The Latest

THE LATEST

THE LATEST THINKING

THE LATEST THINKING

The opinions of THE LATEST’s guest contributors are their own.

Libertarianism and American Sovereignty

Robert Dimuro

Posted on July 14, 2019 14:50

3 users

If you strip a society of its government, you strip that society of its ability to safeguard the freedoms that are the basis of the Libertarian ideal.

Libertarianism is a unique political philosophy in one respect- its platform is based on the principle of individual liberty. In this sense, Libertarianism has bipartisan support, from its right-wing positions regarding taxation and regulations to its left-wing positions regarding social issues. Their zealous adherence to freedom makes it impossible for most Libertarians to support any mainstream Republican or Democratic candidate. However, in my opinion, Libertarians take the principle of individual liberty too far, which, in turn, makes it impossible for anyone in the political mainstream to support Libertarians.

One example of their taking freedom too far is when freedom tramples past our nation's sovereign borders. I'm not sure if an open border is an explicit part of the Libertarian platform, but it seems evident that Libertarian leadership tends to support the free flow of migrants in and out of America, based on the principle of "freedom of movement."

Freedom of movement is the justification for non-US citizens to enter our country illegally in search of a better life... or a life of crime, for that matter. Many Libertarians do not recognize the federal government's authority to secure our borders and think it should not be incumbent upon taxpayers to fund that endeavor. Moreover, many believe that there should be no federally owned property, implying that it's the right of citizens who own private property along national borders to defend (or not defend!) those borders at their own discretion.

One must stop and think: does this really make sense? If we live in a sovereign nation, citizens must agree to recognize that sovereignty within defined borders. Otherwise, how does one define a nation?

It seems to me that many Libertarians don't actually wish to live in a nation, which means they can't logically admire America. Based on the notion that ALL taxation is theft, they cannot be in favor of the commerce clause, the court system, or even our publicly funded military that is the ultimate safeguard of our freedoms. By definition, these viewpoints are meta-Constitutional, although Libertarian rhetoric would have you believe that Libertarians are the standard-bearers for Constitutional liberty.

Unless Libertarians want anarchy, they need to realize that having a federal government, even if small and limited, is a necessary component of any nation. This means that taxation and, YES, a base amount of collectivism are paramount to the preservation of America in accordance with what the founders had envisioned. If you strip a society of its government, you strip that society of its ability to safeguard the freedoms that are the basis of the Libertarian ideal.

In a future article, I will discuss certain problems with the privatization of the essential institutions I mentioned earlier. In any case, it's clear that the Libertarian vision is akin to our living in a utopian, Galt's Gulch-like society in which no central authority is needed. Libertarians should seriously consider whether or not this is or ever was possible.

Robert Dimuro

Posted on July 14, 2019 14:50

Comments

comments powered by Disqus
Source: Recent News

For years, left-wingers would contest my use of the term "open borders lobby" because, they sternly rebuked me, nooooobody...

THE LATEST THINKING

Video Site Tour

The Latest
The Latest

Subscribe to THE LATEST Newsletter.

The Latest
The Latest

Share this TLT through...

The Latest