Date: 2009-06-18 16:35 Subject: A Libertarian Trapped In a Socialist's Body - Part 1 Continued Security: Public Location: talking out my butt Mood: curious Music: Sinead O' Connor Tags: liberalism, libertarian socialism, libertarianism, socialism

Libertarians are the True Liberals

Libertarians are the classic liberals. They may be fiscally conservative but they are socially liberal. Both attitudes bespeak of keeping the government out of our lives as much as possible. I am of the opinion that the majority of the voting public espouses these two attitudes – socially liberal and fiscally conservative. We want to live our lives without the interference of other people. Live and let live is the best way to describe us. You don’t bother or hurt me and I will respect you likewise.

The minority on the right and on the left are just louder than we are. That’s why many are fooled into thinking that they have more influence than they do. But, unlike the majority of us the political extremes aren’t just content to sit in their arm chairs waxing political with friends and families. They are out working and working hard. Both sides are fighting for the souls of the American public. This is where their power comes from.

Don’t be fooled. We are in the middle of a cultural revolution in the United States. Perhaps we have always been. In the 60’s it was about civil rights. Today it is about separation of church and state, civil liberties and issues of moral independence. It’s also about economic equality. Reforming forces to the left and the right do have good ideas to be sure. But it is important that those of us in the middle – the live and let lives – keep the extremes accountable.

The Need to Embrace an Ethos of Accountability to Ensure Liberty

Accountability! There is a bugaboo for you. Both sides fling it at each other like monkey’s flinging pooh. The Conservatives say the individual must be accountable. The left says its government and corporations. Both simplify it. But both are correct. However, you can’t have communal accountability. You can’t have corporate or government accountability without individual accountability. The two go hand in hand. Every community is made up of individuals.

My conservative friends and family always cry that the biggest problem in our country today is the lack of personal accountability. Everyone seems to blame everyone else for their problems or societies problems at large. We call each other stupid, misguided and even evil. Yet we seldom look at our own stupidity or evil. We can justify anything in the name of our cause. No one is really listening to anyone else. We preach to the choir, but we seldom persuade those who oppose us of the merits of our arguments. We just keep fighting. Voices get shrill and our once well intentioned passion becomes vitriol. Vitriol leads to violence. Our problems become worse.

Individual accountability is indeed a libertarian or liberal value. There can be no honest discussion of liberty without it. Conservatives need to put the “conserve” back into conservative. They need to show more responsibility with resources and a willingness to be better stewards or our economy and environment. Liberals need to stop expecting the government to provide for everyone. There are no guarantees in life and it is not necessarily empathetic or wise to rely on governments to fill in the gaps. Beaurocratic charity always dehumanizes. It never, or rarely ever, empowers anyone to do better.

A certain amount of social insurance is a good idea. Medicare, social security, even some form of universal health care. I embrace these as good ideas, at least theoretically, and they should be strengthened, improved and even reformed if necessary. But, these should be safety nets not catch alls. In many ways Europe is slowly trying to move away from its socialist leanings. Although, it is a long hard struggle and the EU is making it next to impossible. Unemployment is generally high in the EU, some countries like France is a little higher and in Denmark it can be below the norm. To understand this trending you need to look at the last 15-20 years to appreciate it. The inclusion of many former Eastern bloc nations is only increasing the problems.

We need to ensure that the authoritarian voices to the left and the right do not usurp our liberty. This is going to require personal accountability and a commitment to living ethically by the libertarian principals of our forefathers who knew only to well the pain of living under the boot heels of the powerful.

Is America perfect? No? Do we cause our share of the world’s problems? Sometimes. But, we need to get off this “It’s all America’s fault” soap box. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t criticize our government. We are here to keep it accountable and to stump for change when needed. The nations of the world are sovereign from us and are most often the cause of their own problems. It’s foolish to think we can export democracy or force change. Many of the worlds sovereign states are failed sates. Many of them just south of the United States.

This is one of the central issues of the so-called illegal immigration problem. Incidentally Libertarians are opposed to much in the way of immigration controls. If America is to be a free and open republic then all who are willing to come and embrace our ideals must continue to be welcome. Libertarians generally have no problem with amnesty. But, welfare for immigrants is another issue. This is where the left gets a little queasy. Libertarians and most conservatives, view welfare as handouts that should be dispensed with and giving aid to illegal immigrants is, in a way, akin to supporting the failure of other states, such as Mexico by making it possible for the least educated and skilled to come across our border to get aid.

Personally, I feel the issue is a little more complex than this, at least morally. I have no issue with people escaping bad situations and striving for something better. In fact I want to encourage it. But, only as part of a well oiled machine in which all are striving for better and are contributors to the society as a whole. I am not sure we should punish those whose only real crime is to be in this country without legal sanction. If larger crimes are being committed, then yes, for those crimes they must be held accountable as any of us would. But, I am not willing to allow poverty to be an excuse. This brings us back to accountability and living with the understanding that there are no guarantees. Poverty may fore others to commit criminal acts of desperation. But, nonetheless they cannot be excused.

My Ethical Dilemma

The question many might ask for me is if not the government then who? My answer might differ depending on the day. I am not always sure if I am a libertarian minded person or a left leaning socialist type. Most of the time I am libertarian though and I would mostly likely respond with a question of my own. Why should the government be responsible for providing for others?

I started this piece with left handed praise for Karl Marx. That is because in my late teens and early 20’s I was something of a devotee, although it is questionable if I truly understood his ideas properly. However, I can look around the world and see the fall out.

But in my youth and in my distrust of human nature and its unrelenting greed made it seem to me that social justice and economic equality could only be achieved through the implementation of socialist principals. But, the current events of the day demonstrated that socialist regimes were far less concerned with human rights an individual liberty then our own country. Socialism speaks of equality, but it’s a forced equality. It kills opportunity as it attempts it to create it. In the most extreme cases it forces those who are more capable to pick up the slack for those who are less able or willing. That is, at least, the argument that many conservative apologists have used.

But, what is wrong with a society that takes care of its own? What’s wrong with making sure that everyone has the basic necessities and that the weakest and least capable among us are protected and cared for? The unequivocal moral answer is nothing at all. The question remains is who’s responsible.

I would say the answer lies in all of us, but not at the government level.

To Be Continued…

Creating an ethically responsible and compassionate society under Libertarian Principals.

Date: 2009-06-16 01:31 Subject: A Libertarian Trapped In a Socialist's Body - Part 1 Continued Security: Public Location: talking out my butt Mood: recumbent Tags: liberalism, libertarian socialism, libertarianism, socialism

The Roots of Liberty

This is my dilemma. I am a Libertarian trapped in a Socialist’s body. It’s interesting that to be a libertarian today is to be considered to be far right. Yet, in my mind the far right is the more authoritarian side of the conservative spectrum. It’s filled with Neo-cons, religious conservatives and, in extreme cases, fascists. Those who espouse a more libertarian political philosophy have a distrust of authority. They want the government to be small and exercise little influence over their lives.

Libertarian ideals were the guiding light of our nation’s founders. These ideals informed the writing of the constitution and the creation of our three branched federal government. As flawed as the U.S. government is, I am still awed by how brilliant it is and how well it works despite its flaws.

The opening line of the Declaration of Independence could not have been formulated except by men that espoused libertarian concepts. The second paragraph where it is stated by the undersigned, “that we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal” (et al) could have only been envisioned by men who were libertarians in every sense of the word and is proof of what our founders wanted to create in a democratic republic. Even though they left out women’s suffrage and the abolition of slavery, but morality is always a progression. First we have the ideal then we struggle to reach it. But the ideal has to exist first.

Liberty is the root of the word Libertarian. Liberty was what the founders of our nation were all about. Despite their association with the far right Libertarians were the original liberals. Unfortunately, Karl Marx irrevocably altered how we view liberal vs. conservative. Since the 19th century we have been struggling with socialist ideals masquerading as liberal.

The fiscally conservative nature of right leaning libertarians such as the Libertarian Party is what lends to this view of libertarians as being far right. But, in truth, to be fiscal conservative is to be liberal. True liberalism embraces a distrust of government authority this includes the collection of taxes and regulation of free enterprise. Our nation’s founders wanted to keep the role of government small – provide for the common defense and keep the wheels of commerce rolling. Everything else becomes problematic.

Every time we ask or expect the government to step in it comes at a great price. It comes with taxes and restrictions. That is what a regulation is. Each time someone on the left cries, “There ought to be a law” they are asking for a restriction to be placed on you and me. That is not necessarily a bad thing. But let’s not call it liberal. It is no more liberal than Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter is a liberal. Regulations are authoritarian regardless of what side of the spectrum they come from – left or right.

Sometimes laws do need to be passed. Sometimes we do need regulations and restrictions. The insurance and banking industries are good examples. So is anything related to the securities, investments and the stock exchange as the temptation to abuse and take advantage is almost too overwhelming for so many. The civil liberties act of 1964 is another example. But, generally laws such as these engender liberty. They are about ensuring freedom and equality for all people. They are as important as the bill of rights attached to our constitution.

Laws seeking to ban the rights of same sex couples in marriage or the right of survivorship are the antithesis of liberty. Republicans, who once upon a time led the call to equality for ethnic minorities over their Democratic brethren, should be ashamed of themselves for continuing to support such heinous laws. It was the working class whites of the Democratic Party who saw equality for minorities as a threat. Things have changes in the past 40-50 years as we can all see.

Date: 2008-11-12 15:05 Subject: OMG! Libertarian Socialism for Real: Part 1 My Version vs. The Reality Security: Public Location: Talking out my Butt Mood: creative Tags: liberalism, libertarian socialism, libertarianism, noam chomsky, political philosophy, truck nutz

Once again one of my great ideas turns out to have already been thought of by someone else. Yes, Jill there really is such a think as Libertarian Socialism and minds such as cognitive theorist and philosopher Noam Chomsky are among Libertarian Socialism’s most notables. All hail the great Gods of Knowledge residing at the Oracle of Wikipedia.

Naturally, Wikipedia is not a perfect font of knowledge so more research is required to pin this elusive monkey down. But, at least for know, my great wheel has been flattened. I guess you really cannot reinvent the wheel. I suppose it is hubris for me to think that I would ever be counted among the great minds of this world. I will now turn my attention back to lesser pursuits such as golf, Dean Koontz novels and Hillbilly television. I might even start up masturbating again. I have nothing else better to do.

Truck Nutz all around.

Hey red neck put it on my tab.

I was so caught up in my cleverness that it never dawned on me to actually Google Libertarian Socialism. Maybe deep down I knew I would be setting myself up for heartbreak. As it was I was pushing the envelope when I typed in Liberals vs. Libertarians into a search engine. You see I have noticed the similarity between the words liberty, liberal and libertarian – see what I am getting at here? They all come from the same root. I know –Duh!  

Date: 2008-10-27 13:53 Subject: What do you mean when you say, "Socialism?" Security: Public Location: Talking out my Butt Mood: thirsty Tags: american politics, joe the plumber, liberalism, mccain, obama, socialism

nightsnows

Drops by to pose this interesting question:
 

“Everyone seems to be bandying about the term Socialism these days in tones of feared whispering or loud bullying outrage. I wonder what they mean by socialism and why they are so afraid of it?”

Do people really know what socialism is?

Frankly, I think it is another “ism” in the long glossary of post industrial political jargon that people barely grasp. We talk of liberalism, conservatism, Marxism, Socialism, Libertarianism, Positive Objectivism and Fascism. Yet do people really know what these terms actually represent?

I suspect that when people think of Socialism in the United States they really mean “welfare” or public assistance. Welfare entitlements while having a socialist element behind their creation is really bad socialism as a whole. Welfare is poorly executed bureaucratic charity and it has little to do with Socialism as a whole.

Most of our political concepts to the left and to the right hark back to the 19^th century and are outdated to say the least. Most of our political philosophies need to be examined and reformulated to meet the demands of the 21^st century world that we live in.

The term Liberalism, for example, is fraught with danger and can be easily misunderstood. In the United States Democrats, progressives and just about anyone politically left of center is dubbed a liberal. But what kind of liberal exactly are we talking about?

Social Liberalism, Cultural Liberalism, Economic Liberalism and Political Liberalism can all be said to be distinct forms of liberal ideologies. It is interesting to ponder that economic liberals tend to prefer little or no government involvement in economic or business affairs which makes them similar, at least in this respect, to Libertarians whom are generally considered to be right of political center. Certainly economic liberals would share similar notions to fiscal conservatives who used to make up the power base of the Republican Party.

Socialism tends to be left of political center. But as we can see above not all liberals can be said to be socialists. Yet that seems to be what people fear. Recently McCain has made much of Obama telling Joe the Plumber that he wants to “spread the wealth around.” For the moderate to conservative who know little of the true meaning behind these isms this “spreading the wealth around” is the ultimate goal of socialism. Indeed, in Marxism – the most extreme Socialist ideology – it certainly is.

Americans tend to view all socialism with suspicion. We see it as the ultimate encroachment of the state into our lives. Some might even call it the Gospel of Envy. The idea that those who are well off are responsible for those who are not and along with this idea comes the notion that anyone with a modicum of ambition or desire is a rat bastard!

Perhaps one of the great economic misunderstandings in this country is the belief of the middle and lower classes that the wealthy pay little or no taxes. The exact opposite is true. The elite 1% of this country pays 49% of the federal income tax revenue. That leaves 99% of the country to pay the remaining 51%. 

Political theorists have long worried that progressive or liberal ideals represent a sort of thievery of those who are best able to work and produce. In many ways it seems the Robin Hood ideal of robbing from the rich to give to the poor, except that in our modern age that translates to taking from those who are capable and willing to work to give to those who are less capable and less willing.

Socialism, which pretty much means all liberalism as far as conservatives are concerned, is about higher taxes and larger government and having their liberties being undercut. Never mind that the Bush Administration has just overseen the nationalization of several of our countries banks, the largest deficits in modern history and the increase in wasteful spending and government bureaucracy. Neo-Conservative and Religious Conservatism rival Marxism in their dictatorial natures. American politics has been reduced the kettles, on the right, and the pots, on the left, black! 

So what are we scared of? Obama – despite being labeled the most liberal member of Congress by McCain, is far from being a true leftist. While he is left of center is he is no socialism. We have avoided actually defining socialism here to keep with the provincial understanding and use of the term as it is tossed about by Republicans and the media.

When Obama tells all the Joe the Plumbers out there that he wants to spread the wealth it may be a knee jerk reaction to scream, “The socialists are taking over.” Obama is less about socialism and more about trying to reverse the ill effects of failed economic policies.

Instead of giving money to the wealthy it’s about letting the middle class and lower classes have a chance at real income and livelihood. It’s about self respect, dignity and the chance to do something positive with your life. It is not about taking money from those who have worked hard and giving it to those who refuse to work. That’s more in line with the present infrastructure that we have now.

Date: 2007-05-20 11:58 Subject: A Rambling, Disjointed Essay on the Emerging Cultural War Security: Public Location: Nowhere Good Mood: aggravated Tags: conservatism, cultural war, fascism, freedom of religion, liberalism, secularism

We are deep in the middle of a cultural war yet most of us fail to see this. There is a battle waging for the hearts and minds of the masses and it is not the battle of light vs. the dark. It is the battle between science and religion. It is a war between secularism and faith. At its most extreme this war is a battle between those on the far right and on the far left each wishing to impose their viewpoint, their philosophy (or theology) of life on everyone.

Religious conservatives wage war against women’s reproductive freedoms and the rights of gays to be treated with respect and the same regard as heterosexual couples. These same conservatives want to dictate so-called standards of decency and morality. They want to tell you what books to read, television programs to watch and what movies are fit to be made. They make up the ranks of book banners and would burn them in huge public bonfires if they could get away with it.

The extremists on the left are not much better. While they support equality and respect for gays and favor women’s reproductive choices they too want to tell us what is appropriate for mass consumption. While the Far right wants to put God and prayer back in the class room the far left wants to take it away. They might favor religious studies but they would scream if Christians demanded equal time. The fact is that both sides represent extremes that threaten our way of life, our freedom of choice and our right to self-determination. Neither side is good at compromise or listening to what their opponents have to say. Both sides have some good ideas but neither would be willing to readily admit it. Both sides have some really bad ideas which they are ever ready to point out to the public with fingers waving, tongues clucking and voices shrill.

The founders of our country wisely understood that separation of church and state was an imperative if a truly democratic society was to ever be created and thrive. The truth however is shaded with much more grey than we would like to admit. We are a nation built on a set of ideals that look and sound great on paper but have always been a challenge to implement fairly and with justice.

The line between the separation of church and state has always been easily blurred. Even though the United States doesn’t have an official state sponsored religion the influence of the protestant Christian traditions can be felt through out every generation of our young countries history. We need to understand that in comparison to many countries we are still very, very young. Our way of life is still a grand experiment in democracy and we haven’t reached a conclusion. While other democratic states exist in the world the democracy of the United States is still unique in many ways.

The extremists waging the cultural war have differing opinions. One side proudly declares this is a secular nation where God has little or no place and the other side proudly proclaim the United States is a Christian nation. Both arguments are incorrect. It is historically more accurate to state the United States is a secular republic founded by largely protestant Christians of varying degrees of belief with a few atheists thrown into the mix. The inheritors of the Calvinist theology choke when they are forced to admit (if they will even acknowledge it) that the theology of the deists and philosophy of the Freemasons played an important role in creating the ideology and government of our country.

George Washington was a very dedicated Freemason of advanced degree by the time he was elected president. John Adams, our second president, was a Unitarian and Thomas Jefferson had very strong deistic sympathies even though he maintained membership in the Anglican Church throughout his life. Other great men and women in American History were Unitarians including the great Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes.

The philosophy of the Transcendentalists played a huge roll in the thought of our nation’s infancy. Ralph Waldo Emerson is still one of the most often quoted American thinkers in Churches across the country. I have even heard tidbits from Emerson read from the pulpit of more conservative churches.

 Revolutionary pamphleteer, Thomas Paine, was an atheist who had very little regard for religion. His famous pamphlet, The Age of Reason, says it all in the title alone. The late 17^th century was the Age of Reason and all across the civilized world humanity was turning its eyes to the pursuit of science, mathematics and reason. Humanity began to emancipate itself from the concepts of God left over from the medieval theologies that still gripped so much of the Christian world.

 Humanism was born and we saw the possibility that humanity had within itself the capacity to create a just, fair world based on reason. We began to reason that morality was not necessarily divinely appointed. We saw the possibility that individuals could be trusted to follow their own conscience in matters of right and wrong. That is one of the great ideas of humanism. We do not have to be beholden to a supreme being in order to do what is right. There are many who believe that morality comes from God and only by being accountable to {him} can we truly create a righteous society.

Yet I don’t know if that is true. In a secular democracy such as ours we are accountable to each other in matters of choice.  I have the freedom to determine my own course in life and the constitution guarantees me the basic inalienable rights first stated in the Declaration of Independence. Yet if my choices interfere with the inalienable rights of my neighbor then I face censure.  My personal freedoms do not necessarily mean that I can do whatever I want. I have to conform to societal standards in regards to certain behaviors.

As a rational man I do not need the fear of hell or the promise of heaven to keep me on the so-called straight and narrow. As a religious man I believe that God has blessed this country because of its attempted secularism not despite it. This secularism that so many religious people fear is the one element that ensures freedom of choice for all people. Even then this much abused ideal has not always been lived up to. African Americans, while emancipated by Lincoln and the Civil War, did not have any real equality under the law or economic equality until the hard one battles of the civil rights movement. Even then progress was often violent and slow.

Every ethnic group that came to the “Land of the Free” experienced bigotry, intolerance and injustice when first arriving upon our shores. The Irish-Catholics, The Chinese and the Japanese all the way up to today where we are treating people of Mexican, Latin American descent or Middle Eastern origins with suspicion and downright hostility experienced or are experiencing intolerance. We haven’t even touched on the issues of women’s rights. It wasn’t until the end of the 19^th, beginning of the 20^th century that women were given “the right” to vote. That is only one of the many issues that women faced.

The United States, a nation that espouses religious freedom as an Ideal, is often suspicious of people who profess something other than the Protestant Christian faith. Catholics are not considered Christian by many of these groups and if you are a Muslim then you must be linked to a terrorist group.

The war in Iraq and the so-called War on Terror are another element of our current cultural war that is turning us on the hopeful idealism of our countries founders.  While the threat of violence against our country is great I am not certain that it is any more profound than in previous generations. We have always had enemies…we always will as long as our idealism differs from other extremists.

But if we continue to be suspicious of every dark face or everyone that reveres the message of the Koran then we have lost ourselves. During World War II suspicion of Japanese Americans lead to one of the greatest modern atrocities in our countries history. Scores of Japanese Americans were rounded up and placed in concentration camps. Their freedom curtailed and their civil rights non-existent they became one of the casualties of the war. When we forcibly rob the dignity of others because of dark, paranoid suspicions we rob ourselves of dignity as well.

President Harry Truman is perhaps one of the greatest mass murders of all time. The act of dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a needless, senseless act ending in many deaths. It is on par with the maliciousness of the Nazi concentration camps and the later atrocities of Stalin and Khrushchev. That we were fighting a war, that Japan attacked us first is no excuse. The war for Japan was all but over. History tells us that Japan was done in and had been trying to surrender all summer but it fell on deaf ears. Truman wanted to drop the bomb. He wanted to announce to the world that the United States had emerged from a period of isolation and was now a superpower to be contended with and respected. He wanted to put the “fear of God” into Stalin and other future dictators of the world.

 Under Eisenhower the era of the military-industrial complex was created and soon, much to his dismay grew to the point where it was beyond his control. In his farewell address to the nation Eisenhower warned us of the new era of militarism but by then we had begun to establish a solid presence across the world.

Now war has become big business. The practice of outsourcing has transformed war into a very profitable enterprise and private companies now vie for government contracts to supply our soldiers with all the necessities needed. Even KP duty has fallen to private contractors. Even more terrifying is that intelligence and security services are being doled out on government contract. We have a difficult challenge as it is policing our intelligence and law enforcement agencies who is going to police the private contractors? Who is going to keep an eye out on the situation as these companies compete against each other? The ramifications are chilling.

With so much money to be made by the private sector in war who can guarantee us that this will not create a demand for more wars? That is part and parcel of a free enterprise economy.

Under the Bush Administration our civil rights have taken a beating. Habeas has been suspended a person suspected of terrorism can be rounded up by the jack booted thugs of the Homeland Security Department and held indefinitely. Even if there is no evidence or clear case against them and many foreign nationals have experienced this simply because they look like what a terrorist is supposed to look like or they have a name that sounds Arabic or come from a part of the world where known terrorist groups operate.

The NSA has been spying on us internally. They are listening in and watching. We can’t escape their eyes. The Bush Administration forced Yahoo and Google (although Google fought hard against it) for its search engine records because they wanted to see what people were surfing the net for. This is the tip of a large iceberg. If may seem innocuous, after all if you are doing nothing wrong what do you have to hide…right?  But, that is all it takes to make a situation get worse. Once privacy is breached no one is safe. This is how extremes of fascism and communism get started.

Privacy and the possibility that some one or some group somewhere may do something harmful is the price we pay for a free and open society. But the present administration and conservative supporters have whipped up a frenzy of fear so that their actions can be justified.  It isn’t just the extremists on the left that want to control society; the extremists on the right do as well.

Not all extreme conservatives hold the Libertarian ideal of small government that stays out of the lives of its citizens. Fascism is an extreme conservative idealism. Its idealism starts with a strong ultra nationalism that fuels a patriotic fervor of “my country, right or wrong.” It’s a political philosophy that creates discrimination based on whether or not you meet a set of overly idealized criteria for citizenship. Fascism supports a very narrow band of morality that is fueled often by a theology.

This essay has flipped back between religion, war and conservative idealism. While it is myopic in the sense that I didn’t give equal time to the liberal idealism that is every bit a part of the problem the elements discussed above are the recipe that has created the present situation we are now facing in this country. At some other point I will discuss the elements of the left that worry me. Meanwhile, let me be so bold as to suggest that a democratic controlled congress as we have now will not necessarily provide the solutions that we need nor is the electing of a democratic president. Yet most people I know will be voting this way simply because it is “not” what we have currently. I hope that people will put more thought into their choices.

As Joe Moore, a newscaster for KHON-TV Honolulu put it, “Death and taxes may be the only certain things in life, but at least death doesn’t get worse every time congress meets.”