There should have been a Clint Eastwood spaghetti western called ‘The Libertarian’, in which towns would come to him with their problems and he would say ‘Well that’s your problem. You sort it out’.
But is that ‘The Libertarian’, or should it be ‘The Apathist’? Hm. Both are good short story titles…
Leaving everyone to their own devices is not Libertarianism. What is it, then? It’s very hard to pin down because as a politics of individuality, every individual has their own take on it.
It’s not anarchy. Libertarianism has boundaries. It has laws, but not very many. Therefore it must employ some form of police force to enforce those laws. These police will never be confused into thinking it is illegal to take photos in public places and they will not be confused into thinking they are the law. The law they enforce would be very simple. As the Devil himself once put it, it would be illegal to initiate force or fraud against another.
That’s it. That covers it all.
Any crime of violence, any crime of theft, any crime of fraud or deception, is covered by that one law. It is all that is really needed.
We do not need a law against using a mobile phone when driving because we already have ‘driving without due care and attention’, ‘careless driving’, dangerous driving’, and more. We don’t even need all those laws when ‘driving like a limp dick’ would cover it all. There would also be the immense shame factor in being in court for that.
All those puffed out thug chests belonging to ‘hard’ men (hard of thinking) declaring ‘Yeah, I drive dangerously, innit. Better stay out of me way, innit.’ Imagine them declaring ‘Yeah, I drive like a limp dick, innit… oh.’ Likewise ASBOs. Kids hold them up as a badge of pride. Would they do that if the acronym was ‘TWAT’? Total waster, arrested and thumped. I like the sound of that. I bet any police reading like that idea too. No piddling around with mitigation and no real criminal record. The copper can just give the kid a clip around the ear, like in the old days. It worked. Well it worked on me anyway, and I did not develop into a criminal mastermind. There’s still time. I just need that underground lair…
I digress. We do not need thousands of silly little laws that do no more than define specific details that were already covered by more general laws anyway. It confuses the public and the police alike. I won’t mention PCSOs because the pseudoplods must have been confused in the first place or they wouldn’t have accepted a position in that limbo between police, pubilic and reality.
If the law was simple, there would be no long drawn out trials costing millions. There would be no confusion. Most lawyers could be safely euthanased since they are no use in real life, and the ones that remained would be cheap. Ah, right, there’s the problem.
Major digression. There is a mark on my screen that looks just like a full stop and I keep trying to delete it. It won’t rub off. I would have said it looks like a period for the sake of the American readers, but if I said there was something that looked like a period on my screen, the UK readers would envisage something entirely different, and some might wonder how I could see the screen at all. End digression.
This is a rambling post, yes, but Libertarianism is like that. That’s the point. There isn’t one.
There can never be a truly Libertarian government because a true Libertarian does not want to control anyone else’s life. No true Libertarian wants to be in charge. We would need an entirely different system of election, whereby the ones who least want to be in charge are put in charge. Yes, some sociopaths will slip through by pretending they don’t want to rule our lives but they can soon be rooted out.
It is, on the face of it, the sensible way to run things. Being in Government should be like jury duty. You get called up for five years and you do what you can. Then you cannot be recalled, ever. That makes the career politician an impossibility. No elections. Names in a hat. Your job is held open for your return to real life, that has to be part of the deal.
Oh, but these people have no experience of being in government. How much experience of ‘being in government’ did any of the Cleggeron Coagulation have when they came to power? They had experience of suckling the taxpayer’s teat and they have sucked harder and deeper since taking over, but have acheived little of note. How much harder and deeper? Well, don’t ask Ozzy. It’s 56, Ozzy. The quick way to do it in your head is 10×7=70, minus 14. That gives you 8×7. I can do it plastered. Can you do it at all? All that expensive schooling…
We need an old Aberdonian farming curmudgeon in charge of the economy. He won’t spend any of it and will be out of debt in a week. The IMF will get a ‘can’t pay, won’t pay, awa’ tae buggery wi’ ye’ note.
The digressions come fast and frequent tonight and I think I know why. Trying to define a Libertarian is like trying to write a cat-herder’s manual. I know what I think it is, but then I am one individual with one individual’s view. I might be the only one who thinks the way I do… and so might you. Recognising that might well be the first step to Libertarianism. Or might not.
Maybe the first step is recognising that other people think differently and might not want to live their lives the way you live yours. Oh, you might think you have the perfect life and feel the need to tell everyone. Do so, by all means. Tell everyone how you live. Force them to live your way and the Libertarian Police will drag you away to ‘Never Coming Home’ land.
I like to smoke. Some people do not like to smoke. I have no interest at all in making any attempt to force anyone to take up smoking. I am not ‘pro-smoking’. I like it, if you don’t like it. don’t do it. But do not force your lifestyle choices on me. Yours might be ‘right’ in your mind and mine might be ‘wrong’ but that does not give you the authority to initiate force against what you see as my ‘wrong’ choice. It does not affect you. Despite the pretend science, no, it really does not.
I do not recognise the concept of authority.
No human has any innate authority over any other. It sounds Socialist I know but it is the absolute opposite of Scialism, a vicious creed based on strict heirarchy. The Socialist drones are the only ones who do not see it.
So the Idiot King was born to Mrs. Queen and one day will be King Jug-ears III. He is a gullible fool who thinks himself important because he does not have the brains to see otherwise. Charlie started as a mewling helpless shit-machine as did we all. Being Son of the Queen does not make him superior. He is not a superior being, he is a very naughty boy.
I am no different to the would-be New World Order Kings and no different to the druggie in the gutter. I am made of the same stuff in more-or-less the same way. So are you. The suicide bomber, the ISIS or IRA terrorist, the Nazi, the Jew or the gay single parent one-armed dwarf on benefits. All the same. Human.
This is what Libertarianism recognises Not the differences, even though Libertarianism encourages difference. The underlying sameness of humanity. There can be no Holocaust under Libertarianism because Libertarianism does not recognise groups that can be hated. It deals with individuals. One by one. With no regard to skin shade or religion or special body shape or anything at all. One by one, the individuals live their lives, unmolested by other individuals. Initiate force or fraud and the Libertarians come for you. Live your life your way and let others live their way, and you will never come in contact with any official of any kind.
Does that really sound so bad? Is it really so scary that those in authority have to stamp it down and discredit it at every opportunity? It is not anarchy, it is not Somalia. It is peace.
Maybe humanity isn’t ready for peace. Maybe it never will be.
There is more to this. Formulating thoughts on Libertarianism probably isn’t easy when sober. One day I’ll try.