Elitism, dogmatism, oppression and terror are things Libertarians
are fighting against. Curious how you twist that around to mean
if they fight those things too well, they become them.
While it might be true that Libertarianism will never become
universal, that is no reason to compromise the philosophy. BTW,
Libertarians do not exclude votes from "impure" Libertarians.
It is true that one has to separate reality from principle, but
in a reverse fashion from your inclination. Allow the purist to
be the movers. Don't criticize them for being too idealistic,
especially when you agree with their principles. Don't blame them
for the status quo or the ignorance of others. Instead, respect
the movers for their goals. If you blame them for the fact that
their goals are less than met, you reason circular. There will
always be plenty who will compromise; you do not have to promote
it for it to happen; the "the goal of compromise" is not only NOT
a respectable goal, it is an oxymoron.
************
{American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote
"not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the
case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's instructions.
There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at a
unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and fulfill
its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and
unjust lawsuits.
See www.fija.org
[Please adopt this as your own signature.] }
_____
--- In [email protected], "Eric Dondero Rittberg"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Here's a question you'll never get an extremist libertarian to
answer.
>
> If you want to restrict libertarianism to just the purists,
than what
> label do you give to advocacies of partial libertarianism;
> basically inconsistent fiscally conservative yet socially
tolerant?
>
> They hate this question. Puts them in a corner. Forces them
to
> admit that deep down they are advocating exclusivity.
>
Judging by what I've seen, they would just call them stupid
because
they don't think like the purists.
That is why I keep making the point that elitists and dogmatists
in
ANY political body are bad. That attitude leads to oppression
and terror.
I DO believe that most Americans beleive in the fundamental
principals
of Libertarianism. I've also found through talking to many
people,
that this same group desires a certain amount of Socialism and
Statism. Because I don't agree with them on that point, does not
mean
I am not going to encourage them to move as far toward my
politics as
I can get.
Universal Libertarianism is a Utopian concept. It would be nice,
but,
like a calculus equation, it is only a limit which can never be
reached due to the basic nature of humanity, which is agression.
Since we are imperfect, so is our politics. We should approach
the
gates of Utopia as close as possible, but I don't expect to ever
get
there.
_____
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
