Dave >freedom, reason, and individualism.
Who can argue with that? But wait.......
Here's a "libertarian" piece which is of considerable interest.
antiwar.com
>>>That is why, today, it is astonishing to hear some alleged "libertarians" proclaim their support for George W. Bush's perpetual "war on terrorism." Even more astonishing is the unusual lengths they will go to rationalize their own betrayal and denial of their heritage.
There is no place in the libertarian movement for the War Party and its minions. The Libertarian Party must take decisive action against any "Libertarian" candidate or spokesperson who endorses this war. Equivocation on this question is equally impermissible. Nor do we want any kind of a "debate." <<<
So, it is clear that when a "libertarian" uses his reason, his freedom and his individualism to support his President, in other words something which Raimondo or the Libertarian Party doesn't like, he is no longer a "libertarian".
This example highlights, in fact, the very contradiction which Ayn Rand couldn't deal with. When her married lover decided to break off their affair against her wishes she went beserk. Despite her professed philosophy of freedom etc, she did not and could not respect his freedom, his reason or his individualism to do as he pleased. All she was concerned about was herself.
Interestingly, Raimondo refers to the inspiration of Ayn Rand on "libertarianism":
>>>Brought up on National Review, weaned by Frank S. Meyer's "fusionism" that merged the libertarian's love of freedom with the conservative's awareness of human limitations, inspired by the novels of Ayn Rand, and activated by the crisis of the country – a country torn by a merciless, immoral war, and with the threat of the draft hanging over our heads – we had a vision of the future that was as simplistic as it was charming: we were going to change the world.<<<
No-one can argue that he was, indeed, inspired by Ayn Rand. |
