At the risk of offending someone in the Libertarian Party, I must start with a disclaimer:

I began watching their debate this past weekend (a week late) with the hopes that I would see a REAL debate on issues of the role of Government, and personal Responsibility.

What I got was a cross between a Star-Trek convention and an anti-war rally.

The main problem I had with the debate (on May 24th) between the Libertarian candidates, was that it was not a debate.  They basically fell all over each other trying to be more “Libertarian” than the other.  Noone disagreed on anything; noone challenged anything.  The first hint should have been Mike Gravel being on stage; who by almost EVERY STANDARD is the OPPOSITE of Libertarian:  A progressive to the core, his mere presence confused me.

I was going to wax philosophical about my feelings even more, but Stuart Rothenberg beat me to the punch:

You’d think that, at the very least, Libertarians would look coldbloodedly at their own status and avoid the usual delusional propaganda that we all are force-fed by Democrats and Republicans. After all, they are a mere asterisk on the American political landscape, and some of the convention participants were funny and self-deprecating. But no, even the Libertarians are glued to the ridiculous rhetoric that they are “in this to win.”

I’ll take it a step further and say that they should recognize their comments as even more jingoistic and rhetorical than any Republican or Democratic debate I’ve ever seen.  I can at least congratulate them on nominating Bob Barr, who, although not inspiring, compared to some on the stage, could be considered downright Charismatic, and then contrast that with the Vice-Presidential Candidate, Wayne Allyn Root, who I was thoroughly convinced was going to start selling me Oxy-Clean…at any moment.

The depressing thing is I agree with a good chunk of their rhetoric.  I could take it all…the “military-industrial-complex,” the “get Government out of your wallet,”  and even the anti-”war on drugs” tripe.  But I would have to agree with Huckabee’s comments recently that described the Libertarian movement as “soulless.”  Less Government is a good thing to stand for…but what’s missing from the picture is what fills that void.  Personal responsibility should be couple with Personal Accountability, or at least some acknowledgment of the REASONS behind an overactive Government.

I especially cringed when someone (the nerdy guy in the middle from Massachussetts) used the tired and exasperating excoriation of State’s Rights by bringing up Jim Crow laws.  So States should never have any say so in how they govern ever again because they once had Jim Crow laws?  What kind of logic is that.

{It reminded me of a video I saw the other day of Noam Chomsky saying that the argument that capitalism has improved the standard of living of virtually every civilization it touches is poppycock…Why?  Because someone made the argument that slaves in the South were treated better than blacks in the cities.  There’s some ironclad logic.}

The Massachusetts candidate was vying for Gay Marriage rights, which is a legitimate Libertarian view (that I vehemently disagree with), but since when does State’s Rights become a COMPLETELY invalid argument for responsible Government.

Most of the rest of it was “Vote Libertarian because the ‘two-party system’ doesn’t work.”

YAAWNN.  Very…very disappointing.  If anyone has the bright idea that the Libertarian Party has the answers, they are sadly mistaken.

Here’s an article about the Ron Paul phenomenon. As expected, there’s a little too much emphasis on the “liberal” part of modern “libertarianism” (the war on drugs is mentioned more than once), and of course the war on Iraq is cited as a cornerstone of flawed interventionism. Here, however, is the part that describes most accurately the “libertarian” tendencies of some within the Republican party.

…In the 1990s, conservative Republicans rose to power by relentlessly attacking Big Government. Yet the minute they took control of both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, they kicked out the jams on even a semblance of fiscal responsibility, signing off on the Medicare prescription drug benefit and building literal and figurative bridges to nowhere. From 2001 to 2008, federal outlays will have grown by an estimated 29 percent in inflation-adjusted terms, according to the Office of Management and Budget.

And I almost took issue with this part:

Now with about 5 percent (and climbing) support in polls of likely Republican voters…

Until I looked at the numbers. It seems he’s gotten a little boost just within the last couple of months. I sincerely think he should hang in there and nip at the big money in the race (although according to this article he IS the big money lately). Hopefully, maybe, possibly, we’ll have an actual discussion about real issues at one of these debates

A good review of a new book highlighting the influence of libertarian thought in American politics up until FDR, or perhaps 1913. As expected, from the Wall Street Journal. Would be nice to note the role bloggers and open-source programming/creativity may play in expanding libertarian beliefs and policy.

One of his last interviews linked above. So rarely do I shake my head yes during an interview!

A good quote not to be buried in a comments section.

From Hayek, …”the arrogation of arbitrary powers by Parliament was regarded by the spokesman of the American colonies as the ultimate cause of te break with the mother country. This was most clearly expressed by one of the profoundest of their political philosophers, James Wilson, who

‘rejected Blackstone’s doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty as outmoded. The British do not understand the idea of a constitution which limits and superintends the operations of the legislature. This was an improvement in the science of government reserved to the Americans.

Back to Hayek, “We shall not further consider here the American attempt to limit in their Constitution the powers of the legislature, and its limited success. It in fact did no more to prevent Congress from becoming primarily a governmental rater than a truly legislative institution…

Sadly he is right. The root of the problem is not private influence of government, but rather the unlimited nature of our government.

Hey guys, hope you don’t mind if I mix it up a bit. The link above is a pretty good blog about neuroscience. If it is too deep this one might be better. In addition there are some neat books out there that I recommend

1. Law, Legislation and Liberty F.A. Hayek

2. Land Without Justice Milovan Djilas (a communist apology, i.e. why this Yugoslav became communist)

3. Conversations with Stalin Milovan Djilas (After communism took hold and Djilas saw how the sausage got made in Moscow).

4. The Self and Its Brain By Eccles and Popper, two guys I really admire.

Posted at 08:45 pm by Johnny B

	Posted by BP @ 11/21/2005 04:39 PM PST
	Very well put….

I picked up the autobiography of Calvin Coolidge from the library and I’m stoked and definitely putting it on the favorites list. Recommended for EVERYONE:

Walter Williams discusses Katrina

Posted at 09:13 pm by Johnny B