Topic: Abolition of Statism
On labels [or: Why I’m now calling myself a voluntaryist rather than a libertarian] I believe that on all matters of life, from economic to personal, people ought to be free to make their own decisions voluntarily.by Jeremy West
(Libertarian)
Thursday, July 10, 2008
The current Libertarian presidential candidate believes in limited government (I choose to give him the benefit of the doubt that his views have changed since his days in congress). That would certainly be preferable to the platforms of either of the two major party candidates.
It has been said that the perfect is the enemy of the good. However, I believe in the case of where the Libertarian Party is at the moment, the practical has become the enemy of the good.
Limited government is without a doubt not as harmful as big government. However, it is still not good. Governments, however small, rely on the initiation of force to fund themselves, and I believe that the initiation of force is morally wrong, no matter which hat the person initiating the force is wearing.
The word libertarian has become synonymous with the Libertarian Party in America. The Libertarian Party stands for small government. As this does not represent my beliefs, I do not want to confuse people by calling myself a libertarian.
As an individual, I have my own beliefs, so perhaps Jeremy is the only true label for me. However, when discussing philosophy it is useful to begin with a label so that a body of knowledge can begin the conversation.
The old meaning for anarchy, "an absence of government", does some justice to my philosophy. However, the term anarchy has now come to have the connotation at best of "chaos", and at worst "bomb throwing radicals". As violence is the polar opposite of what I believe, I do not want to confuse people by calling myself an anarchist.
Ian Bernard, one of the hosts of the freedom oriented radio program, Free Talk Live, has very similar political views to mine. He calls himself a "free marketer". Aside from the fact that this term might be confused with the Three Musketeers or even the Mickey Mouseketeers, I'm not sure the term paints the full picture in people's minds. It makes clear that he believes in economic freedoms, but I don't think it makes clear that he also believes strongly in personal freedoms.
For myself, I've settled on the term voluntaryist. I simply believe that on all matters of life, from economic to personal, people ought to be free to make their own decisions voluntarily. My next series of articles will show why I believe this way on ten major issues.
If you enjoyed this article, please use the buttons above to digg it and subscribe to The Jeremy West Column. Then enjoy my other articles below:
The views expressed in this
article are those of Jeremy West only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Jeremy West is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: Floyd W. Whitley
Date: 2008-07-10 09:28:37
"the practical has become the enemy of the good"?
I cannot determine where you define "the good". But I do note that you define the "not good"...e.g.
"Limited government is without a doubt not as harmful as big government. However, it is still not good. Governments, however small, rely on the initiation of force to fund themselves, and I believe that the initiation of force is morally wrong."
Quite a piece of work, I find, the columnists to be here on Nolan Chart.
Personally, I'm usually okay with most deductions of reasoned opinion, whether I agree with them or not, so long as I can determine how, given the presentable facts, one arrived at their conclusions.
If, however, I cannot make such a determination, then any such rhetorical argument becomes absolute jibberish. Sadly, your article here falls under just such a category, personally.
On morality, I would remind that the worst moral harm of all is hypocrisy. To turn the pun, I woud also like to point out that a "hypocracy" is not an adequate substitute for a "democracy".
In a gesture of neighborly favor, I would ask you to bear that in mind the next time you drive to the store over a government funded road, or place a postcard into their mailbox, or land without incident at O'Hara, or make another posting upon the Internet, or, God forbid, you should ever require emergency medical care at the local Memorial Hospital.
This Nolan Chart site, and the philosophies and opinions expressed here, is most fascinating to me. Bizarre, but fascinating.
I really had no idea that the public was as confused and uninformed on matters of governance as my sample reading here seems to indicate. Not even the "reformers" seem to have an adequate knowledge base.
The catchword here, critically demonized by "Libertarians" of all persuasions, is "statism"...the evident epitome of all evil.
Nonetheless, the fact remains that the concept of State is one of the single, and signal, most important "inventions" of mankind. It easily ranks in human development right along with the wheel, and maybe even with fire.
Yet I hear no one condemning the wheel, which can, if out of control, roll over you and crush you; nor do I hear anyone condemning fire, which can, if out of control, destroy you. No one argues about the legitimacy of their existences--of the wheel and fire.
Why then do so regarding the State? The question really is not whether the existence of the state is legitimate, nor morally right. It is flat out impossible to separate the State from human society. It is an integral OF society.
Rather, the question is, and really should be:
"What form should the State take in this modern age?"
Or better, "How can the State be improved wherein it is most efficient, and whereby Liberty is best manifested?"
Arguing that there be no State is both senseless and erroneous. First, because the State exists and is a principle and inseparable component of the definition of the difference bewteen human and animal; and second, in those periods where the State faltered and failed, Dark Ages were the resultant condition for mankind.
Which of course led to the necessity of "having to reinvent the wheel." As such, a most wasteful exercise that defies reason.
Posted By: C. Al Currier
Date: 2008-07-12 08:33:49
Label: Voluntaryist
The Ministy-of-Truth has decided that income taxes are voluntary. Your right to double-speak is voluntarily granted by the Ministry-of-Truth provided that your taxes are paid.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
