Question #3: Why Write about Libertarians and Gary Johnson?

So far, more than 40% of the posts to Selfish Citizenship have been tied to either Libertarians or Gary Johnson, so the following question is relevant:

Why are you writing so much about Libertarians and Gary Johnson?

There are two reasons: (1) they are not criticized enough, and (2) they are important.

Most of what is written about Libertarians and Gary Johnson is by fanboys.  For the most part, the mainstream media ignores them and gives them no serious consideration.  In contrast, I think that Libertarians merit substantial criticism for amongst other things:

  1. being ideologically incoherent as evident when their “ideas” are concretized to policy,
  2. being ignorant of history and politics,
  3. having an anti-American foreign policy,
  4. being apologists for terrorists,
  5. embracing neo-confederates, anarchists, and other unsavories, and
  6. being opposed to the government’s legitimate role in protecting individual rights through objective law.

After all the bad things that I write about them, how can I say that they are important?  I mean important like cancer…not good, but an affliction that should not be ignored.  As I have explained previously, the Libertarian Party is a dead end of wasted effort.

Unfortunately, in their ignorance, too many young people waste their thoughts and efforts on the Libertarian Party.  Further, as the Libertarian Party espouses packaged deals, these youthfully ignorant followers fail to distinguish the valuable from the dangerous aspect of Libertarian rhetoric.  As the purpose of this blog is educational, its mission includes providing a corrective to the Libertarian Party’s misinformation campaign directed at students.

Extra Points

Below are some relevant quotes, via Lexicon:

For the record…I disapprove of, disagree with and have no connection with, the latest aberration of some conservatives, the so-called ‘hippies of the right,’ who attempt to snare the younger or more careless ones of my readers by claiming simultaneously to be followers of my philosophy and advocates of anarchism. Anyone offering such a combination confesses his inability to understand either. 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, “Brief Summary,” The Objectivist, September 1971]

Above all, do not join the wrong ideological groups or movements, in order to ‘do something.’ By ‘ideological’ (in this context), I mean groups or movements proclaiming some vaguely generalized, undefined (and, usually, contradictory) political goals. (E.g., the Conservative Party, which subordinates reason to faith, and substitutes theocracy for capitalism; or the ‘libertarian’ hippies, who subordinate reason to whims, and substitute anarchism for capitalism.)

To join such groups means to reverse the philosophical hierarchy and to sell out fundamental principles for the sake of some superficial political action which is bound to fail. It means that you help the defeat of your ideas and the victory of your enemies.  [Ayn Rand, “What Can One Do?” Philosophy: Who Needs It]

In the philosophical battle for a free society, the one crucial connection to be upheld is that between capitalism and reason. The religious conservatives are seeking to tie capitalism to mysticism; the ‘libertarians’ are tying capitalism to the whim-worshipping subjectivism and chaos of anarchy. To cooperate with either group is to betray capitalism, reason, and one’s own future. [Harry Binswanger, “Q & A Department: Anarchism,” The Objectivist Forum, Aug. 1981, 12]

Also, Peter Schwartz has written pointedly on the Libertarian error:

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…Subjectivism, amoralism and anarchism are not merely present in certain “wings” of the Libertarian movement; they are integral to it…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. If the Libertarian movement were ever to come to power, widespread death would be the consequence.  [Peter Schwartz, “On Moral Sanction,” The Intellectual Activist, vol. V, num. 1]

Schwartz’s essay “Libertarianism: The Perversion of Liberty” in the Voice of Reason is highly recommended.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Questions, Quotes and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Question #3: Why Write about Libertarians and Gary Johnson?

  1. Pingback: TeaParty.nu – Left is Not Right at the Tea Party

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s