Why I’m a Libertarian

Posted by Stone February 22, 2013 3 Comments 241 views

Or should I say, “liberal-tarian.” See, I’ve got a touch of the bleeding heart.  Well…it’s more than a touch. But I’m a libertarian for feel-goody reasons and logical ones, I swear!

A multitude of things drew me to libertarianism: the emphasis on logic, on individual and personal responsibility (it’s “we the people” not “we the states” or “we the union”), and the general minimalist approach to government. What kept me around was the diversity of ideas and the acceptance that my weird mish-mash of ultra social-liberalism and fiscal-conservatism somehow had a place in today’s political discourse. I liked that there were people with whom I could debate and disagree, who seemed to actually be interested in not just what I thought, but why I thought it and how I was backing up those opinions.

It’s sometimes hard to explain to my friends how it’s possible that I align with the same party as say, Glenn Beck, when his ideas about how America should be and mine are very, very different. If you talk to most libertarians, they’ll disagree with me sharply. But I believe the core libertarian tenant is equal opportunity to success, and that’s why I am a libertarian.  For example…

…I’m not against entitlements.  I mean, I am against public entitlements in theory, but not in our country’s present state.  I think if you break down a lot of entitlements into specifics most people aren’t against them – nobody thinks Grandma should die from not being able to afford her heart pills after retiring at age 70, nobody thinks children should be left hungry, nobody thinks someone should be homeless because they’ve been laid off and are actively seeking work.  Living off welfare is actually very difficult – and yes, there’s people who game the system and live large, but it’s very rare.  I do think welfare should be a more private matter, but I recognize that presently those networks are not in place and that in a way we have built a dependence on public welfare and cut out a lot of private welfare that existed beforehand.  The system is going to have to be massively overhauled and gradually phased out, cutting off entitlements suddenly at this point would be disastrous.

…I’m pro-freed market, but anti big business (and pro death tax).  In theory I understand why Burger is an anarcho-capitalist, but I really don’t believe our present business climate would allow for that.  And I understand where Elizabeth is coming from when she talks about wage negotiation and benefits, but I know realistically there’s more blue collar non-negotiable wage jobs out there than there are white collar ones.  I’m not in favor of replacing the tyranny of large government with the tyranny of big business, and if I had to pick which of the two right now is more “evil,” I’d lean towards big business (though really that’s like picking between being kicked in the gut or punched in the face).  For a minimal interference freed market to run and not turn in to effective slavery you need generous employers.  We have illustrated consistently since the industrial revolution that we do not have that.


…I think the best solution to minimize government is to radically reform education.
  The biggest block to freedom, in my opinion, is the lack of equality of opportunity due to inconsistency in educational standards and an adherence to a failing and outdated way of thinking about education.  The problem is (mostly) not teachers, it is how we force them to teach.  The sad fact of the matter is if you’re born into a poorly performing school district (typically low-income rural and urban areas), you will receive a sub-par education and will likely have children into that same situation.  Being born into a cycle of poverty is *technically* overcome-able, but it sure as hell isn’t equal opportunity at success.  If we want self-sufficient, responsible society that can act logically, we have to teach that, we can’t just throw up our hands and say, “sorry kids, you were born into a bad situation so now we’re not going to give you any tools to help yourself out of it and spend the rest of your life belittling you for not being as good as someone born into opportunity.”  The quality of basic education has to improve.  It has to.  It’s the basis for everything.

I believe that one day we can have a society with minimal government interference in our personal and business lives, but I believe we have to change government and change ourselves to get there.

And that’s why I’m a libertarian.


About Stone

Stone (not a pseudonym) considers herself to be a bit bookish (and doesn’t consider than in insult). Stone enjoys comics (her thesis was on Batman), sewing, working on stained glass windows, and writing. Stone is particularly interested in how Liberty thinking was applied differently in the American and French Revolutions; she is a student of History with a specialty in Enlightenment Era Thought and Revolutions, obtaining her Bachelor’s Degree in History in 2009 from Agnes Scott College.

  • http://www.facebook.com/robkirchoff Robert Kenneth Kirchoff

    I find this post terribly backwards. There is a multitude of factual errors made here, but they seem less important to me than the overriding issue of attitude. To take issue with the current state of geographically-determinist education is certainly a libertarian notion, but to then breeze past how this is a singular product of government and nothing else is simply baffling.

    To opt for the “evil” of big business over big government is even more distressing, especially for someone who purports to be a bleeding heart. What business, or coalition of businesses, has ever managed even a fraction of the horror and human misery that big government entails on a daily basis? Even assuming that you somehow posit that a corporatist world of ultra-powerful cartels could exist absent state power (a highly suspect notion), what state of man would we have to descend to that such an arrangement would be worse than the centralized regimes of the 20th century? I’m sorry but even assuming the very worst of intentions, never will I place the men of commerce below the men of coercion.

    • wrothbard

      Tyranny of big business is also an oxymoron, as they quite simply don’t have the power to force anyone to work for them.

  • http://twitter.com/CathyReisenwitz Cathy Reisenwitz

    “I’m not in favor of replacing the tyranny of large government with the tyranny of big business.” Does not compute. The understanding that business cannot perpetrate tyranny without the coercive forces of the state underpins libertarian thought. Also, the death tax is an affront to the idea that people own themselves and their property and can do with it as they please, including passing it down after they die.

  • Madonnahorr

    I'm troubled about your stance on "morality clause …

  • Brendan Morse

    You're right about gay rights/marriage, but I thin …

  • brianrw

    Fair enough, but if you take even a cursory look a …

  • Chad Murphy

    But the Democrats generally don't claim to be for …

  • sandra sanchez

    I omitted the democrat ticket because their primar …

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Social Followers

Find Us on Facebook

Latest Tweets

  • Loading...