Monday, September 15, 2008

Choose

DK seems to have got himself into a bit of a fire fight over a drunken post he wrote, where he suggested that you are either a Libertarian or a de facto totalitarian (and a lot more besides). The full post can be found in the comments section if you want to read some full on, sweary ranting. It won’t be to everyone’s taste, but it does demonstrate a simple truth. You are either Libertarian, or you believe in the State. And there is a further simple truth that follows on – the three main parties support the State, and the intrusion of the State into the private life of the citizens.

Therefore, if you are a Labour supporter, a Lib Dem supporter, or a Tory, you support the State. Yes, the Tories might be less Statist that Nu Labour, but you are being staggeringly naïve if you believe that, on balance, the Tories will be much better than the Labour party. Their instinct is to make government the solution to society’s ills; they just see different ways in which government can be the plaster on society’s issues. Mark my words, Cameron will do some vague Libertarian posturing whilst he is still popular. But come the first dip in popularity, he will show himself to be just as Statist as those governing at the moment. A clampdown on drugs or something else that The Daily Mail sees as utterly evil will happen as soon as the voters start to question the Cameron brand. Just as the Nu Labour bastards started nationalising as soon that economy started to go down the shitter.

And it will be the naivete, and the complete failure to understand that people have a right to a private life and the right to live without the constant, suffocating, draconian presence of government, that will lead to further little yet damning erosions of freedom in this country. Take this policy – admirably dealt with here. The government sees that it has the right to tell you how fat to be, and if you dare to deviate from the path the State has decided for you, then it will send minions to come up to you and insult you to your face. Yes, this is a local government initiative, but it sums up the mentality of those in government nicely. Their question is “how can we legislate to *help*?” Not “do we need to intervene here?” Or “will any good come from us intervening here?” Nu Labour, Tories, Lib Dems – the arrogance of our ruling class is such that regardless of their rhetoric, deep down they feel they know better than you. And that is all of them – all the main parties. Brown, Cameron, Clegg; ignore the liberal lip-service and get down to the truth. They know best. And they will tell you what to do, because they believe that they know better than you on how you should live your own life.

I don’t know how the Libertarian Party can push itself into the political arena properly. I do know that all those who prop up the Tories in a hope that they will suddenly rip of their mask and become Libertarians once in power are on a hiding to nothing. And those that think they can convince the blue rinse brigade (the backbone of the Tories) that a socially conservative, paternalistic government isn’t the way forward are on a hiding to nothing. Real change isn’t coming through the three main parties and their cosy consensus. Right now any real change is going to come from outside of Parliament.

So this it it – you are either Libertarian, or you tacitly support the Statist status quo. If you are Nu Labour, or a Liberal Democrat, or a Tory then you support the State. Which is fine; it is your democratic right. But if you are a Tory, please don’t pretend you are helping the Libertarian cause. You are propping up part of the problem, not being part of the solution.

Labels: , , , , , ,

4 Comments:

At 9:55 am , Blogger Letters From A Tory said...

It seems that you misunderstand the libertarian streak of the Conservative Party. I'm not a full-on libertarian, but even I can see that the government should not run our lives. As I said on DK's site, many of my Conservative friends actually describe themselves as libertarian.

Don't confuse the party leadership with the party voters - they can be very different in their philosophy.

 
At 10:57 am , Blogger The Nameless Libertarian said...

I have worked with the party membership, and they are mostly socially conservative people who are in no way Libertarian. Yes, the leadership is a problem for me, given their centrist, almost Blairite at times outlook. But they also have to keep their membership happy, and that is not a Libertarian membership.

I think it is great that you and your Conservative friends call yourself Libertarian, but I maintain that given your support of the Tories, you are not helping the Libertarian cause.

 
At 8:39 pm , Anonymous Anonymous said...

ou are either Libertarian, or you believe in the State.

Are you seriously suggesting that libertarians are, therefore, anarchists and not the supporters of minimal government that libertarians identify themselves as?

Most of the libertarians I have come across do believe in the state, but in such a confined role. If they didn't believe in a state at all, they'd be anarchists.

You are propping up part of the problem, not being part of the solution.

But that's because of the way you (and DK) perceive this support.

Some of us don't see these three options that you project- i) support the Conservatives, ii) supporting Labour or iii) supporting the (non-existent) libertarian option.

The way I see it is like this- would I prefer to lose a hand or a leg? Of course, I'd prefer neither, but I choose the least worst option- for me, that is Conservative (particularly as I know my local candidate and appreciate his outlook on many issues- and that he doesn't have an outlook on others, because he understands that it isn't his place to). When I vote in a general election, I vote for my constituency MP- I don't vote for the leader of their party or the hundreds of other candidates on the same platform. The last thing I would ever want to do is split the vote and give the local cunt from Labour a better chance of keeping her seat.

Finally, I'd suggest that the same reasoning I mention above is misunderstood because of a presumption that when we vote, we vote for the 'best' candidate and/ or party. We don't and we have rarely ever done this. We vote for the least worst option. Weighing up the options, my local Labour cunt is far worse than the Conservative candidate, therefore I will choose to cast a vote for them. It doesn't necessarily mean a wholehearted endorsement of them or their party- it just means that they're the least worst option. I do not understand why this is such a barrier to understanding for some people?

you are not helping the Libertarian cause.

Perhaps they should start helping themselves first, then? There isn't much of an alternative whilst they're sat around, twiddling their thumbs, waiting for thousands of votes to drop in to their laps for non-existent candidates, off the back of bugger-all campaigning, is there? Just a load of hot air so far.

 
At 7:41 am , Blogger The Nameless Libertarian said...

When I vote in a general election, I vote for my constituency MP- I don't vote for the leader of their party or the hundreds of other candidates on the same platform.

Yes, you do vote for the party and for their platform. By electing your local Tory, you will put Cameron in power. That is the same husky hugging, Toynbee embarrassing Cameron that I'd have thought most Libertarians would want to avoid.

The last thing I would ever want to do is split the vote and give the local cunt from Labour a better chance of keeping her seat.

And whilst people like yourselves continue to use this logic to support the Tories, nothing will ever change. Yes, you might split the Tory vote and let someone from Labour in. But whilst the Tories have to do fuck all to get your vote other than not be Labour, they're going to stay as a centrist, bloated ideological mess of a party.

And is you fear of your Labour candidate getting in based on ideological concerns or a (perfectly natural) revulsion at the thought of four more years of Labour? I suspect it is the latter, as there is very little difference now between the three main parties.

Weighing up the options, my local Labour cunt is far worse than the Conservative candidate, therefore I will choose to cast a vote for them. It doesn't necessarily mean a wholehearted endorsement of them or their party- it just means that they're the least worst option. I do not understand why this is such a barrier to understanding for some people?

Again, by voting Tory you do end up effectively endorsing the Tories and their platform. What do you think your new Local Tory MP would do? Be a firebrand, a true Independent focused on Libertarian solutions for your local area? Or a Cameron drone, who props up the Tory leader? Face it, it is going to be the latter.

And you may be perfectly happy to vote for the least worst option - I can totally understand that. It is part of the all pervading cynicism that is in politics at the moment. But some people would like to vote for the best option, rather than compromising their principles every time they step into a voting booth. Surely that isn't too difficult to understand?

Perhaps they should start helping themselves first, then? There isn't much of an alternative whilst they're sat around, twiddling their thumbs, waiting for thousands of votes to drop in to their laps for non-existent candidates, off the back of bugger-all campaigning, is there? Just a load of hot air so far.

The Libertarian party needs to do far more to help itself, true. And I could have done far more to help it. But this is also a chicken and egg scenario. The party could do with Libertarians from all parties switching their support from the corpulent, Statist main parties to LPUK. People like yourself. Then it can start to make inroads. Yes, you're going to argue that LPUK needs to do more to win your support. But I'd argue that people like yourself need to overcome their tribal voting instincts and stop propping up the Tories.

A vote for a candidate who supports Cameron is a vote for a politician who is not, fundamentally, a Libertarian. Therefore, by voting for his candidate and pushing him into power you are part of the problem, not the solution.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home