How then would they have ended the war?
The war would have ended if or when (a) the Wehrmacht was defeated by the British, French, and/or Russians (possibly with weapons and ammunition we'd have been selling them the whole time); (b) when the Reich fell apart internally, as all massively stretched, conquering empires do; or (c) when, however unlikely as it might have been, the Germans undertook an attack upon or attempted to invade the United States.
As commented elsewhere, this is why Libertarians don't get elected[.]
Perhaps, but I'll never be offended by someone telling me that I follow the Constitution too closely and value freedom too greatly.
They refuse to let reality interfere with the purity of their principles.
Which reality are you speaking of? The one where American boys die for other governments far from home, or the one where I pay, financially and with my own freedom, for the freedom of strangers? (They're often mutually inextricable and yes, I have served in the military.)
Many...
If, indeed, "many" individuals with whom you've spoken expound the concept that you're citing below, I can assure you that they are anarchists, not Libertarians.
...take that purity. to the point where the state (if they allow such a thing)...
Again: anyone suggesting an abolition or elimination of government as a whole is not a Libertarian. These errors are merely humorous on SI, but you - or they - may want to tighten up those philosophical definitions somewhat. In or among the wrong crowd, they may prove rather embarrassing.
...cannot have even police and courts.
The Constitution provides for both, either explicitly or by deferring to the states; therefore, these are supported by Libertarians.
Citizens are supposed to hire private protection and privately pay judges to resolve disputes.
Those are both viable alternatives, if people so choose; neither are radical concepts either: arbitration and mediation are the primary conflict resolution channels in the securities industry, and all across this country private communities are trying out private security services in place of municipal police departments.
The Constitution, of course, tacitly recognizes that two (of the very, very few) things that governments can do - in particular, that they can do better than private concerns - include raising, training, and fielding an effective military force and running a court system. Anyone claiming that those would (or should) be prohibited may be a lot of things, and certainly may value freedom, but would be on the cavalier side to refer to themselves as Libertarians.
LPS5 |
