About Me

I Am A Libertarian

Not the angry, disillusioned type that rants against local property taxes being used to pay for our volunteer fire department. Not the type that advocates revolution, thinking that a completely new government ‘system’ will solve anything, because government is simply made up of ordinary flawed, biased and self-absorbed people like myself.

The way I see it, the problem in any system arises when certain people begin to believe that they have more wisdom, intelligence, and objectivity than their neighbors and therefore have the right to coerce others to do what they want.

Coercion of any sort can be justified on this basis: That a small number of people understand what is best for each and every other person, and as such are justified in using force to bring about the compliance of their neighbors to further their plans.

Government is dangerously unique in that it has something that no corporation or individual has: It can use force and violence to coerce you and I to consume their products. As such, free people insist on stringent limitations on the power of government. They recognize that all of human history demonstrates that government uses power chiefly to preserve and enhance its power, and always does so at the expense of the individual.

It also appears to be increasingly evident to many that government solutions to problems virtually always make the problem worse, or at the very best provide a temporary fix at outrageous cost. History is replete with examples of government impeding individual innovation, invention, entrepreneurship and enterprise. It is likewise peppered with examples of unregulated enterprise flourishing and bringing immense benefit to every individual (ie. The Internet, upon which you, dear reader, are currently asurf).

Another serious danger inherent in all government is that as it grows, it inevitably moves away from treating individuals in society as free equals, and towards grouping people into identifiable groups.

Once group identity is culturally and politically enshrined, it’s a simple thing for individual people who aspire to power over others to identify special interest voting groups in their riding, promise them benefits if elected, and thus garner the support to take honestly earned resources from one group by force and pay off their support groups.

Thus, a successful government (one that wishes to expand it's power and influence) benefits from enhancing, fuelling and expanding class antagonism, and it does so by exploiting even the smallest variables of economics, race or social identity.

The lifeblood of government is taxation. Taxation always involves forcibly separating citizens from their honestly earned money (if it’s not honestly earned, it’s usually far from government hands).

Which raises a few questions: If it is wrong for you to use force and violence to make your neighbors comply with your version of what is best for you, isn't is just as wrong to demand someone else step up and do that dirty work for you? (and make no mistake - every appeal of 'best for society' is actually 'best for society the way I see it and the way I want it.')

As such, here are the basic principles of libertarianism:

1. Each individual has the right to his or her own life, and this right is the source of all other rights.

2. Property rights are essential to the maintenance of those rights.

3. In order that these rights be respected, it is essential that no individual or group initiate the use of force or fraud against any other.

4. In order to bar the use of force or fraud from social relationships and to place the use of retaliatory force under objective control, human society requires an institution charged with the task of protecting individual rights under an objective code of rules. This is the basic task, and the only moral justification for, government.

5. The only proper functions of government, whose powers must be constitutionally limited are as follows: settling, according to objective laws, disputes among individuals, where private, voluntary arbitration has failed; providing protection from criminals; providing protection from foreign invaders.

6. As a consequence of all the above, every individual -- as long as he or she respects the rights of others -- has the right to live as he or she alone sees fit, as a free trader in a free market.

Libertarianism asserts that the key to accepting responsibility for my life is to accept the fact that my choices, every one of them, are leading me inexorably to either success or failure, however I define those terms.

I Am A Christian

Jesus of Nazareth is the most fascinating figure in all of human history. If one accepts his biographies to be factual (which not everyone does, and they are entitled to their views just as I am entitled to mine), Jesus was perhaps the ultimate libertarian example.

Jesus simply said "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if any man hears my voice, and opens the door, I will come in." Jesus never forces his way into a human heart – he enters by invitation only. That is what Christianity is all about.

Individuals become Christians voluntarily by accepting Jesus and their Lord and Savior, and ONLY individuals can become Christian. There is no such thing as a “Christian nation” or a “Christian government”. Jesus' mission was not to force us to stop sinning, but to show us the way to a right relationship with God, something that always and only comes as a result of individual choice.

Contrast Jesus' methods with those of government: The common denominator in all government activity is the use of force. Government either forces you to do things, forces you not to do things, or forces you to pay for things. If Jesus never used force to accomplish His ends, then who are Christians to initiate force, especially in the name of God?

There is no Biblical promise of some utopian society that we humans will create on earth without poverty, racism, drugs, illiteracy, or any of a host of other social ills, much less that secular government can bring about such a society. And yet every day, politicians (and preachers) ask for greater government efforts toward eradicating these problems.

Read the gospels (Go ahead, this will still be here when you get back) and you’ll find, among other things, that:

* Jesus’ very life began with an act of defiance to government, and would later end in defiance to government.

* Jesus was extremely opposed to any correlation between personal faith and political power. Political rulers are always viewed negatively (Pilate, Herod, Pharisees), the words “sinner” and “tax collector” are used almost interchangeably.

* Class distinctions that lump people into identifiable religious, social or economic groups are roundly condemned.

* When confronted with the sins of people, Jesus simply forgave and reminded them that their choices would lead them -- and only them -- inexorably to the ultimate eternal consequences of their choices, whether good or evil.

* When Jesus was offered political control over the world, (Lk 4, Matt 4, Mk 1) he refused and drew a strong line between government and God.

* Human greatness always comes as a result of voluntary service to others, never through forced altruism.

* The only incident where Jesus used physical violence (Matt 21), he grabbed a homemade weapon to drive out “thieves” who were using fraud to deprive people of property.

* Jesus taught in Mark 7 that what a person eats, smokes, drinks or consumes isn’t what defiles them; but rather what comes out of the human heart in the form of a selfish desire to control, exploit, defraud and manipulate other people. Perhaps that ought to inform our opinion about the War On (Some) Drugs.

* And other observations are even more intriguing: While he knew some of his most beloved followers walked around armed, Jesus only chastised them for the illegitimate initiation of the use of force, never for simply being prepared to use force in defense of their person (Peter in the Garden of Gethsemane).

* And perhaps most revealingly, it is Christ’s own golden rule “whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them” that encapsulates the very essence of libertarian philosophy.

Would Jesus have voted Libertarian? I doubt it. I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t have voted at all.

But having thought about this for almost 25 years, I’m confident that of all possible government models, he would have gravitated towards the one with the minimum amount of coercion, the fewest religious overtones, the least number of tax collectors and the greatest emphasis on personal liberty and responsibility.