-Mahatma Ghandi

"An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it."

"We must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love."

                          -- Martin Luther King, Jr.

Think globally. . .

Did you know?  . . . American teenagers rank 21st out of 25 countries in math and science. Illiteracy and innumeracy are a greater threat to humanity than terrorism. There are one billion people without clean water on this planet.  

We are increasingly interconnected, interdependent and interacting with peoples of many other cultures. I join with Stiglitz and others, when I propose that we adopt a more global approach to solving the country's and the world's problems. We must value relationships more than transactions. We must synthesize the big picture rather than analyzing a single component of a problem. We must learn to synthesize massive amounts of information. We must learn to be self-directed in our learning. Many other countries are better at this than we are.  We musn't be afraid to do something we don't yet know how to do. We are no longer the lone beacon on a hill. We can't thrive by ourselves any longer. We must embrace a global way of thinking.

A big spiritual payoff today. . .

My brother told me today: "You know how men measure their girlfriends up against their mom's and they try to find women that have qualities that their mom's have?  Well, I don't. I measure them to my sister. I try to find women that have qualities that you have."

Frustration with the Media. . .

I really wish the major news networks would stop playing only a few seconds of President Obama's speeches and then hold a panel of 4 to comment on Obama's words for several minutes.  Why can't they just allow us to hear all of his remarks?  That is why I'm so glad Obama continues to post his weekly webcam address.  

Chinese Proverb

"If the water is too clear, there is nothing for the fish to eat". -Quoted by Fareed Zakaria when discussing corruption in China on November 8, 2009.  He wrote The Post-American World. You can see Fareed Zakaria GPS on Sunday afternoons on CNN.  I just think he is super knowledgeable about foreign affairs, crazy-brilliant and frankly beautiful.

Libertarianism - a look at a different political ideology. . .

The Libertarian Party was originally called the Libertarian Socialists. The party coined itself the Libertarian Party in the mid-19th century. “The Libertarian Party is America's third largest political party, founded in 1971 as an alternative to the two main political parties.  Our vision is for a world in which all individuals can freely exercise the natural right of sole dominion over their own lives, liberty and property by building a political party that elects Libertarians to public office, and moving public policy in a libertarian direction”. (Official Libertarian Website[1], Platform) Sounds great so far, doesn’t it? Who doesn’t want liberty?  In spite of this very attractive language, the mission statement tells us almost nothing about what Libertarians stand for. So, let’s take a closer look at the party’s platform.

The Libertarian Party Platform was adopted in May of 2008. Commentaries and discussions can be found on Reason TV. Ron Paul and Bob Barr were the candidates that represented the party in 2008, and William Redpath is the chairman of the party. There are twenty-five issues briefly covered in the document. In the interest of brevity, three issues from the Libertarian perspective will be considered.

Foreign Policy. In a word: non-intervention. Certainly, this is an unambiguous and uncomplicated approach, even elegant in its simplicity.  I can see why this policy would be attractive to many Americans. In a poll taken by Libertarians, the following statement got 69% of the votes that the poll generated: ”I believe we should follow a Libertarian non-interventionist foreign policy, and start withdrawing troops from Afghanistan”.  Libertarian foreign policy is very clear: we just shouldn’t be over there.

Libertarians agree that the solution to our economic problems is in “free trade as prescribed by America’s founders”. (Official Libertarian Website, Issues). Some Libertarians believe in anti-globalization.  However, Friedman, Stiglitz, and other economists agree that such an approach would greatly hinder the United States’ ability to compete in the world market economy given that in 2009, our economic security is intertwined with other countries.   Taxes. The official website actually stated that all other politicians just want more of your money and are busy increasing the size of government unnecessarily. (Official Libertarian Website, Issues). Further, Libertarians’ position is that the only role the government should have is protecting life, rights and property, and if it limited itself to that, America would prosper and thrive and that government regulation of any kind isn’t necessary to preserve individual rights.

Libertarians’ are disillusioned with the government mainly because the government is subsidizing many expensive unnecessary initiatives like foreign aid, bailing out banks, public art museums, education, railroads, and others. Libertarians don’t want to pay taxes for these purposes.  While most Americans tend to acknowledge that the government does squander money, depending on what the particular American values or does not value and I must agree that some of the government’s spending is wasteful, but certainly not all of it.  I disagree that every service the government provides other than those that protect constitutional rights and those that protect the country from foreign attack, are worthless. Are schools, libraries, national parks, railroads, energy grids, food regulations, and drug regulations unnecessary and worthless services? Libertarians say “yes”.

Healthcare. Libertarians believe that the “only healthcare reforms that will make a real difference are those that draw on the strength of the free market”. (Official Libertarian Website, Issues).  I am starting to see a trend here, are you? By way of reform, Libertarians support a Medical Savings Account. Those without a Medical Savings Account will have a 100% tax deduction for their medical costs. Deregulation of the healthcare industry and the FDA are also part of the Libertarian reform policy.  I was somewhat surprised to learn that the above is their only answer to the current healthcare snafu our country faces.

In general, Libertarians’ approach to pretty much all issues that affect Americans is one of self-determinism, which means that the individual should be able to do whatever he/she wishes, so long as he/she is not forcibly interfering with the equal rights of others, and if a person doesn’t like the direction the government is taking, they should rise up and abolish it. (Libertarian Platform, Section 3.7 and Statement of Principles). For example, Libertarians believe that drug usage, whether medicinally or recreationally, should not be a crime.  Nor do Libertarians believe in regulating drug usage. 

This Laissez-faire attitude, if implemented, could lead to some pretty scary consequences. Any responsible American can easily envision how a person on drugs can and often does forcibly interfere with the rights of others.  Doesn’t a child have a right to grow up in a safe environment?  How safe would that environment be if the parent’s mind is regularly altered by methamphetamine or heroine?  Without drug laws, regulations and child protective services, some children would certainly be at risk under the practice of the Libertarian philosophy. How many people use methamphetamine and heroine recreationally without becoming addicted?  It is said that after one experience with heroine, may people are addicted. If Libertarians employed their “hands off” approach, how would addicted people get access to rehabilitation? Is the answer to just let them figure it out on their own? I opine that this philosophy has not been well thought out, and is clearly dangerous if it were to be implemented.

After reading the entire platform, what does “moving public policy in a libertarian direction” actually mean for Americans?  If you don’t have the means to meet your basic human needs, well that is just too bad. If you are a poor pregnant woman who can’t afford to deliver your baby in a hospital, just give birth wherever you happen to be when the contractions start – women have been doing so for ages.

Libertarians would have surely poo-poo’ed Roosevelt’s New Deal, and all of those millions of people helped by the New Deal would have certainly starved to death. Feeding and clothing thousands of young men, teaching them self-efficacy, offering them an opportunity to learn skills, and providing for the families of the young men would not have happened. These young men would not have provided valuable services to the country, such as putting out forest fires, constructing power grids, planting thousands of acres of trees, creating a ski industry in States that otherwise had no industry, and improving national parks that we enjoy today. FDR’s brilliant program that significantly helped our country recover from the Depression would not have happened if Libertarians were a party in power at the time.

In theory, the Libertarian party has some really good ideas; self-determinism, limited government, natural rights, and a free-market, are all worth striving for. However, without considering other social factors, Libertarianism would lead to chaos, perhaps anarchy, and the poorer, weaker, less intelligent American’s would lose big. How can we all have freedom, if few are allowed to bully, and take advantage of the weak, as would surely occur if contract regulations ceased and further deregulation were to occur. It seems all very Darwinian to this author. The problem is we are not animals. We are humans, hence the term "humanity", the concept of which Libertarians miss entirely.

Would Libertarians have us abolish government entirely, give up our culture, move to the mountains and grow our own food and hunt for our subsistence?  Would this be better than the government we have now, which is admittedly flawed in that governmental bureaucracy is frustratingly slow sometimes. To this author, the Libertarian party seems to support abolishing all government accept civil defense. Libertarians’ answer to social problems in the country is voluntary associations.  How they will get the funding since taxes wouldn’t pay for it. . . is anyone’s guess. Donations, I suppose.

How is this party going to get wide support? How many of us are willing to give up parks, transportation safety regulations, food and drug safety regulations, and many other affectations of government in favor of virtual anarchy?  In my view, this party will never get the support it needs to elect anyone to congress. And what would an elected Libertarian do once there, dismantle the government for which it was elected to work with?  It’s nonsensical. Libertarianism is one of those philosophies that seems very attractive prima facie with its talk of freedom, but on closer analysis, simply not pragmatically sound, nor likely to work for the majority given the size of our country.  In researching this political party’s ideology, this author is reminded of the very important responsibility each American holds.  We must educate ourselves on the parties, platforms and politicians, and apply some critical thinking skills before we vote. 

---

[1]  www.lp.org/platform