Why Does Libertarianism Mean Exactly the Opposite To So Many People?
Posted: Monday, December 07, 2009
by Andrew Peel
APeel Solutions
It's fairly infrequently I write articles about thoughts and opinions, I tend to be topic based.
Recently however I have witnessed a phenomena which from my standpoint in the UK I find disturbing. I have checked wikipedia for their definition as used by the United States Libertarian Party and it's basically a concept from the enlightenment period. At at that time with Kings and others acting like despots it entirely reasonable to see how libertarianism arose. This then developed into Liberalism with which I am more at home with.
Libertarians essentially believe the US Government should limit itself to the US Constitution, they believe in gun ownership, gambling and drug use and the sovereignty of the individual.
The most recent encounter I had with a Libertarian claimed Texas was a Free State and that people should only get money according to their labour.
Now there as a disabled person is the rub for me. If the US Government limited itself to the US Constitution then it could never adapt to new circumstances. All legal systems have to be able to adapt to change.
Not all people are physically capable of work and I have never heard an argument from Libertarians how people in society would be genuinely supported. Is it their fault they should suffer because an accident of birth? Does my disability mean because of it's progressive nature I get thrown on the scrap heap despite 30 years in work?
This form of Libertarianism, based purely on individualism, leaves no room for the concept of a society, for the greater good. Can we all say we really know what is best for us all the time? If so why do we have doctors and others?
So I end with question to Libertarians. If you became so ill you were unable to look after yourself and you lived on your own, who is responsible for caring for you or should we just let you die?
This Article has been viewed 455 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (2 total)I used to think of myself as a Libertarian. The thought of total laissez faire agreed with my youthful sensibilities. Now I have to ask, if I should be able to do anything I want with my own property, then why can't I build a chemical weapons factory or a crystal meth lab in my own backyard, next door to your house where your kids play in your back yard? Or maybe I am polluting my yard, which in turn pollutes groundwater? Or maybe I'm firing automatic weapons in my backyard, and damn your own peaceful existence, just mind your own business?
I know many libertarians who think the government should not be allowed to intervene. I think there are good reasons why government must limit absolute freedom, or a few could hurt the many. That's exactly what is being done to us economically, as well.- GThanks for such a thought provoking response G.
"people should only get money according to their labour." is scary to me as well as I am only as mobile as my wheelchair is.This thinking would also likely assess that one should receive health care according to one's healthy or non healthy lifestyle, presumably; if one smokes or drinks that limits his coverage.Thank you for a thoughtful approach;Paul SchroederNice to see the support for this article and that I there is more than just me concerned about the rise of this type of thinking. Andrew Peel
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.