This is for those RNL readers who read my post, Critiquing the Modern American Libertarian Movement.
It would appear that I should have read Wiki Before I wrote my critique of the modern Libertarian movement. If I had, and because Wiki is open source and this no doubt means many “libertarians’ had a hand in writing the page, I could have just stated my assertions and then cited Wiki as support:
Libertarianism (Latin: liber, “free”) is a set of related political philosophies that uphold liberty as the highest political end. This includes emphasis on the primacy of individual liberty, political freedom, and voluntary association. It is the antonym to authoritarianism. Libertarians advocate a society with minimized government or no government at all.
In the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Peter Vallentyne defines libertarianism as the moral view that agents initially fully own themselves and have certain moral powers to acquire property rights in external things. Libertarian philosopher Roderick Long defines libertarianism as “any political position that advocates a radical redistribution of power from the coercive state to voluntary associations of free individuals”, whether “voluntary association” takes the form of the free market or of communal co-operatives. According to the U.S. Libertarian Party, libertarianism is the advocacy of a government that is funded voluntarily and limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence.
Libertarian schools of thought differ over the degree to which the state should have a role. Anarchist schools advocate complete elimination of the state, while Minarchist schools advocate a state which is limited to protecting its citizens from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud. Some schools accept governmental assistance for the poor. Additionally, some schools are supportive of private property rights in the ownership of unappropriated land and natural resources, while others reject such private ownership and support various forms of left-libertarianism.
OMG! If you read my first post, I ask you: is this not everything I accused Libertarians of being?
I accused Libertarians of being borderline Anarchists – CHECK! (it says ANARCHISTS)
I accused them of being Liberals who either want to keep their money or who could think well enough to realize how bad liberal/progressives really look – CHECK! (left-libertarians? This is an oxy-moron, but that proves my point)
I accused Libertarians of being to incoherent in their ideology to support a sustainable government, which is why the Articles of Confederation failed – CHECK! (voluntary taxation? Duh!)
I also accused them of not understanding the connection to morality and rights/liberty. I’ll give this one a partial check. (They talk about morality, and even reference John Locke, but they studiously avoid invoking the necessary connection between the Creator and the very existence of morality).
Like I said: Libertarians are too far to the Right of the founders to ever present a functional system of government where individual rights and liberty can be preserved.