Thoughts on the "Libertarian Movement"

I have absolutely no problem with the definition and idea of "libertarian" and find that term a suitable label to describe an overall view that (in my opinion) is positive. In fact, I have even called myself a "conservative-libertarian (not to be confused with the party)" on many occasions. It is that "not to be confused with the party" part that is the kicker. You see, while I have no problem with the term "Libertarian"... I have a MAJOR problem with the Libertarian Party and, well, much of the "Libertarian Movement"... that is to say, I prefer to associate myself with a "Liberty Movement" instead.

You may be thinking... "isn't that the same thing?" The answer is an unequivocal "NO!!!"

The reason I say this is because there are many in the "Libertarian Movement" that have more in common with the "Libertarian Party" than "Liberty"... and NO, those two things are not the same either.

I'll jump right to some examples of why I say what I say... and then try and put it all together.

There are quite a few Libertarians that hold up Ayn Rand and her philosophies... below is a look at a few of Ayn Rand's thoughts on most "Libertarians" and "Anarchists"; and a few thoughts by one of her heirs. Though Ayn Rand is upheld by many Libertarians, the comments below, oddly enough, do not defend the "Libertarian Movement" but instead lead directly to my point.

"Anarchism is the most irrational, anti-intellectual notion ever spun by the concrete-bound, context-dropping, whim-worshiping fringe of the collectivist movement, where it properly belongs." -- Ayn Rand

I personally put the viability of "Anarchy" on par with the existence of faeries, all you can eat diets, and unicorns... Furthermore, Anarchy is every bit as detrimental to Liberty as the most vile, corrupt, authoritarian dictator. Anarchy begets chaos, begets mob rule, begets fascism and the tyranny of the majority.

"...‘libertarian’ hippies, who subordinate reason to whims, and substitute anarchism for capitalism" -- Ayn Rand, given as a reason why she did not join ideological movements or groups (such as the Libertarian Party).

"Libertarianism is a Perversion of Liberty" -- Peter Schwartz

"...the libertarian interprets liberty to mean the license to do whatever he feels like doing...to him, any obstacle in the path of people's whims is undesirable." -- Peter Schwartz

"IS LIBERTARIANISM AN EVIL DOCTRINE? Yes, if evil is the irrational and the destructive. Libertarianism belligerently rejects the very need for any justification for its belief in something called "liberty." It repudiates the need for any intellectual foundation to explain why "liberty" is desirable and what "liberty" means. Anyone from a gay-rights activist to a criminal counterfeiter to an overt anarchist can declare that he is merely asserting his "liberty"—and no Libertarian (even those who happen to disagree) can objectively refute his definition. Subjectivism, amoralism and anarchism are not merely present in certain "wings" of the Libertarian movement; they are integral to it. In the absence of any intellectual framework, the zealous advocacy of "liberty" can represent only the mindless quest to eliminate all restraints on human behavior—political, moral, metaphysical. And since reality is the fundamental "restraint" upon men's actions, it is nihilism—the desire to obliterate reality—that is the very essence of Libertarianism." -- Peter Schwartz

A good example of evil would be the Libertarian stance that murdering the unborn is fine as it is in keeping with a woman's freedom to do what she will with her body.

Another example is that gay marriage can be forced upon a society that overwhelmingly rejects it so as to pacify the "liberty" (i.e. militant activism) of the homosexual. Though few seem to consider the fact that legislative and judicial tyranny engaged to "liberate" someone is just as fascist as legislative and judicial tyranny used to enslave them. (I will elaborate more on this point in another essay)

Oftentimes some members of the "Libertarian Movement" confuse "Libertarian" with "Libertine"... they go beyond "tolerating" immoral actions, to embracing them. They do not seem to understand that just because someone "can" do something doesn't mean they "should" do it... or that you are not treading upon someone's liberty because you denounce or object to that which another has done. It is as if they believe shame, embarrassment, public scorn, or objection felt by one party somehow renders one or another incapable of being free. The ironic thing is... these "libertine libertarians" (keeping a straight face) claim they believe in "accountability".

On many issues (such as the ones listed above) elements of the 'Libertarian Movement" shows an almost complete lack of understanding of what liberty is, instead clinging to those things liberty is NOT, such as amorality, immorality, indifference, self-indulgence, selfishness, nihilism, and so on.

I am not saying that members of the "Libertarian Movement" are bad people... in fact, I am pretty confident that many of them are trying, as best they know how, to make a better world. However, the same can be said of some Marxists, Socialists, Communists, and yes... even Fascists. In other words, just because you have a good heart, and mean to do the right thing doesn't mean you are not inadvertently engaging in a social evil.

The "Libertarian Movement" (for the most part) lacks a great deal of rationality, with too wide a range of viewpoints (ranging from the Anarchist to the Liberal Statist), and is too focused on "me, me, me" to be able to step out of their self-imposed "fishbowl" long enough to see how much damage they are doing to themselves; and, in the long run, society.

If the "Libertarians" are not careful, soon the term "Libertarian" may no longer retain the meaning it was supposed to have, and will go the way of the term "Liberal"... a word that was synonymous with liberty which evolved into an ugly epithet.