On 24 Oct 2001, at 18:18, Kakki wrote: > Brenda, > > Thank you so much for asking the Professor about where he stands.
Your welcome! > I think, but can't say for certain, > that Libertarians largely are anti-war and pacifist. I draw that conclusion > from some of the literature my Libertarian friends have been passing on to me > the past two months. >From the Libertarian Party web site ( http://www.lp.org/ ): "The Libertarian Party is committed to America's heritage of freedom: individual liberty and personal responsibility a free-market economy of abundance and prosperity a foreign policy of non-intervention, peace and free trade." Also from a Libertarian Party press release "Online Survey: LP members support military strikes against terrorists" ( http://www.lp.org/press/archive.php?function=view&record=541) "Libertarian party members and supporters believe the U.S. government 'has an obligation to bring the terrorists who are responsible for the September 11 attacks to justice," and strongly support military strikes against Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network, according to a new survey." I strongly suggest reading the rest of the release. It is very enlightening. Of course there are conditions to the statement above. For instance, notice that the support is for strikes against bin Laden. Not against a government. (That's one of the first things I noticed. But that whole discussion is for another thread!) And there is also some mention about wariness from survey respondents concerning infringements on civil liberties that may result from anti-terrorist legislation. It's certainly an alternate view that can't be easily dropped into an anti-war box. A non-interventionist foreign policy does not equal anti-war and pacifist nor does it equal Marxism. I think it's perhaps more fair not to try to characterize the entire party since it probably covers a spectrum of beliefs radiating from its core philosophies, just like the other U.S. political parties. These complex issues and positions have varying degrees. > I could provide support for my > experiences, claims and opinions but I don't think the audience here is really > all that receptive to hearing them and would rather "shoot the messenger." I hope you will provide the support for what you believe and that you will call people out to substantiate what they claim as well. Don't be deterred; as you may know you have to work harder to present your position when it is a minority view. I've certainly been faced with it enough in my life to know. And as you can tell I'm of the school that facts are more persuasive than an insistent tone. I also think that it is helpful to separate opinion based on personal experience from fact. It's the way I learned to ensure a fulfilling and rewarding debate. And I'm certainly open to hearing other suggestions in that regard; I'm more than a decade out of college but I still fall back on what I learned in my philosophy classes. (And I still read the Socratic dialogues from time to time. I'll have to remember that one for the next desert island thread. : ) > Today, by accident I came across and organization whose purpose seems to support > some of what I've claimed. I'll forward it in another email. Please do. I would love to see it. Brenda n.p.: Wynonna - "Only Love"
