Category Archives: Libertarianism

Rand Paul wasn't a conventional Republican when he won a U.S. Senate seat in Kentucky, and he's not mapping out a predictable strategy as he ponders a 2016 bid for the White House.

Paul confirmed Friday that he will announce his intentions in April or May, and then he spent the day displaying an ideological and political balancing act.

"We have to be a bigger party," he told Alabama Republicans at a fundraising gala Friday evening. "I want to take that message across America. I've shown I'll go anywhere."

He takes with him the small-government libertarianism of his father, former congressman and failed presidential candidate Ron Paul. But the senator also mixes in frequent references to his "Christian faith" as he courts cultural conservatives who were wary of his father.

There's the usual blistering of President Barack Obama and his executive orders, but Paul reminds his partisan audiences that the expansion of presidential authority has spanned decades, through administrations of both major parties.

Paul calls for the conservative "boldness" of Ronald Reagan and offers GOP orthodoxy on tax and spending cuts, making him a tea party darling.

He talks tough on national defense, but also staged an actual Senate filibuster talking for hours on the chamber floor, rather than just using procedural paper delays to protest the American government's use of drones.

Meanwhile, he chides Republicans to reach into the cities for non-white votes that have eluded the GOP by particularly wide margins in Obama's two national victories. And Paul champions criminal-justice reform and plugs his work with New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, a black Democrat, on the issue.

It adds up to a politician who is difficult to put into a box.

"Maybe a different kind of Republican might be the kind of Republican that can win," Paul told reporters Friday in Kentucky.

Read the original post:
In Early White House Maneuvering, Paul Avoids Predictability

The logic is irresistible. What with its celebration of personal autonomy and private enterprise, its dependence on a rules-based system and its ability to generate instinctive suspicion of outsiders, I have long thought of driving as mere libertarianism in motion. Thats one reason Ronald Reagan was so fond of using it in his political metaphors.

And yet a funny thing has happened. The experience has actually turned me into something of a hippy, a loved-up citizen rather than a hyper-rational hater. Ive found talking to Taz, my instructor, therapeutic: his 10 siblings and four daughters seem like old friends already, even when he is screaming RELAX, bruvva! CALM your BEANS, my son! as we reverse- park into a bay in Wood Green.

Despite such commotion, being behind the wheel has struck me as a beautiful vantage point. Like Louis Armstrong, I see trees of green, red roses too, I see them bloom, for me and you. Like with cycling, I find driving helps me appreciate the beauty of our environment. Best of all, Ive found other drivers to be communicative and kind, albeit probably looking after their own interests when they see a learner driver.

All this is cheering. Theres just one drag, which is that I hate traffic so much it might stop me driving altogether.

I know everyone hates traffic. But I really, really cannot bear it. Traffic is like a huge grater scratching away at my soul. I feel like my whole life is a war against time, with a constant sense that there is so much to do. Traffic, even with the radio on, is dead time.

And these two sentiments surprise at the generosity of fellow drivers, and hatred of traffic combine to give me an idea. Its bonkers but should we think about abolishing traffic lights? If not all, then some at least?

I know anecdotal evidence is the worst kind but I cant help but make the comparison with India, whose roads I have spent ages on, including recently. Yes, there are 150,000 road deaths in India each year, half a million recorded accidents, and the new government is planning radical action.

But in many cities, the crazy traffic, with cows, rickshaws, mopeds, bikes, lorries and cars in constant, frenzied negotiation, just seems to work, like a highly adaptable organism. People pull off the most outlandish manoeuvres and constantly get away with it.

They do this, I think, because there is a presumption toward maximum communication which traffic lights (which Indians do have, at big junctions) censor. When we come to a traffic light, we all look at the lights one reason nearly half of personal injury accidents happen there.

What if we looked at each other instead? Sure, traffic lights send much clearer signals than the infinitely complex human face. But over time wed learn to trust each other.

Read more from the original source:
Amol Rajan: Its about time we abolished traffic lights in the capital

Sen. Rand Paul is reportedly set to announce his presidential campaign in April. And(timing!) his supporters are happily pointingto newQuinnipiac polls of three key swing states, which show for a change that a Republican is running neck-and-neck with Hillary Clinton.

That Republican, of course,is Paul.

Of particular interest are the results inColorado and Virginia, where Clinton narrowly leads Paul 43-41 percent and 44-42 percent, respectively within the margin of error. No other Republican is so close in the three states polled the third being Iowa. And that includes Jeb Bush, who is tied in Virginia but lags in the two other states.

A sampling of the Twitter analysis:

All the usual caveats of early polling, of course, apply here. This poll predicts nothing, but it does give a sense of *very early* views of the candidates.

And thoughit's a good picture for Paul, it's also not that surprising. Colorado and Virginia, after all,should be some of his better states.

The former is known as the birthplace of the American libertarian movement. And a 2009 study from George Mason University ranked it as the second most-libertarian state in the country when it cameto "personal and economic freedom."

And Virginia, while not renowned for its libertarian streak, per se, gave Ron Paul 40 percent of the vote in his 2012 primary match-up with Mitt Romney his best showing in any state. It's worth qualifying that they were the only two candidatesonVirginia's ballot (in contrast to other contests around that time) making Ron Paul the only so-called non-Romney option and likely inflating his total at least somewhat. But 40 percent for a Paul is still 40 percent for a Paul.

And there's plenty of evidence of Virginia moving more toward libertarianism, up to and including Robert Sarvis, who had the third-best showing ever for a libertarian gubernatorial candidate in Virginia's 2013 governor's race.

None of this, we would emphasize, is to diminish Paul's case for electability. In fact, it's part and parcel of it. That's because both of these states and other more libertarian stateslike Nevada and New Hampshire arguably the most libertarian state in the country just happen to beswing states in 2016. And Republicans would love to have a candidate who runs well in these states. Paul could be that guy, at least in theory.

Read the original here:
The Fix: Is Rand Paul the GOPs Great Libertarian Hope against Clinton? Yes and no.

Jeffrey Tucker:

Stephan Kinsella, it's a pleasure to have you here today. Welcome.

Thank you. It's good to be here.

We're going to talk about your class for the Mises Academy, on intellectual property.

Yes, I'm looking forward to it. We've been planning it for quite a while, as you know. I think the first course will be on November 1st for six weeks and then we'll take a week off. We'll have time to go in depth into many of the issues about intellectual property and its relationship to libertarianism, economic theory, and various other areas.

Why is this an important issue?

Well, it's becoming a more and more important issue as we've seen in our circles and as seen on the internet. Daily, we see horror stories and crazy examples of abuses of IP. People are starting to wonder if these are really abuses of IP or if there's something wrong with IP itself.

In the past, free-market economists and libertarians have sort of given this issue a pass. They took it for granted. It's been in a corner all by itself. Now people are wondering, and as we start looking more closely at it, we can see that a lot of the assumptions about IP have been wrong.

It's striking you mention the history of thought here and why this issue is sort of crystallizing in our time, especially with your pioneering monograph on that subject, Against Intellectual Property.

It's generally true, isn't it, that that theoretical element of economics or law or whatever catches up when the practical need for that new theory comes along. For example, the theory of money and credit was made necessary by the advent of central banking.

See original here:
Understanding IP: An Interview with Stephan Kinsella

Cato #39;s David Boaz Talks Politics, History, and His Path to Libertarianism
"I think the general idea of #39;it #39;s your life you get to run it the way you want to #39; is an appealing aspect of libertarianism," says David Boaz executive vice...

By: ReasonTV

Continue reading here:
Cato's David Boaz Talks Politics, History, and His Path to Libertarianism - Video

Excursions, Ep. 29: Neoconservatism Versus Libertarianism, Part 2
George H. Smith tells the story of how a disagreement with Roy Childs over the ideas of Irving Kristol resulted in a serious argument. George H. Smith begins his series on neoconservatism...

By: Libertarianism.org

See original here:
Excursions, Ep. 29: Neoconservatism Versus Libertarianism, Part 2 - Video

Over his 33 years at Cato and through his earlier activities in the libertarian policy sphere, Catos Executive Vice PresidentDavid Boazhas played a key role in the development of both the Cato Institute and the libertarian movement at large; he even wrote the Encyclopedia Britannica entry on libertarianism!

On Tuesday, in conjunction with the release of his new book, The Libertarian Mind: A Manifesto for Freedom (which, incidentally, sold out on Amazon within hours), Boaz took to Reddits iAMA forum to discuss libertarianism, his book, and the burgoening libertarian moment,inviting Redditors of all ilks to ask him anything.

During the hour long Q&A session, Boaz tackled a wide-array of questions, weighing in on everything from the drug warandabortionto effective strategies for social change and the efficacy of libertarian governance.Each one of his responses ignitedimpassioned debates amongst the forums diverse audience as commenters from all sides of the political spectrum hashed out the ideas of liberty.

The resulting discussion is a fascinating one, very much worth your attention. Check out the Reddit discussion and Boazs book, and then continue the conversation on Twitter using #LibertarianMind.

Read the rest here:
You asked Cato EVP David Boaz anything. Heres what happened.

An ad-hominem rant by "Lazarus Long", based on the presumption that his opponents use the same attack tactics he does. His most glaring double-speak is that he claims the arguments are strawmen, but he defends them anyway instead of disclaiming them.

My normal policy is not to engage in ad-hominem pissing matches with libertarians, but Lazarus Long has been impugning me for quite a while now. So, I'd like to set the following straight, since it illustrates his debate style. Also, this can serve as an example of how argument with him can mire you endlessly, even when he is grossly wrong.

In his FAS , he writes: Incidentally, even though this article was not written at the time of Huben's e-mail to me, he stated "I'm hardly upset by your "refutation" or any of the other rather pathetic attempts (and yours is indeed the weakest by far.)" In other words... although the refutation had not been written, Huben miraculously claims that it is the weakest by far.

In an ad-hominem web page titled Who is Mike Huben , he writes: An example of his obsession, and lack of intellectual integrity can be seen by a visit to his "Critique of Libertarianism" site. He listed a link to my critique of his Non-Libertarian FAQ, before the critique had been written, along with a description of what was contained in the critique. A most impressive stunt, considering that the critique, not only was not on this site at the time, but hadn't been written.

Now, I'm not known for my psychic powers: how could I have known about his document to criticize it or create a link to it?

Very simple. He had posted it (or an early version) as Huben's FAS (Frequently Asserted Strawmen). in talk.politics.libertarian July 2, 1996. He wrote: This article will appear in full form on my webpage as http://vaxxine.com/rational/huben-bs-fas.htm within the next few weeks. I criticized his post by email, and made a link to the URL he had announced. No magic involved: I was just responding to the information he made publicly available. I'd like to know how he construes this as "obsession, and lack of intellectual integrity".

Most of his attacks and his FAS can be similarly handled. However, responding to them just gives him more material to similarly misuse. He likes to misinterpret non-response as his own triumph over the cowardly, but I trust most readers can see that he's a legend in his own mind.

[4/13/99: "Prince Lazarus", age 67, given name Howard Turney, has been hit with an SEC restraining order for his New Utopia internet scam.]

Visit link:
Critiques Of Libertarianism: All links. - http://www.TheWorld.com ...

Some people think libertarians only care about taxes and regulations. But I was asked not long ago, whats the most important libertarian accomplishment in history? I said, the abolition of slavery.

The greatest libertarian crusade in history was the effort to abolish chattel slavery, culminating in the nineteenth-century abolitionist movement and the heroic Underground Railroad. Its no accident that abolitionism emerged out of the ferment of the Industrial Revolution and the American Revolution.

How could Americans proclaim that all men are created equal endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, without noticing that they themselves were holding other men and women in bondage? They could not, of course. The ideas of the American Revolution individualism, natural rights and free markets led logically to agitation for the extension of civil and political rights to those who had been excluded from liberty, as they were from power notably slaves, serfs and women. As the great English scholar Samuel Johnsonwrote in 1775, How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of Negroes?

The worlds first antislavery society was founded in Philadelphia that same year. Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, yet he included a passionate condemnation of slavery in his draft of the Declaration of Independence the following year: [King George] has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him. The Continental Congress deleted that passage, but Americans lived uneasily with the obvious contradiction between their commitment to individual rights and the institution of slavery.

Racism is an age-old problem, but it clearly clashes with the universal ethics of libertarianism and the equal natural rights of all men and women.

As the idea of liberty spread, slavery and serfdom came under attack throughout the Western world. During the British debate over the idea of compensating slaveholders for the loss of their property, the libertarian Benjamin Pearsonrepliedthat he had thought it was the slaves who should have been compensated.

In the United States, the abolitionist movement was naturally led by libertarians. Leading abolitionists called slavery man stealing, in that it sought to deny self-ownership and steal a mans very self. Their arguments paralleled those of John Locke and the libertarian agitators known as the Levellers. William Lloyd Garrison wrote that his goal was not just the abolition of slavery but the emancipation of our whole race from the dominion of man, from the thraldom of self, from the government of brute force.

Frederick Douglass likewise made his arguments for abolitionin the terms of classical liberalism and libertarianism: self-ownership and natural rights. After the Civil War, he continued his fight for equal freedom, campaigning against Southern states efforts to avoid following the new constitutional amendments. And he applied his belief in liberty and equal rights universally: He backed womens suffrage, saying we hold woman to be justly entitled to all we claim for man. He defended Chinese immigrants, pointing out that there are no rights of race superior to the rights of humanity. In Great Britain he joined campaigns for free trade and Irish freedom.

Just as a better understanding of natural rights was developed during the American struggle against specific injustices suffered by the colonies, the feminist and abolitionist Angelina Grimknoted in an 1837 letter, I have found the Anti-Slavery cause to be the high school of morals in our land the school in which human rights are more fully investigated, and better understood and taught, than in any other.

Racism is an age-old problem, but it clearly clashes with the universal ethics of libertarianism and the equal natural rights of all men and women. As Ayn Rand pointed out in her 1963 essay Racism,

Read more from the original source:
Black History Is American History

A Short Introduction to Libertarianism: The Libertarian Mind with David Boaz
Libertarianismthe philosophy of personal and economic freedomhas deep roots in Western civilization and in American history, and it #39;s growing stronger. Two long wars, chronic deficits,...

By: Libertarianism.org

Continued here:
A Short Introduction to Libertarianism: The Libertarian Mind with David Boaz - Video