity. Let us not allow it to go to waste.

Jon Swain is a recent convert to the liberty movement after becoming disillusioned with Republican politics in the 2016 election cycle. He is currently earning his B.S. in Kinesiology from Mississippi State University and plans to pursue a Masters of Science after graduation.

Photo: Ed Jones

Like Loading...

See the original post:
Peace in Korea - Being Libertarian

ANTIFA Terror Threats Cause Venue To Drop Libertarian Festival; Event Now In Jeopardy – The Liberty Conservative

Terror threats from ANTIFA leftists have put next weekends Mid-Atlantic Liberty Festival in jeopardy. After left-libertarians released a call to arms vowing resistance, bomb threats were called in to the Hilton in Harrisburg, who were forced to the event.

To me, it is horrifying that in the United States a fringe group can get away with its threats of violence, but such is the world in which we live, event organizer Steve Scheetz said in a public Facebook post explaining the situation.

The entire controversy arose after a debate was scheduled between former Libertarian Party Senate hopeful Augustus Invictus and Will Coley of Muslims for Liberty on the issue of border security. ANTIFA-aligned left-libertarians took umbrage with the fact that Invictus, who they allege to be a fascist without any clear evidence, was allowed to speak at the event. Instead of finding a like-minded group that doesnt respect the values of free speech and free expression, they declared war against the event instead.

But not every libertarian is outraged at these leftist terror threats. Some have even applauded or excused these leftist terror tactics because of their disdain for Invictus.

Maybe you guys can feature Isis next time. You can have a peaceful exchange of ideas about crucifying children for not fasting during Ramadan, left-libertarian Brandon Bitros stated in an apparent open justification of the terrorist threats committed by ANTIFA.

Invite fascists, deal with Antifa, left-libertarian Leslee Ann Petersen said in a smug response. Libertarian Party Chairman Nicholas Sarwark chimed in with no condemnation of the terrorist threats, only to echo Petersens sentiments in an apparent indication that ANTIFAs threats were justified or at least understandable.

Event organizers are scrambling to find another venue right now. With only seven days before the event is scheduled, it remains to be seen if it will be postponed or canceled.

Continued here:
ANTIFA Terror Threats Cause Venue To Drop Libertarian Festival; Event Now In Jeopardy - The Liberty Conservative

Libertarian News | A libertarian news aggregation service.

The Fabulous and Frightening Future of Helmet Use

Would automobile drivers be safer wearing a helmet? It works for NASCAR drivers. Since household injury

Animals in the wild, eating their natural diet, dont get fat. Only humans and our pets seem to have

Being alive at the end of the twentieth century here on planet Insanity has afforded us a few special

Beginning in August, Kokesh will be kicking off his FOR THE LOVE OF FREEDOM! National Tour. The tour

Another Duck Dodgers installment. For background, please also see: Iron, Food Enrichment and the

The government has a monopoly over our money, but it wasn't always this way. Some states are taking

One of the chief virtues of a gold standard is that it serves as a restraint on the growth of money

Since the U.S. completely abandoned the gold standard in 1971, trade deficits have exploded, government

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ----------------------------------- World Index of Moral Freedom 2016 published The

Maine legislators voted last week to moved forward with a proposed constitutional amendment declaring

Read more here:
Libertarian News | A libertarian news aggregation service.