Libertarians will eat your soul

July 21st, 2006

There are two things that seem to interest me lately: politics, and offending people (I'm getting pretty good at the latter.) I've said before I'm libertarian (previously a liberal,) but it seems to be coming out now more than ever. For instance, I couldn't help writing an angry letter to my school newspaper for a rather conservative bash at Michael Moore (we hardly find points of agreement, surprisingly.)

What's a Libertarian? Kinda a middle-of-the-road between liberal and convervative. (okay, technically, "middle of the road" is more reserved for people who can't make up their mind.) Libertarians tend to support liberal social issues such as gay marriage and abortion and whatnot, but alternately, lean right on economic issues, like taxes and free market. We've also got the title of having the stupidest name a philosophy can get (hardly anyone my age knows what a libertarian is!) For more info on libertarians, click here.

Do not confuse "Libertarian" with "Anarchist." Yes, both libertarians and anarchists vouch for less government involvement in social, personal, and economic matters, but anarchism more focuses on the abolition of ruling parties (Greek "an"= no; "archon"=ruler.)

A chief philosphy of libertarianism is that taking anything of value from another person obligates you to give something of equal value in return (see lp.org on Crime.) In essence, the government's biggest responsibility is serving justice for cases in which someone causes an imbalance, through theft, murder, rape, or a myriad of other victimizing crimes (granted, this is more a minarchist approach at libertarianism.) Unfortunately, this differs sharply from anarchism, as suggested by violent groups such as the Black Bloc, Black Cross, Animal Liberation Front, and La Mano Negra. Additionally, while libertarians are more often than not supporters of capitalism, this is a source of debate among anarchists.

Therefore, the difference between libertarianism and anarchism is the difference between self-government and nongovernment. To a degree, it's also a difference between the belief in an incompetent government and a malicious government.

Libertarianism in the Artistic Community:

NOTE: these are my opinions, completely unresearched. They may not necessarily reflect the positions of the Libertarian Party as a majority.

Libertarians abide by a strict interpretation of the First Amendment, and claim to be the only party that explicitly opposes censorship and infringement on online privacy.

Censorship: Big fat no-no. Both Democrats (The Communications Decency Act, 1995; Hillary Clinton) and Republicans (Focus on the Family; Jack Thompson) have a history of attempting to limit what people see and don't see on the Internet. Personally, I believe that a free Internet does nothing to repress one's moral values (that's why every browser has a Back button.) What about the children? Would they be corrupted by obscenity and hate speech online? Well, let's just say it's not my place to discuss parenting.

Copyright: Every good artist on deviantART works hard to create pleasurable pieces for everyone to enjoy. No artist receive money for getting their art viewed; therefore, it's only fair that you don't take another person's hard work, erase the signature, and profit from it. Leans a little too close to socialism for me. One's own private work should be privately owned. At the same time, however, it is not wise to rely on the government to hold onto your hard work. We the artists have the power to state exactly how we want our work to be treated by the populus. Want to slap "DO NOT STEAL" on your piece? By all means! Throw it in the public domain? Copyright is not set in stone.

Network Neutrality: "Save the Internet," eh? That is what a lot of users are posting in their blogs lately. I, too want to "save the Internet," but for a different reason. I stand opposed to network neutrality laws, because I'm essentially choosing between an Internet owned by the government and an Internet owned by corporations. I'd choose the latter, after seeing Golden Shield's handiwork. But Fenris! The corporations will give disproportionate coverage to websites who pay more, lol! Exhibit A: Google. Type in practically any noun (apple, boat, computer) and right at the top of the screen, with a yellow background, is something called "sponsored links." And again at the side of the screen. Google practically dominated ad banners on nonrelated web pages with a program called "Adsense," in which they receive a portion of all the revenue you receive. A similar program, "Adwords," places you on Google's sidebars. The more you pay, the more you appear. That doesn't sound too fair, either, does it? Now the clincher: Google is a supporter of net neutrality.

The one thing about libertarians that pisses me off: Conspiracy theorists. They're flypaper for libertarians. Even Ron Paul outright rejected the claims made by the 9/11 Truth Movement, and he's still inexplicably an icon for conspiracy nuts that believe "the Man" is more than just an abstract concept.

I treat things a little differently. A conspiracy theory is based off the assumption that some mastermind, in the libertarian case the government, was able to pull off a complex plot that fooled near everybody (except for Mr. Armchair Activist who discovered the magic of iMovie.) For the sake of consistency, if the government can't even deliver my mail, it's not gonna pull anything more successful than Watergate. Nice try.

Badass Libertarians in the Media:
John Stossel
Dave Barry
Trey Parker
Kurt Russell
Drew Carey
Clint Eastwood
Howard Stern
Ayn Rand
Penn Jillette
Teller
6 Nobel Prize Winners

More complete list here.

 Back to Ramblings...