Every so often, I write about what makes libertarianism special and different.
In the future, though, I think I’ll simply share this excellent cartoon.
By the way, I actually think the cartoon is a bit unfair to conservatives. Unless I’m missing something, the right-wing position on birth control is to resist subsidies and mandates. As I recently wrote, that’s the economically sound and libertarian point of view.
That being said, one of the most obvious distinctions between libertarians and conservatives is that the latter do sometimes favor laws restricting private behavior when there is no harm imposed on third parties. The misguided War on Drugs is a good example, as illustrated by this Gary Johnson speech, this video, and this AP story.
The libertarian message isn’t that drug use is good, but rather that prohibition is ineffective and that the net result of the drug war is bigger government and less freedom.
[…] P.P.S. You can learn more about libertarian self-identification here and here. […]
[…] all, our philosophy is based on the notion that we want government to be limited so it is less likely to reach into your wallet or your […]
Further evidence, if such were needed, that the libertarian stance is “I don’t understand politics and I wish it would stop”.
Similarly:
How regulations on buildings, cars, washing machines, light bulbs etc are wrong, whether from right or left wing ideology:
Even if they had to be targeted,
market competition or taxation policies are more relevant
(the latter can pay for price lowering subsidies on alternatives
as well as giving Govmt income – hello California),
– both policies not just keeping choice, but also being better at promoting innovation and saving more energy overall,
stimulated market competition being the best option
See Dunday com using Light Bulb Regulations as example
Allen Murdock — No liberal has suggested that women should be forced to use contraception.
No, liberals are asking that we all pay for someone else’s. And the conservative position is that an unborn child is still a human child — “unborn” is redundant. I understand that there was I time I did not exist; I understand there will be a time again when I do not. But I do not accept that I ever existed as something essentially different than what I am now.
If you do not believe that a human life commences with conception, as the majority of Western thought has agreed at least since the time of Hippocrates (cf. “Oath”) then it is incumbent on you to define when and why it begins later.
As for the “Drug War”: I am ambivalent, to be honest, but citing the failure of law enforcement to stop illegal activity is no argument. 5000 years of civilization and law have not stopped rapes, murders, or thefts. That is no reason to throw up our hands and say the laws should be abandoned.
yeta nother red herring and a ridiculous comment. Of course it is much better to waste billions on intercepting 10% of the drugs while empowering cartels to control whole countries. Perhaps we should banish alcohol again too. Look at the recent (8 year) history of Portugal for a clue.
“The misguided War on Drugs”
When your libertarian utopia is inaugurated, I want you to go right out and buy your children some crystal meth to celebrate.
The position of some conservatives with views of restricting ABORTION is that it involves a third party – the unborn child. As far as birth control goes that is by and large viewed as a personal or religious issue and one that the government has no business in much less using tax dollars on. This issue often gets confused much like the views on Stem Cell Research. Nobody in there right mind opposes Stem Cell Research or the use of stem cells for medical purpose. It’s the use of fetal stem cells derived from aborted fetuses that is the issue. Stem Cells come from many different tissues, not just fetus tissue.
This is a perfect example of how political cartoons do nothing to explain an argument.
The liberal position would be more one of ” Everyone that wants a puppy should be able to get one and if you can’t afford a puppy the government will force everybody else to subsidize your purchase of a puppy”
The conservative position would be closer to “I don’t like puppies. I would never own one. You can buy one if you like, but don’t force me to buy it for you or pay for the puppies food and medical care.”
[…] posts: Thoughts On The Contraception Dust-Up Why Libertarianism Is the Best Philosophy, as Demonstrated by a Cartoon Contraception: Insuring the Uninsurable Share this:ShareEmailPrintRedditFacebookDiggTags: Catholic, […]
[…] / Govt. Why Libertarianism Is the Best Philosophy, as Demonstrated by a Cartoon Putting Milton Friedman to the Test – Ideas Matter Harsanyi: Your absolute right to free […]
crisap444, I agree. I’m married to one of those “liberals” (in the old, socially caring form of the word) who is losing that battle. Just as I am being left behind in the apparent rush to elect another spend-thrift, RINO, big government statist. It isn’t easy being a Ludwig von Mises and Henry Hazlitt reading former Marine with a Libertarian mindset.
Reblogged this on The Conservative New Ager.
It is unfair to conservatives in general…however given the sweater-vest, my worst fears are that it is not unfair to its very specific target. (And it might be unfair to many liberals who would not use the power of the government to force things down people’s throats…but they seem to be on the losing side of the party at the moment).
The words liberal, intellectual and elite seldom belong in the same sentence. Most will not discuss public policy, the direction of society, or government in a factual, pragmatic way. They almost always prefer hyperbole, personal attacks, and misdirection (gun control, the budget, the constitution and the enumerate powers come to mind). When those techniques either fail or are unavailable they fall back on ginned up statistics and / or junk science (global warming, social engineering, along with gun control, and the budget come to mind).
Unfortunately today most of those who portray themselves as “conservatives” are not significantly different from their “progressive” cousins. They tend to use the same hyperbole, personal attacks and misdirection. The only difference is in the subject, manner, and extent to which they each wish to control our lives.
I see nothing “conservative” about conservative social engineering, deficit spending, intrusive government, or the other unconstitutional, overreaching meddling in private affairs. The idea that Obumma can mandate birth control for all, while Santordum would mandate no birth control AT ALL is ridiculous and DANGEROUS. Both support drug control and endless wars of intervention. Both support the idea that we can “nation build” in places where there is a 3000 year history of tyranny! (Look how well the “Arab Spring” has worked out for us.)
Apparently both sides feel that we the sheeple are too stupid notice the fences or to be responsible for our own lives.
After more than 60 years of breeding sheep they are mostly right.
Rather than proving that Libertarianism is the best philosophy, you have demonstrated that Libertarians don’t live in the real world.
The cartoon is unfair to conservatives? Maybe. But it completely misrepresents the liberal position as well. No liberal has suggested that women should be forced to use contraception.
Not only does the war on drugs waste resources and imprison people needlessly, it has elevated criminal gangs from control of neighborhoods to control of entire countries. Einstein’s definition of insanity was proven by Prohibition in the 20’s, but as with so many other governmental programs, we keep on doing the things that just don’t work. After all, it’s not their lives or money
The lib-prog appraoach is that if prohibition isn’t effective, and some faction of constitutients like it, the the government is going to use taxdollars to subsidize it.
If birth control were puppies, would Romney strap a diaphragm to the roof of his car?