Like immigration and abortion libertarians have a different opinions on what the proper response to accepting refugees from Syria are. Before answering we should look at these factors:
The Welfare State
As far as we know, any refugees that are taken in can receive welfare benefits (housing, medical care, public "education" etc). As libertarians we know that the welfare state in it's current form is evil. It's a system build on theft and force with the threat of being locked in a government cage if one refuses to pay into the system. Adding more people to this system will only result in the state forcibly confiscating more of our hard earned labor in order to keep up with the increased burden on it.
Private Property
While nothing has been state on either the mainstream media or alternative media outlets lets not be fooled that with the state importing people that we have a good chance of seeing private property rights being violated. What if lands and public housing project which are designated to house the refugees all of a sudden become full for whatever reason and then the government starts going after people who have large amounts of land such as farmers? As a rule libertarians don't put anything past government and what they may or may not do. It's completely believable that governments would threaten large land owners into accepting refugees on their land. Also not just farmers, people who own apartment complexes and buildings could be told that they have accept refugees at whatever rate that the government thinks is "fair".
Based on these two issues alone any libertarian in good faith can't be for the state importing massive amounts of people at a fast rate. Even if the state says it's being humanitarian we all know that anything that the state does has an underlining purpose from what they say upfront. However it's not to say that libertarians should be against people who wish to sponsor refugees with their own resources. That's perfectly within libertarian philosophy and should be encouraged instead of a massive all at once importation. It actually somewhat surprises me that even the MSM isn't even suggesting that this is even an option.
Some may be reading this and say that this is no different than what conservatives are saying. I would say Yes but it's not just against the massive importation that libertarians should be against. In addition to this we as a movement should be highlighting on our blogs, podcasts, YouTube videos that this crisis is the result of years of meddling in the Middle East. It should be highlighted that once again Ron Paul was right. As horrible as it sounds, Iraq, Syria and Libya were much more stable when Saddam, Gaddafi and Assad were in charge. Yes all three of these countries were socialist hell holes but the religious and ethnic strife wasn't there as all three leaders stressed nationalism over religion and ethnicity and believe it or not Islamists weren't tolerated in those countries. When Islamists attempt to set up shop they were regularly jailed and executed. With them gone the fringe hate groups took over the country with the regular people fled or got killed. Conservatives don't want to acknowledge this, there solution is just to continue to bomb these countries like the government has been doing since 2003. The warfare state created the instability but it's not going to fix it, only make it worse.
Ramblings and thoughts on politics and other issues from a citizen of New York state.
Showing posts with label libertarianism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label libertarianism. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
Thursday, March 13, 2014
Law and Voluntaryism
Libertarians have been point out for years that the notion that we can change government into a non-parasitic and non-rights violating entity is false. The common response to this is "Who will prevent gangs and other people from violating the rights of others without government?"
Well the answer to that question is the free market. I had stumbled upon these three videos by the YouTube user Man Against The State and they explain how such an arrangement would work.
Part 1: Principals
Part 2: Conflict Resolution in a Free Society
Part 3: The Bargaining Mechanism
Well the answer to that question is the free market. I had stumbled upon these three videos by the YouTube user Man Against The State and they explain how such an arrangement would work.
Part 1: Principals
Part 2: Conflict Resolution in a Free Society
Part 3: The Bargaining Mechanism
Friday, January 28, 2011
Libertarians are Right Wing?
One of the advantages or disadvantages (depending on how you look at it) to being a libertarian is that liberals and conservatives accuse of us of being the other.
Daily Dish blogger Andrew Sullivan had nominated Lew Rockwell of all people for the Michelle Malkin award. Now what in anyone's political mind who actually pays attention and not just repeats sound bites would think Lew Rockwell and Michelle Malkin are the same stripe? Is it just the repeated myth that Libertarians and Conservatives are the same or is it Sullivan's plain ignorance (either on purpose or not) of both ideologies? If Sullivan and those who share his view on this subject would do some simple research, they would come to the quick realization that libertarians and conservatives are completely different.
Conservatives firmly stand for the following;
1. National Security State/Police Socialism (TSA, Patriot Act, Drug War, etc)
2. Military Keynesianism (current foreign policy, bases all over the world, etc)
3. Morality legislation
However in no way this exempts liberals, since they support both of these concepts as well. They just disguise it enough so their supporters can't catch on. In reality liberals and Conservatives stand for the same thing with the only difference is that Conservatives mask it in the collectivist concept of organized religion in order to justify it. Rockwell and company have spoken out and continue to speak out against these actions since day one. Unlike conservatives who only pay lip service to the ideas of privatizing social security, cutting and phasing out entitlements, actually letting, stopping government thuggery, people keep more of their money among others. Libertarian Ron Paul is the only one as usual who practices and acts on what he preaches. So if liberals really wanna criticize us, they should really do some research before lumping us with their red statist kin.
Daily Dish blogger Andrew Sullivan had nominated Lew Rockwell of all people for the Michelle Malkin award. Now what in anyone's political mind who actually pays attention and not just repeats sound bites would think Lew Rockwell and Michelle Malkin are the same stripe? Is it just the repeated myth that Libertarians and Conservatives are the same or is it Sullivan's plain ignorance (either on purpose or not) of both ideologies? If Sullivan and those who share his view on this subject would do some simple research, they would come to the quick realization that libertarians and conservatives are completely different.
Conservatives firmly stand for the following;
1. National Security State/Police Socialism (TSA, Patriot Act, Drug War, etc)
2. Military Keynesianism (current foreign policy, bases all over the world, etc)
3. Morality legislation
However in no way this exempts liberals, since they support both of these concepts as well. They just disguise it enough so their supporters can't catch on. In reality liberals and Conservatives stand for the same thing with the only difference is that Conservatives mask it in the collectivist concept of organized religion in order to justify it. Rockwell and company have spoken out and continue to speak out against these actions since day one. Unlike conservatives who only pay lip service to the ideas of privatizing social security, cutting and phasing out entitlements, actually letting, stopping government thuggery, people keep more of their money among others. Libertarian Ron Paul is the only one as usual who practices and acts on what he preaches. So if liberals really wanna criticize us, they should really do some research before lumping us with their red statist kin.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
When in doubt point the finger
Ever notice whenever something really tragic and serious goes down political partisans are quick to point the finger at their opposition? We saw it during 9/11, various school shootings, the bridge collapsing in Minnesota, etc. Now that the economy is very shaky at this point, the partisan Liberals have decided to point their cross hairs on the Free Market and Libertarianism. This article at Slate.com . This cat claims that Libertarianism caused all this mess when in fact it was liberal economics and business killing government policies that caused this. Granted some in the business community got stupid and made bad bets but when the government strong arms them to follow stupid policies they can only be blamed for a certain amount. Of course Weisberg has the solution: Surprise More Government intervention that's the only answer we get from the economic left expand government, let government take care of it and such. You would think after the massive amount of failures Washington has had over the course of these last eight years and beyond the economic left would be shrinking more and more but guess not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)