Want to learn everything about libertarian principles?
Greetings, internet! Today I am here to explain what the core values are of libertarianism, an ideological 'Big Tent' of ideologies who all have the same number one goal in common: escalate individual freedom all the time.
Even though he does not identify as a libertarian, a favorite pundit of mine called Yaron Brook described libertarianism's diversity of thought better than anyone else ever will in his 2nd appearance on the Rubin Report; 51 to 52 minutes in:
"Libertarianism is kind of a big tent that ranges from the anarcho capitalists, some really good some really not, to the liberty Republicans who want government more involved in social issues than I want it to be".
Why I am posting this.
The reason I decided to post this today is because many people out there do not know the first fact about one or two or any number of libertarian principles. I am going to use the same primary source Sargon of Akkad used to describe liberalism in the video he drew me into his fanbase with called "Anti-liberal Progressives": Wikipedia. And yes, I'll be paraphrasing a bit.
Defining Words.
"Libertarianism (Latin: libertas = freedom) is a collection of political ideologies and movements that uphold liberty their number one principle. Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and political freedom; emphasizing individualism, freedom of choice, self-ownership, and voluntary association."
Alright, now that we got that clarified, let us talk about how libertarianism is, according to my primary source of citation, a variant of liberalism, which is this:
"Liberalism is a political ideology and view of the world founded on ideas of individual liberty and legal equality. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their knowledge of these principles, but are unified behind the ideas of freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, free market capitalism, civil rights, democracy, secularism, equal treatment under law, and global cooperation."
However, not every libertarian trusts democracy just as not every libertarian desires anarchy. Most, including me, are Minimal State people who believe democracy can only work within a deeply decentralized framework. Minimal state means the authorities have only a very short list of tasks to perform within only one job: upholding individual freedom.
Piecing libertarianism together.
So basically, libertarian principles, as far as we know, are as follows.
1. Autonomy
2. Political Freedom
3. Individualism
4. Freedom of Choice
5. Self Ownership
6. Voluntary Association
7. Freedom of Speech
8. Freedom of the Press
9. Freedom of Religion
10. Free Markets
11. Civil Rights
12. Limited Authority
13. Decentralization
14. Equal Treatment Under Law
15. Global Cooperation
Frankly, this means libertarians are basically to Limited-authority federalism as liberals are to secular democracy. It also means that libertarianism is a big tent with just 15 ideological rules, as laid out above.
I chose to name the libertarian parallel to liberalism's democracy principle the 'Limited Authority' principle because I am well aware there is dissent & disagreement in the libertarian movement whether government is a legit authority or if we need to be rules by one or more NGOs.
Does this mean there is an official libertarian position on [insert issue here]?
Not in terms of very specific issues, No. But in terms of a general, multi-issue principle, the answer is Yes. For example, over whether America should adopt another free society's model of healthcare policy. Is there an official libertarian opinion on healthcare reform? No, but is there an official libertarian principle on healthcare reform? There's at least 5 relevant principles: Autonomy, Freedom of Choice, Individualism, Self Ownership and Voluntary Association. A libertarian can justify any healthcare policy reform, anywhere on Earth, that stays in line with at least these five principles.
Going back to our foreign healthcare models example, a libertarian can argue in favor of the low-spending, no-monopolies concept of UHC used in Singapore, but not the high-spending, government-monopoly concept of UHC used in Canada. And that has more to do, let's be honest, with Free Markets and Limited Authority only being harmonious to each other if there are no such things in practice as monopolies. Any true libertarian will oppose any kind of monopoly; governmental, corporate or other.
What's a Libertarian Immigration Policy?
True libertarians are Freedom of Movement people, meaning we as libertarians and I as a libertarian want every individual to have freedom of choice, autonomy, and self ownership in terms of where on the planet to go and why. However, the dissent between us is on the border security side of that. Some of us like me want Ellis Island style strict but simple disease and security checkups for border security. Others tend to think even that is going overboard and want lawlessly opened-up borders. Then you have libertarians who believe that with greater freedom of movement comes a need for more modernized, more futuristic border securities like using eVerify, and border militarization in the case of a small handful of individuals in the liberty movement. But one fact unifies all of these despite border security disagreements: Libertarian Immigration Policy = Total Freedom of Movement with "You-Fill-In-The-Blank" for Border Controls.
What is a Libertarian Foreign Policy?
Anything that contains Global Cooperation as a core principle. But also, there is the core principle of free trade, which is unregulated global trade that is tariffed at a low flat rate if at all. With these being the only two prerequisites to being a libertarian on foreign policy, that Global Cooperation and Free Trade both be priority number one, this leads to enormous diversity of opinion. Firstly you have people like the Democratic Freedom Caucus whose military policies preach almost every JWT talking point like "Last Resort" and "Proportionality" among other JWT talking points. Next you have people like Jason Stapleton who believe, in his words, that "War is generally a violent and evil thing, but when an enemy attacks us on our soil, we get ruthless... doing whatever it takes to crush them as quickly as possible." Then you have people like Andrew Klavan, Mark Humprhys and I who all want what Klavan called "A global humanity run by the US Constitution". Also you have people like Larry Elder who will argue for the Iraq War but against the Libya and Syria wars because according to libertarians of his side of this debate "It's not our job to impose democracy, instead it's our job to make sure that foreign countries are respecting our national security interests, without nation-building." And of course you have Republican Liberty Caucus whose National Defense plank is about upholding Peace Through Strength from within a framework whose number one priorities are, again, Trade and Diplomacy.
How come libertarian policies are not in effect?
I will answer this last one and then I will wrap up. It's because we need to be the ones controlling the government and right now we are not. See, government is a vessel whose morality depends entirely on the moralities of those controlling it. And we have many people with many ideologies with many moralities, some good and some not, controlling it. That's why none of the three federal government branches here in America seem to know what they are doing.
Thanks for reading this, people of Minds!
~Kyle S. Perkins