Libertarianism: Difference between revisions

{{Wikipedia}}

=== Rights and consequentialism ===

== Libertarian policy ==

===Libertarian philosophy in the academy===

===Left-libertarians===

 

===Ayn Rand's Objectivist philosophy===

==Politics of libertarian parties==

 

== The libertarian movement ==

===Controversies among libertarians===

*[[Libertarian perspectives on capitalism]]: Most libertarians support [[deregulation]] and [[free trade]] because they believe that people should be able to start and grow [[businesses]], manufacture, transport, trade, buy, and sell with little to no interference from the government. Some may support efforts to limit private monopolies. Some libertarians like [[Milton Friedman]] prefer [[market reform]]s like [[Education voucher|school vouchers]] to the ''status quo'' while others like [[Lew Rockwell]] see such programs as a threat to private industry and as a covert means of expanding government, and instead would abolish tax-funded schools altogether.<ref>Rockwell, Llewellyn H. Jr. ''[http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/voucher2.html Vouchers: Another Name for Welfare]''</ref> There is also opposition by many libertarians to [[antitrust laws]] and laws and regulations against [[insider trading]], "[[price gouging]]".

*[[Libertarian perspectives on redistribution]]: Most libertarians oppose forced economic "redistribution" and any other form of government welfare because they consider forced redistribution a form of "legalized theft." However, some may support minimal, temporary public support.

*[[Libertarian perspectives on taxes]]: Some libertarians believe that logical consistency to fundamental libertarian maxims (non aggression, individual rights)<ref>The maxims are described in the introduction of this article. Tenet is a principle, belief, or doctrine generally held to be true.(Meraim Webster) I.e. it is generally held to be true that as a fundamental maxim all human interaction should be voluntary and consensual.</ref> allows no taxation at all,<ref>"The libertarian, if he is to be logically consistent, must urge zero crime, not a small amount of it. Any crime is anathema for the libertarian. Any government, no matter how “nice,” must therefore also be rejected by the libertarian." Walter Block, GOVERNMENTAL INEVITABILITY: REPLY TO HOLCOMBE, JOURNAL OF LIBERTARIAN STUDIES VOLUME 19, NO. 3 (SUMMER 2005): 71–93</ref> while proponents of limited government might support low taxes, arguing that a society with no taxation would have difficulty providing [[public good]]s such as [[crime prevention]]. ''See also: [[Minarchism]].''

* [[Libertarian perspectives on political alliances]]: Most libertarians ally politically with modern conservatives over economic issues and gun laws (but for a libertarian defense of gun control, see here [http://www.la-articles.org.uk/libcontrols.htm]). On many social issues, libertarians ally with modern left-wing politics. Foreign policy is a hotly debated issue among libertarians, because most libertarians oppose wars, against conservative wishes, but also oppose the [[United Nations]], against liberal wishes. Others ally with [[Isolationism|isolationist]], [[Religion|religious]] [[paleoconservatism|paleoconservatives]], despite sharp disagreement on economic and social issues. Others refuse to ally with any political party other than their own and will never vote for a mainstream candidate. Most voting libertarians typically will only vote for a candidate that is philosopically libertarian, a good example of which in the U.S. is congressman [[Ron Paul]] (TX-R-14). Those that choose to vote for whichever main party matches their goals and ideals are called small-l libertarians (l) or "philosophical libertarians" because they are more willing to compromise to advance individual liberty. In the [[2004 U.S. Presidential election]], a few "small-l libertarians" advocated [[Howard Dean]] for President in the primaries because of his belief in gun rights and his moderate approval of free trade, and their fear of John Kerry and George Bush as even worse political choices. Several philosophical libertarians voted for George W. Bush fearing John Kerry would be even less in favor of free trade than Bush; and others voted for Bush because of the Republican party's claim to be the party of smaller government.  A smaller minority of philosophical libertarians voted for John Kerry, mostly as a protest vote against Bush, because of Bush's failure to restrain federal spending. A greater number of philosophical libertarians either abstained from voting entirely (typically in their belief that the Libertarian Candidate for 2004 was poorly-chosen), or voted for the 2004 Libertarian Presidential Candidate, [[Michael Badnarik]], anyway, believing both major party choices in 2004 were opposed to fundamental Libertarian tenets.

* [[Libertarian perspectives on intellectual property]]: Some libertarians believe that property rights in ideas (and other intangibles) should be identical to property rights in physical goods, as they see both justified by natural rights. Others justify [[intellectual property]] for utilitarian reasons. They argue that intellectual property rights are required to maximize innovation. Still others believe that "intellectual property" is a euphemism for [[intellectual protectionism]] and [http://www.morethings.com/senate/2004/06/copyright-law-as-corporate-welfare.html should be abolished] altogether.  

* [[Libertarian perspectives on immigration]]: Libertarians of the Natural Law variety generally support freedom of movement, but other libertarians argue that open borders amount to legalized trespassing. The debate often centers on self-ownership of bodies and whether we have the freedom to hire anyone without the federal government's permission.  Other times, the debate centers on immigrants abusing tax-funded government resources. "Consequentialist libertarians" may decide the issue in terms of what is best for the economy. Ideally for a libertarian, there would be minimal government involvement in various social programs, thus virtually no increased tax burden of immigration.

* [[Libertarian perspectives on abortion]]: A controversy is the role of the state in regulating [[abortion]], if it is in fact unethical. In the United States, some on both sides of this debate agree that this should be settled by the several states instead of the national central government, thereby invalidating ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' on grounds that it was a centralizing decision by the national government violating traditional state self-police powers. American libertarians who are not states-rights advocates, on the other hand, prefer for the issue to be settled at whatever level of government will reach the best decision.  Although considered to be a minority of libertarians, a significant number of libertarians (including many in the [[Mises Institute]]) view abortion to be an initiation of force against the fetus and therefore wrong, while other libertarians view the fetus's early stages of development to be under the control of the female or individual(s) bearing responsibility for its development.  Some anarcho-capitalists, including [[Lew Rockwell]] and [[Joe Sobran]] oppose abortion and the centralizing Roe v. Wade decision.

* [[Libertarian perspectives on the death penalty]]: Some libertarians support the [[Capital punishment|death penalty]] on [[self-defense]] or [[retributive justice]] grounds. Others see it as an excessive abuse of state power.  Many consitutionalist libertarians disavow the death penalty for its irreversible nature, as well as its perceived conflict with the Bill of Rights' ban on "cruel and unusual punishment".

* [[Libertarian perspectives on foreign intervention]]: Most libertarians oppose and are suspicious of government intervention in the affairs of other countries, especially violent intervention. Others (such as those influenced by Objectivism) argue that intervention is not unethical when a foreign government is abusing the rights of its citizens but whether a nation should intervene depends on its own self-interest. Libertarians advocating foreign intervention are typically known as "Liberventionists".

* [[Libertarian perspectives on gay rights]]: Most libertarians feel that adults have a right to choose their own lifestyle or sexual preference, provided that such expression does not trample on the same freedom of other people to choose their own sexual preference or religious freedom. Yet, there has been some debate among libertarians as to how to respond to the issue homosexuality in armed forces and gay marriage.  The controversy arises virtually entirely from the current involvement of the State in heterosexual marriage.  The philosophically pure libertarian answer is to treat all marriage contracts as legal contracts only, and to require that the terms of the marriage are spelled out clearly in the contract, allowing any number of legal adults to marry under any conditions that are legally enforceable, thus ending the implicit government-endorsement of all marriage contracts, including heterosexual ones.  If the state no longer endorses only certain marriages as legitimate, there is no inequality, and gays, lesbians, polygamists, etc... can all draw up their own private legal contracts, just the same as heterosexuals could.  The controversy arises from the fact that the State assumes that heterosexuals who did not draw up pre-nuptual agreements entered into a commonly recognized Christian ritual union that entitles the united parties to the use of the State's legal system as a means of filing a record of their marriage and of resolving disputes.  This system is widely used by heterosexuals who have not prepared for the likelihood of divorce and later contractual dispute.  Although the system is currently thus flawed, many gays who wish to marry want the same ability to turn to the state in hopes that the same government assumptions of tax-funded contract protection that occasionally benefits heterosexuals. The dilemma for most libertarians arises from the fact that a currently unjust situation is popular.  Heterosexuals currently have tax-funded protection and the assumption of enforceable contract resolution for their marriage contracts.  Homosexuals often desire inclusion in this flawed system.  Libertarians then, are caught in the situation of trying to expand an unjust system to grant incorrectly-perceived benefits, or to deny certain parties membership within that unjust system.  Many libertarians advocate the concept that there can be no such thing as a just separation of people into differing status groups under the law, so the current definition of marriage must include all those who wish to marry, with the later goal of eliminating this increased role of government in marriage entirely.  It is thus the consistent view amongst all libertarians that the best resolution of inequalities under the law for gays would best be resolved by eliminating all state involvement in marriage (for heterosexuals, gays, polygamists, etc...), rendering every living human exactly equal under the law.

* [[Libertarian perspectives on inheritance]]: Libertarians may disagree over what to do in absence of a will or contract in the event of death, and over posthumous property rights.  In the event of a contract, the contract is enforced according to the property owner's wishes.  Typically, libertarians believe that any unwilled property goes to remaining living relatives, and ideally, none of the property goes to the government in such a case.  Many libertarians advocate the establishments of trusts to avoid taxation of property at the time of death.

* [[Libertarian perspectives on natural resources]]: Some libertarians, (such as [[Free-market environmentalism|free market environmentalists]] and [[objectivist philosophy|objectivists]]) believe that environmental damage is a result of [[tragedy of the commons|state ownership and mismanagement of natural resources]] and believe that private ownership of all natural resources will result in a better environment, as a private owner of property will have more incentive to ensure the longer term value of the property.  Others, such as [[Geolibertarianism|geolibertarians]], believe that such resources (especially land) cannot be considered property.

* [[Libertarian perspectives on animal rights]]: A small number of libertarians grant basic rights to animals (considering them sovereign individuals which therefore have the right not to be subjected to coercion), while others see animals as property, and think their owners are free to treat them as they wish.

== Criticism of libertarianism ==