Jeanie,
Change a few terms, and you've articulated very well my position on
global affairs:
"What I support is individual rights. I am equally opposed to
violation of those rights by state and national governments, and I
support either government precisely to the degree they reduce the
rights-violations of the other. Broadly, the question of local or
federal is to me just a question of strategy, though in general I fear
local governments more, because their homogenous composition and sense
of social cohesion makes it easier for them to agree to unite against
unpopular minorites. I am very wary of granting positive powers to the
federal government, but very grateful for the negative powers of the
national government- particularly that of incorporated judicial review."
I support individual rights, and am equally opposed to violation of
those rights by U.S. or other governments. I support either precisely
to the degree they reduce the rights-violations of the other. Broadly,
the question of national or international is to me just a question of
strategy. I am very wary of granting powers to the U.S. national
government, but grateful for the negative powers of that government --
particularly that of military intervention into despotic states.
"And, to mention the obvious, states' rights is an ideology that from
the beginning protected the local coercion of human beings in the worst
matter possible- by which I mean slavery."
And to mention the obvious, national sovereignty (the prism through
which most libertarians see global affairs) is an ideology that
*continues* to protect the local coercion of human beings in some of
the worst manners possible.
"If libertarianism fights for everyone's equal rights with equal
enthusiasm, against both state and national encroachment, with equal
attention paid to the practical danger of authoritarian control of all
persons, then we are comrades.
I similarly desire a libertarianism which fights for everyone's equal
rights with equal enthusiasm, against both U.S. and non-U.S. government
encroachment.
Yours in liberty,
<<< Starchild >>>
Msr. Getty-
The the biggest mistake the Founding Fathers made at the
Constitutional Convention. They gave up states rights for a
centralized federal government and from there its been all down hill.I highly disagree, but then again I don't consider the 'Founding
Fathers' to be any special keynote to my own politics. Some of their
debates resonate with me in the working out of the full implications
of modernity.And, to mention the obvious, states' rights is an ideology that from
the beginning protected the local coercion of human beings in the
worst matter possible- by which I mean slavery. I mention this as
the ultimate case of the principle that no local government has the
right to maintain coercive instirutions- whether that be African
American slavery, established churches, censorship, sodomy laws,
tobacco laws, an abortion ban, gun laws, or whatever.Aiding local governments to inflict violations of human rights is not
what I became a libertarian to do. When I notice a consistent trend
that libertarians are gladly willing to quietly delegate rights-
violations under the table to the states when those liberties are
politically touchy issues crucial only to unpopular minority groups,
I start wondering what I am doing in this movement of yours.I ask, simply, that you treat the liberties a transgender prostitute
might care about on the same level of absolute human rights as those
of a family businessperson. I do not accept graciously a plan of
exile to a few tolerant state in flight from the restored power of
local governments. You offer me the legacy of Anne Hutchison and ask
me to thank you. No! I demand my rights as a human being everywhere-
as should you.I loathe the thought of an America as a sea of castle-keeps of mutual
intolerances, which each government setting up rules to run and
control people according to its own culture, each bringing up
children not as full human beings but as creatures stunted and
regional. I look to an America where these very particulars merge
and blend into a kaleidscope, a heritage for all and none from which
each can choose according to their reason and passion, and where
people of all backgrounds can walk in sunlight, commerce, and
conversation with a cosmopolitan world.As an aside, to how bad the government is in causing problems.
Henry Ford at his Model A factory in the early 1900's decided to
stop having such a high turnover of men working on his assembly
line.... Why the difference? Taxes and government inefficiences and
inflation caused by prolifigate government spending and inflation
caused by we need money we'll just print more paper.I quite agree with you on the perniciousness of economic regulation.
But you seem to think that because I champion federal restraints on
state-level rights-violations by Bill of Rights enforcement, that I
somehow support 'government.'What I support is individual rights. I am equally opposed to
violation of those rights by state and national governments, and I
support either government precisely to the degree they reduce the
rights-violations of the other. Broadly, the question of local or
federal is to me just a question of strategy, though in general Ifear
local governments more, because their homogenous composition and
sense of social cohesion makes it easier for them to agree to unite
against unpopular minorites. I am very wary of granting positive
powers to the federal government, but very grateful for the negative
powers of the national government- particularly that of incorporated
judicial review.Time and again its been shown in our history that as Jefferson
said, that government which governs best governs least.
That government which governs *individuals* least governs best. That
government which localizes power to states to govern individuals
*more* governs horrifically.An an example after the Revolutionary War started the Royal
Governors version of states crumpled. And for some time there was no
true state governments. And people got along just fine. Then when the
people started going to the Allegheny Valley and the Ohio Valley and
Tennessee Valley there were no governments and people got along just
fine. When people traveled across the US to the west coast the wagon
trains got along just fine without no government.We can survive without a government. Or in the True Tradition of
the word ANARKOS - without a ruler.
I'm familiar with such Greek terms, believe me, and have some
sympathy to anarchism- I have learned significantly from Emma
Goldman, Max Stirner, and Benjamin Tucker, among others. I'm a
neutralist as far as anarchy and minarchy is concerned myself- I
think the more important question division between libertarians is on
culture- between those who revolt againstt the state from anti-
authoritarian instincts and those who revolt to reclaim a social
authority they see the state as usurping. There are minarchists and
anarchists on both sides of this division and that fight isn't mine.I support culturally libertarionist libertarians such as Roderick
Long (an anarchist) and Chris Sciabarra (a minarchist, I believe),
while opposing culturally conservative libertarians such as Hans
Hermann Hoppe (an anarchist) and Ron Paul (a minarchist)... and to go
farther I think each side has more in common with those who share
their cultural views than with other libertarians who share their
technical politics. I'll take Ellen Willis (a culturally radical pro-
sex left-libertarian feminist) over Ron Paul any day.I will put it bluntly; if libertarianism fights for everyone's equal
rights with equal enthusiasm, against both state and national
encroachment, with equal attention paid to the practical danger of
authoritarian control of all persons, then we are comrades.However, if libertarianism stands for delegating control to local
levels which will mean certain abrogation of rights crucial to people
in my world, but not in yours, and devalues those rights clearly
primary to liberals (such as gay marriage and abortion), but not to
conservatives, then you make me choose between support for my
experience of a liberated life and the party of 'liberty'. In which
case I would choose the former.P.S. We too have our mythology of the American West. Calamity Jane
is a figure seldom sketched in detail to children.Ron Getty
SF Libertarianregards,
Jeanine Ring
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Give underprivileged students the materials they need to learn.
Bring education to life by funding a specific classroom project.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/FHLuJD/_WnJAA/cUmLAA/69cplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lpsf-discuss-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos