A Libertarian Party Partisan Draws Her Line

in nonagression •  7 days ago

I am a hardcore Libertarian Party partisan. I love this Party with a crazy love. And I grieve when I see the absolutely stupid internecine battles that we use for blood sports. However, there is an equally bad over-correction: claiming that ALL "fighting" is bad. That is the baby that was thrown out that paves the way to hell - to mix a metaphor or two.

The Libertarian purity scales are usually as comical as finding a witch via comparison with a duck but usually is not always.

Where is the line? The Party is DIRECTIONAL towards its members and DESTINATIONAL in its hard-line philosophy. We all know the analogy. This is a liberty bus going north. I am by the side of the road with my thumb out. The bus stops, and I say, I am going to Some Place 100 Miles North of Here, can you give me a lift?

The driver says sure! I'm going that way. If you like That Place, I am going a bit farther up the road, and you can get off where you wish, but you are welcome to ride the whole way. We have only one rule- we are here helping each other get to our destinations. Please be courteous and don't try to hijack the bus to go in a different direction. If you think we need to stop and rest a while in a location, that's fine, but we are never going south. Occasionally there may be an obstruction on the road, and we will have to swing around it to the east or west, but that is a temporary sideways move to get us back on the road.

Are you good with that?

That is not a lot to ask. It is friendly and non-judgmental.

But it is a lot to ask that we passengers ignore the guy who keeps farting until we turn the bus around because he decided that there was a cute gal in that town he would like to spend some time with. He can get out and find another bus, and we will go our way in peace.

To connect the dots. It is NOT Libertarian to advocate MORE government and control. A Libertarian may do so, but in that specific area, he is not holding a Libertarian policy and cannot expect that to be suffered silently because the state is force and violence, and that cannot be ignored or coddled.

For instance, should a Libertarian horse trade gun rights? NO. That is violence. That is a rights violation. If YOU are not willing to go and take the gun from the young mother who needs protection and potentially use lethal force to get it, don't you DARE silently stand by while one of your tribe does it. That is immoral.

Don't tell me it's​ for the good of the Party. If you sell your principles for the Party, you have destroyed it, not the one who stands against violence.

I love the Party, but there are limits to what I will do. To channel the immortal sage Meat Loaf,

m0meatloaf_m_Yellow.jpg

I would do anything for love but I won't do that.

And I hope you won't either. But I've never shrank from standing alone.

There are necessary battles that are few and far between, and gun grabbers certainly fit that bill. So is anything that foundationally increases the power of the state without straining gnats and swallowing camels.

Here is where I stand, and where I invite you to join me. If any of my tribe is standing still or moving forward, I am there with you. Advocate going backwards by increasing the state, and you are no better than a common street thug, only with better clothes and a whiter smile.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!