The American Spectator

Geoff Brandt br> Quintana, Texas br> (yes, a veteran who voted for Dr. Ron Paul last month) /p>

John Tabin writes “If foreign policy remains the primary fault line in American politics, dovish libertarians may be bound to the left for the foreseeable future”.

The fault in Mr. Tabin’s fault line analysis is that anything fundamentally human is rational. It isn’t. People of all political persuasions, sexes, races, ethnicities, sexual orientations, ages, religions, socio-economic status, are overwhelmingly emotional, making virtually all of their decisions emotionally, but then retain the most infinitesimal remainder of conscience to hastily reverse engineer “objective” reasons for their out and out emotional decisions.

Once it is accepted that American political reality is emotional, not rational, the question them becomes what issue generates the most emotional reaction, and given the answer to that question, one can accurately predict individual conclusions and trends. I suggest the most emotional reaction in America today is triggered by any issue of sexual license, be it that of a woman to have sex with a man she does not want to have children with (thus the need for abortion), or that of a man to have sexual relations with another man (thus the need for laws postulating the equivalence of such associations with heterosexual ones), or of any man to do what his bloodstream testosterone suggests might be “fun.”

The real world consequences of non-sexual license, e.g., narcotics legalization, another one of the commandments on the libertarian stone tablets, are only hinted at by Mr. Tabin, see “If there’s one surefire way to make sure America never reforms its drug laws, it’s telling the public that step one in ‘drug reform’ would be to have taxpayers foot the bill for morphine clinics, needles, and the local addict’s relapses.” Thanks to the liberals that Mr. Tabin considers might be allies of libertarians, the tobacco industry pays for advertisements that advocate not using their product, because tobacco might actually result in clipping the three or four final and most Medicare expensive years off the tobacco user’s life. But libertarians insist that there is a real world where your local ShopRite will have shelves stocked with products previously supplied the year before by the Mob, which if used “as intended” will result in your immediate death, rather than some sad emphysema in your early 70s.

p>Honestly, Mr. Tabin is correct, libertarians and liberals have more common ground than libertarians and conservatives. But the reason is because conservatives understand that there is such a thing as sin, even if many, most and probably all conservatives are sinners. Libertarians and liberals, on the other hand, insist with a straight face that there is no such thing as sin, no such thing as societally determined (or divinely determined) right and wrong, and thus whatever emotionally pleases, is the way to go. br> — Frank Natoli br> Newton, New Jersey /p> p> The most vocal strain of modern Libertarianism has become more concerned with lifestyle liberty then traditional economic and political liberty. This strain of lifestyle Libertarianism is as much a product of the 1960s counterculture then an outgrowth of von Hayek and Friedman. You could say it is the fusion of Ayn Rand and Timothy Leary. Lifestyle Libertarians seem to be quite willing to sacrifice political and economic liberty so they can enjoy the triumvirate of drugs, sex and rock n’ roll. Ultimately, this disregard for fundamental liberty for the sake of living the libertine lifestyle is corrosive to true liberty. I would rather live in the “repressed” 1950s social climate and have meaningful freedom then sacrifice my economic and political liberty for the sake of a few passing carnal pleasures. br> —