You're Libertarian, in every one of your positions, except one.
When the Big Government BorrowAndSpenders do their concentration camps and Patriot Acts, you make a tactical alliance with the Peace Party.
The problem with the Libertarians is, their ideas have already been tried, and few people liked the results. Little Government, with Property given free rein, is what the U.S. had before the Progressive Republicans, in the late 1800s. The problem is, complex societies require complex control structures. That means Big Something. The choice is Big Government, or Big Business, running things. Or chaos. By advocating Little Government, you are (without meaning to), advocating a return to 19th Century Robber Baron Capitalism. Taking power away from Big Government, simply means that the Intels and Enrons run the planet. The freedom you want, and that you see threatened by Big Government, will elude you.
Already, there are no more than 5 governments (out of 200 nominally independant nation-states), that can negotiate on a equal footing with Big Business. The U.S., the EU, Japan, China, India. The Europeans recognize that even France and Germany are too small, and only a pan-European entity can take on monsters like Microsoft and Monsanto, with any hope of ameliorating their predations.
The one exception to your otherwise consistent Libertarianism, is your NewUN idea, which I consider your best idea. A global economy, and the spread of WMD, and global warming, and global diseases (from SARS to mad cows to HIV), and a list of other pressing problems, requires a global government to address them. Nation-states, with their bloody tribalism, simply have no solution to a growing list of problems. They are flailing about, ineffectually. |
