The “LOONEYTARIANS”


5/23/98 4:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time


While going through dejanews last night, I saw a post on libertarianisn authored by a guy indetifying himself as Rack Jite (jite@ix.netcom.com) 2 years ago which he posted on the Newsgroups:

talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.libertarian.

Would the libertarians who post on here please comment on what he had to say about the Libertarian Party?

This is what he typed:

LOONEYTARIANS

“Squeeze a Libertarian and most of what you get is zit juice and gun oil.”

I find Libertarians the most selfish people on this Earth. They care about nothing at all but their money, their guns and their absolute right to their money and their guns. They care not one lick about society or anyone in it, proved conclusively by their incessant screaming not about less taxes, but no taxes. No personal income taxes whatsoever is at the top of their party platform. My speech on this issue is real short: If you don’t want to pay taxes get the heck out of here pal - go to Bosnia, Somalia, or Beirut where your ideas are a reality rather than just your pipe dreams.

Second on their platform is the full legalization of all drugs including cocaine. The numbers of people who would fall into this snowheap would overwhelm every city and town in this country to an extent never before experienced. Within months there would be literally millions of kids and screwed up nitwits perceiving existence only as where and when their next line was coming from. Ten’s of millions more would be buying and trying cocaine within weeks; the hopeless lower class, the bored middle class, the college students, the sometime partiers, and horny Dudes using it to get laid. Adding another 10% addiction/dependency rate to the millions of afore mentioned kids and nitwits. This would be the beginning of what the Libertarians are after, the destruction of society and overthrow of the United States Government by handgun and assault rifle.

Third on the Looneytarian platform is an intense overwhelming gunwaving that makes the NRA look like a gun control organization. My God, these people are barrelheads from Hell. They want full automatic weapons in every hand at all times with hand grenades, claymores and rocket launchers strapped to their coveralls and .50 caliber machine guns mounted on every car.

The leader of the Libertarian Party in the 80’s and who was instrumental in making it America’s Third Party (also their first Presidential candidate) was Ron Paul. A congressman from Freeport, Texas and an adamant unyielding Pro-Lifer. In the Spring of 88’ when Pat Robertson lost the Michigan primary and was knocked out of the presidential run, an estimated 200,000 Right-wing Fundamentalist Robertson followers joined the Libertarian Party.

I watched the 88’ Looneytarian Convention on CSPAN in February of 89’ (I guess they didn’t want to compete with real conventions before the election).

Above all, they presented themselves as lunatic gun crazies looking more like a Biker convention where each Harley owner was required to bring one nerd each. Watching them purposely leave blank the platform statement on abortion is when I finally began to understand. My God, besides the death penalty, there is no greater government intrusion in this country than forcing women to have children they do not want. I guess denying women the liberty to choose to have an abortion is what freedom really means to a “Libertarian.”

Also keep in mind that their two greatest heroes today are David Koresh, an insane cop-killing rapist, child molester and arms dealer who said he was God, and Randy Weaver, a cop-killing sawed off shotgun seller associated with the Aryan Nations.

The attraction to Weaver is not only the guns, but be sure to understand that the Libertarian Party is against all Civil Rights legislation and adheres completely with David Duke, the KKK and the Aryan Nations on legislation concerning race. A few years back in my modem travels I happened upon the National Libertarian Echo, I asked this question: “How do you rationalize “libertarian” to your leader being Pro Life and the influx of a quarter of your membership from Pro-Life Pat Robertson Fundamentalists?” I received the answer the following day through my local Sysop who informed me my message had been deleted and I was banned from the system. Banned I might add, faster than I had ever been banned from any system in 10 years (including Christian Fundamentalist and NAZI/Aryan boards).

If you wish to understand what Libertarians want and are about, just go down to your local movie rental house and grab up a couple MAD MAX movies. There it is. And please, do not confuse “Libertarian” with “Civil” libertarian”.

If you have that streak in your make send $25 to join the ACLU.




Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 5/23/98 10:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: CheffJeff Message-id: <1998052314443900.KAA04668@ladder03.news.aol.com>

Dedleedave asked us:

>

Most of it is not worthy of comment. Little said by him is factual (Ron Paul our first Presidential candidate, eg.), and what is factual is linked to other facts to create dishonest conclusions. One example of this:

>

I mean, someone who spouts non-sequiturs such as these is pretty laughable, isn’t he? He’s wasted enough of my time already. Dedleedave, you’re wise enough to see through this; you don’t need us to think for you.

Jeff, proud to be considered looney by a shallow thinker like Rack Jite







Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 5/23/98 11:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: GJWigginto Message-id: <1998052315482600.LAA09991@ladder03.news.aol.com>

>

The guy has no idea what he’s talking about. The underlying philosophy is too complex to explore decently on a chat board.

If you have interest in exploring the intellectual origins of Libertarianism, Dead Economists Society (http://cac.psu.edu/%7Ejdm114/) is one place to start. Charles Murray, in “What It Means To Be A Libertarian” gives a nice, though lite overview of what a free and civil society might look like, with an excellent bibliography appended. David Boaz, in “Libertarianism: A Primer” explores the whys. His “The Libertarian Reader: Classic & Contemporary Writings From Lao-Tzu to Milton Friedman” has excerpts from a wide range of classically liberal thinkers.

The bad news about the Libertarian Party is that few will have the interest, time, or ability to figure out what it’s all about.

The good news is that libertarian thought owns the top of the information food chain. I’ve noticed no small number of heavyweights concurring that Friederich Hayek is the dominant intellectual force of the latter part of this century. This thinking will eventually trickle down, though as weak beer, but it’ll probably take at least one generation.



George




Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 5/25/98 3:59 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: VCash29827 Message-id: <1998052507595200.DAA21185@ladder03.news.aol.com>

>

I have found that alot of people, myself included, had preconceived notions as to what the LP is all about, and sometimes those notions are quite erroneous. Someone must be awfully afraid of the LP to print such obvious lies and misrepresentations.

I usually invite them to this board, or tell them to check for themselves, there are plenty of LP sites on the web, Vicki




Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 6/15/98 12:56 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: GuntersDX Message-id: <1998061504561000.AAA03490@ladder01.news.aol.com>

I would say so far the only Libertarian that was worth voting for is Ron Paul, now a Republican congressman who sticks with a basic libertarian stand and most importantly, he is pro-life.

The biggest mistake the libertarians ever made was allowing 1996 Presidential candidate, Harry Browne, to be a guest on Art Bell’s talk show. This was the time when Art Bell announced on his show that he’s joining the Libertarian Party. A big mistake because all he likes to talk about is UFOs and supposively reported sightings of these flying objects. This only makes us look like crackpots.

Jacob Hornberger plans to run for President in 2000 and he is head of the Future of Freedom Foundation, which publishes a monthly booklet called Freedom Daily. He’s a more preferable candidate than Harry Browne and who claims that he won’t compromise libertarian principles.

He also plans to not waste time appearing on talk shows like Harry Browne has.

I have a little problem with the LP platform myself. I’m not sure I would go along with the legalization of illegal drugs such as marijuana or cocaine.

The only thing hemp is good for is for making clothing and making paper which would save the cutting of live trees. It’s certainly not good for smoking and this medical stuff is not all some libertarians are after. It’s so that these drugs can used recreationally like booze or cigarettes. And what is the LP stand on abortion. I’m pro-life and always will be even if the LP’s stand is “pro-choice” or pro-killing the baby before it’s born. If it is “pro-choice”, then we are no more than a carbon copy of the Democratic Party.

Abolish the income tax and the IRS? Fine. But, what is our solution. Excise taxes. Value-Added taxes. A National sales tax. What? Harry Browne says nothing will be replaced. What? How can it be? We are a big country and it is not like that small piece of land covering the eastern seaboard our founding fathers fought for to win freedom when only an excise tax was a solution to their problems. Okay. The Income tax is illiminated. Does the federal government now pass the tax onto the states?

We could have more people aboard, but our pro-hemp crowd scares them away along with our inept ways of not offering solutions when we abolish the income tax.

Tim Gunter GuntersDX







Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 6/15/98 6:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: TMA68 Message-id: <1998061510011301.GAA17837@ladder01.news.aol.com>

< I’m not sure I would go along with the legalization of illegal drugs such as marijuana or cocaine. >> -- Guntersdx

In other words, you’re not sure if you go along with the notion that peaceful adults have the right to control their own bodies without having to ask government for permission first.

< The only thing hemp is good for is for making clothing and making paper which would save the cutting of live trees. It’s certainly not good for smoking and this medical stuff is not all some libertarians are after. >>

First, who are you to tell other people whether or not something is “good” for smoking? Isn’t that for the individual to decide? Second, do you honestly think the government has the right to lock up or in any way harass someone for possessing or selling a plant? If so, then it is hypocritical at best to say you support individual liberty.

< It’s so that these drugs can used recreationally like booze or cigarettes. >>

And we certainly can’t have consenting adults engaging in peaceful activity that you find personally offensive, now can we. Are you serious?

Basic Facts About the War on Drugs ; Vices Are Not Crimes

Todd





Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 6/15/98 7:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: CheffJeff Message-id: <1998061511175700.HAA20118@ladder01.news.aol.com>

gunterdx sez:

>

Then, I assume, that you’re in favor of making tobacco and alcohol (these kill ~500,000 each year vs ~5,000 for cocaine & zero for pot) illegal? If not, why not?

>

This is ridiculous. What about EVERY OTHER ISSUE besides abortion where we differ from the Democrats?

Jeff




Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 6/16/98 2:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: GuntersDX Message-id: <1998061618472100.OAA18876@ladder01.news.aol.com>

I favor individual liberty which includes individual responsibility. I hear Libertarians say they favor individual liberty but not individual responsibility or never mention it. If I smoke marijuana, I should take responsibility of my own actions. Why are there not more stepping aboard by joining the LP? We make a pledge to not cause harm to other people, but we think it’s alright for a baby to be aborted. What if someone doesn’t care to smell marijuana smoke, are you harming someone by invading his/her space by blowing marijuana smoke? We have to be responsible for our own actions. Am I also free to make personal opinions even though it doesn’t agree with the LP platform? According to what I read, I am apparently not free to do so.

Tim GuntersDX







Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 6/16/98 6:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: TMA68 Message-id: <1998061622290600.SAA17018@ladder01.news.aol.com>

< I hear Libertarians say they favor individual liberty but not individual responsibility or never mention it. >> -- Guntersdx

I see conservatives calling themselves libertarian implying that “individual responsibility” applies not only to activities that do harm the person or property of another (i.e., theft, fraud, tres- pass, battery, rape, and murder), but to activities that do not harm the person or property of another, but which they happen to find personally offensive. In other words, they believe that it is not just their person and property, but their fragile sensibilities, that government must protect.

< If I smoke marijuana, I should take responsibility of my own actions. >>

If by “actions” you mean that you are responsible if you get sick as a result, or proceed to initiate force against the person or property of another, then I agree. If, however, you mean that you should take “responsibility” for actions that merely offend the delicate sensibi- lities of another, then I firmly disagree. To suggest otherwise is to justify racists who believe that inter-racial couples should be held “reponsible” for engaging in a peaceful activity that offends their personal (racist) beliefs.

< Why are there not more stepping aboard by joining the LP? >>

Ah yes, it’s always the LP’s fault for adhering to principle, instead of the people’s fault for adhering to the slogans and lies of republi- crats and demopubs.

< What if someone doesn’t care to smell marijuana smoke, are you harming someone by invading his/her space by blowing marijuana smoke? >>

Nice try, but that is at best a red herring. People are arrested all the time not for blowing marijuana smoke in someone else’s “space,” but for mere possession. If someone has truly “invaded” your space, then that is trespass, and libertarians support laws against trespass. But to invade someone’s “space,” you must in some way initiate force against their person or property. Non-libertarians seem to think their right to “space” includes their right to never be offended, which is like saying that the Jews were some how guilty of invading Hitler’s “space” simply because he found their very existence person- ally offensive.

< Am I also free to make personal opinions even though it doesn’t agree with the LP platform? >>

Yes, just as we are free to make personal opinions that do agree with the LP platform.

< According to what I read, I am apparently not free to do so. >>

No, you are apparently you are so hypersensitive that you assume that anyone who simply disagrees with you must also oppose your freedom to express your opinions. More and more you give the im- pression of one who believes that his “freedom” is threatened every time someone else engages in a peaceful activity that contradicts your personal beliefs. Reminds me of a quote by Elbert Hubbard: “Every tyrant who has lived has believed in freedom --- for himself.”

Todd

DRUGS Part A ; DRUGS Part B










Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 6/23/98 6:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: Savysooner Message-id: <1998062310034900.GAA17184@ladder01.news.aol.com>

Hey, Todd! Great reply! Of course, many people cannot bear for libertarians to point out the contradictions and arbitrary prejudices inherent in their opinions. It has always been so. I have had a few cock-eyed notions in my time, but after a few moments of initial embarrassment I have felt better for a long time afterwards. Of course, in the old days most of my embarrasments were private because I learned by reading a book. Now, more and more people bring their ignorance online. They are not shielded by the impersonal written words of a writer. For example, Ayn Rand never got a chance to censure me for being a fool face to face or even via computer. But I sure learned a lot from her and she never knew who I was.

We expend to much effort trying to save Cyberface sometimes. Generally the struggle to keep up a good Cyberface is based on the notion that the best defense if derision. I love to poke fun, but I expect to get poked back.

Ocassionally I get a well justified poke. But as Nietzche tried to say, “What does not totally humiliate me, makes me stronger.” Sometimes the most enlightening answers come from the stupidest questions.




Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 6/17/98 7:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: CheffJeff Message-id: <1998061711304800.HAA28486@ladder01.news.aol.com>

guntersdx said:

<...What if someone doesn’t care to smell marijuana smoke, are you harming someone by invading his/her space by blowing marijuana smoke?...>>

Yes, unless they’re on your property. Let me ask you another, similar question: What if someone doesn’t care to be put in a cage for smoking marijuana, are you harming them by putting them there, even though they hurt no one?

<...Am I also free to make personal opinions even though it doesn’t agree with the LP platform? According to what I read, I am apparently not free to do so.>>

You just did, ergo, you’re free to do so--we’re certainly for free speech and rational argument. You’re just not free to FORCE us to go along with them.

Jeff, I’m all for responsible freedom, Livingston




Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 6/17/98 8:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Presbyte Message-id: <1998061800404200.UAA23869@ladder01.news.aol.com>

>>>I hear Libertarians say they favor individual liberty but not individual responsibility or never mention it.<< -GuntersDX

We mention that all the time here in the LP Forum and during the weekly Libertarian Party Forum Chat, every Wed 9-11PM in the Cloak Room chat area.

>>>Why are there not more stepping aboard by joining the LP?<< -GuntersDx

More are. Paid LP membership is now around 2.5 times what it was before the 1996 elections. In plain numbers, back then we were around 10,000, and now are over 25,000. Not yet a formidible political “army,” but not too shabby for a party that has had to grow through grass-roots effort, either.

>>>We make a pledge to not cause harm to other people, but we think it’s alright for a baby to be aborted.<< -GDX

No, I don’t think it is correct to say that we “think it is alright.” Rather, we don’t see the necessity for government to get involved with prohibiting or promoting (recommending or paying for) the activity. Also, the pledge states “I do not believe in or advocate the initiation of force as a means of achieving political or social goals.” This is not at all the same as pledging to “do no harm,” although many individual libertarians subscribe to the latter creed also.

>>>Am I also free to make personal opinions even though it doesn’t agree with the LP platform?<< -GDX

You are certainly free to believe and say what you feel is right, whether or not it agrees with the platform. It would be wrong, however, to label your personal opinions (or mine, or any individual person’s) as representative of libertarianism or the LP, especially when they disagree with the official platform. If the LP does not represent enough of your political beliefs to earn your support, then hopefully, there will be another party that does so.

Not that I’m interested in losing the support of any who once thought themselves libertarian. But you must ask yourself if you truly believe in the individual’s right to his own life and property, and the need to minimize the group’s infringement on individual autonomy. If so, I think you will find LP platform planks to be consistent with that core belief. If you think there are some freedoms that YOU YOURSELF were not meant to have, then you can support their denial to others with a clear conscience. But most people believe THEY can be responsible while their NEIGHBOR cannot, and from this basic prejudice come so many laws that constrain us all.

Thanks for posting your thoughts. I appreciate your comments and the opportunity to respond.

-James Merritt Libertarian Party Forum Host AOL News & Politics Channel




Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 6/17/98 8:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Presbyte Message-id: <1998061800255400.UAA17864@ladder03.news.aol.com>

>>>I have a little problem with the LP platform myself. I’m not sure I would go along with the legalization of illegal drugs such as marijuana or cocaine.

The only thing hemp is good for is for making clothing and making paper which would save the cutting of live trees. It’s certainly not good for smoking and this medical stuff is not all some libertarians are after. It’s so that these drugs can used recreationally like booze or cigarettes.<< -GuntersDx

The thing to ask is, what right did a group of people have to tell their peaceable neighbors that they could not grow, possess, or smoke a plant or chemical? If you grant that right to your neighbors, you will not be able to control their use of that power when they want to tell you do something else that you may not want to do, or which might actually be hazardous to your health or wealth.

Sure, if drugs (or other things) are legal, there will be abuses. People WILL use them both medically and recreationally. But the LP stance on drugs comes from a certainty that the War On Drugs “cure” is far worse than the “disease” could ever be.

Abortion is actually a MUCH trickier topic, because a human life is ended when such a procedure is performed. With drugs, it is relatively easy for a libertarian to uphold the freedom to produce, purchase, and use substances, so long as the person doesn’t hurt someone else as a part of the process.

With abortion, the woman’s freedom to use her own body as she sees fit is juxtaposed with the developing baby’s right to life.

-J




Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 7/2/98 6:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Verbal3721 Message-id: <1998070222360700.SAA16060@ladder01.news.aol.com>

<<------the prohemp crowd------>>>

You make it sound that anyone who wants drugs to be legal is a pot head...Drugs are a personal decision that should have no government infringement...but if you smoke and get sick because of that choice then you have given up your right to healthcare. Then you either provide for yourself or your family provides for you or a private organization or...you die. I do not agree with drug use...I think its stupid...but if someone wants to take the risk then that is their descision. I’m not their parent and same with the government...throw yourselve infront of a train if you want...I wont stop you.







Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 7/8/98 4:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: HORagion Message-id: <1998070808352700.EAA19149@ladder01.news.aol.com>

Hi Tim,

You said about old Harry B and taxes:


- Abolish the income tax and the IRS? Fine. But, what is our solution. Excise taxes. Value-Added taxes. A National sales tax. What? Harry Browne says nothing will be replaced. What? How can it be? We are a big country and it is not like that small piece of land covering the eastern seaboard our founding fathers fought for to win freedom when only an excise tax was a solution to their problems. Okay. The Income tax is illiminated. Does the federal government now pass the tax onto the states?

We could have more people aboard, but our pro-hemp crowd scares them away along with our inept ways of not offering solutions when we abolish the income tax.




The tax solution is to shift what smaller tax burden remained in a libertarian society off of productivity and on to locally assessed land values, as proposed by David Nolan, similar to what was agreed to by the FFs in the Articles Of Confederation.

Land value user fees would be collected only once annually at the local level and all successively higher levels of government would have to compete with each other for a piece of the revenue. This is a solution which can and in fact must be first started earlier than an LP electoral victory at the federal level. It is most conducive to solving local grass roots problems. It has already been applied in about 20 cities in Pennsylvania (of course, only for local level taxes). It is “bottom-up” oriented and “pushes down” more power and accountability to the local level, which is much more accessible to voters and less concentrated and more difficult for high powered lobby interests to focus on.

The shift is off of improvements such as buildings, homes, etc and onto the land value itself which is a product of the scarcity of land compared to the demand for it. Land values are not a fruit of labor nor capital.

This system could allow secession of smaller political units from larger ones. If a superior government asked for too high a tax, the inferior level could stop paying tax either for reasons of protest or for long term secession.

H.O. Ragione







Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 7/8/98 7:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: CheffJeff Message-id: <1998070811361701.HAA24522@ladder01.news.aol.com>

you write:

>

Isn’t this a “Republic?” And didn’t we have this option before Lincoln?

Good idea if you can win the civil war.

Jeff




Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 7/10/98 5:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Giule Message-id: <1998071021122200.RAA21121@ladder01.news.aol.com>

I think that there needn’t be taxes or tariffs at all. With a government as small as would be maintained by the LP, we would easily be able to pay for it without taxes at all. There could simply be a federal lottery and federal casinos. Maybe the gov’t could even purchase wholesale products and sell them retail. All the money made by a business like this would substitute for taxes, and congress would choose how to spend it.

-Peter de Blanc




Since all luck, outside our own, is the same, it can be considered a shared asset/liability. Able to be tended and managed.

-Nelson Mock

You want to be able to control luck? I predict you will fail miserably.

-Vicki Cash




Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 7/19/98 9:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Skisail26 Message-id: <1998072001522800.VAA04203@ladder03.news.aol.com>

Friend - The gov’t already does what you suggest with very poor results:

they manage the forest and sell the timber rights, the manage the grazing lands, there is also the TVA which sells power below the price it cost to produce and transport. It manages over 100 golf cost at a cost of millions to you and you can’t play on them and the list goes on. The dynamics of life is that once gov’t gets involved they enlarge base. What gov’t agency or dept has ever been eliminated? There must be one but you’d be hard pressed to come up with a name.

robemmett



Subject: Re: The “LOONEYTARIANS” Date: 5/26/98 2:41 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: Presbyte Message-id: <1998052606410000.CAA21853@ladder03.news.aol.com>

Someone who should know better, dedleedave, posted the following, throughought which I intersperse my comments:

<
talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.libertarian.

Would the libertarians who post on here please comment on what he had to say about the Libertarian Party?>>>

The piece to which you refer was refuted by libertarians as a canard two years ago -- and was even dissected here in these boards at that time. Like urban legends and internet hoaxes (read any “Good Times” email lately? :-) this thing won’t stay dead, no matter how many stakes go through its heart.

I have no doubt that my attempts at rebuttal will be forgotten much sooner than the trash that inspired them. So I call upon Dedleedave to keep a copy of this and post it in response, the next time this garbage is disgorged by the internet. I would prefer not to have to waste my time to rebut this idiot again.

>>>I find Libertarians the most selfish people on this Earth. They care about nothing at all but their money, their guns and their absolute right to their money and their guns. They care not one lick about society or anyone in it, proved conclusively by their incessant screaming not about less taxes, but no taxes. No personal income taxes whatsoever is at the top of their party platform. My speech on this issue is real short: If you don’t want to pay taxes get the heck out of here pal - go to Bosnia, Somalia, or Beirut where your ideas are a reality rather than just your pipe dreams.

This is simply untrue. Many libertarians work for the betterment of their communities, through volunteering, charity giving, and just engaging with (and so helping to build) their own neighborhoods. The writer’s fallacy is in assuming that taxes are necessary to make a better world. In fact, experience shows us that taxes are most often poured down a hole, never helping the intended beneficiaries at all. Libertarians prefe




 

 



this website copyright scars publications and design. All rights reserved. No material may be reprinted without express permission from the author.



this page was downloaded to your computer