Being a Libertarian makes sense
September 5th, 2007 - Posted by Alan Howard
When I discovered I was a Libertarian, everything made sense to me.
“The Libertarian creed rests upon one central axiom: that no man or group of men may aggress against the person or property of anyone else. This may be called the “nonaggression axiom.” “Aggression” is defined as the initiation of the use or threat of physical violence against the person or property of anyone else. Aggression is therefore synonymous with invasion.”
- For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto, by Murray N. Rothbard
I’ve always had the belief that we should all have the right to do whatever we want, as long as it does not interfere with the rights of others to do whatever they want. Common law has generally been supportive of this philosophy, but it’s changed over the past few decades (centuries?).
I believe that people should be punished for their actions, not for their thoughts. I believe that people are innocent until proven guilty. I hate how this world has become something where people are guilty - all of them - until proven innocent.
I strongly believe in the Libertarian creed, and I’m so very frustrated by the actions of those who go against it. It appears to me that the elite follow their own creed, which seems to be:
“I have the right to do as I please, while doing my very best to ensure that the common people lose those same rights, thus allowing me to do even more of what I please.”
I am absolutely unable to comprehend why people would choose to create and support a society that takes away their freedom, their independence, and their rights. It stuns me that people would support the removal of their freedom. For freedom to be made illegal which, realistically, it is, is absurd.
I live in an absurd world.
So what about you? Do you support freedom, independence, and individual rights, or do you support the idea of freedom being illegal?
Entry Filed under: Freedom
2 Responses to “Being a Libertarian makes sense”
Posted: Sep 13th, 2007 at
“Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative … Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having.” — Lord Justice Sedley (UK) in
Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions, 23 July 1999 (q.v.).
Posted: Sep 13th, 2007 at
Thanks Greg, that’s an excellent quote.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed