I see no connection between a socialist institution like the military and libertarianism. Libertarianism has historically (and correctly so) been opposed to a standing army, such as the one which taxpayers are forced to pay for here in the U.S.
I suppose one can argue for voluntary socialism, but cooperatives are much different. A voluntary institution does not enslave its members and force them to continue in such a slave relationship over and over again when the expected time of the contract is over. Even the temporary slave relationships which were exacted from the scots and the irish in the agreements to come to the American colonies was only for seven years. Your portrayal of normal people who are not in the military is clearly mistaken. One can be "Pro-Freedom" AND have fought and defended freedom without being in a socialist institution. Does "Pro-Freedom" mean that you must kill another from some other land? Obviously not, and I would not expect you to claim this is the only meaning that you take for "Pro-Freedom". Even the most vile socialists don't go that far! Does "Pro-Freedom" mean living in some state-owned, state-controlled barracks, marching to some statist tune, crying out to kill the enemy, falling in line and doing whatever your leader tells you to do? Of course this has nothing to do with freedom, and you know that, unless you are completely indoctrinated in statism. Being "Pro-Freedom" means engaging in life, making choices which encourage others to be free from coercion, to understand the rights and principles of freedom, and respecting the property of others. You may have a much different vision of "Pro-Freedom" than I have, from what you have said, and I can only see it as a contradictory one. Socialism is not freedom (save in "1984"). The difference is too vast. Cheers! Just Ken Eric Dondero Rittberg wrote: > Actually, quite the opposite. I find it hard to give the > libertarian label to any American who has not served in the > Military. Hard to justify saying that one is Pro-Freedom, when one > has done absolutely nothing to fight and defend that freedom. > > --- In [email protected] > <mailto:Libertarian%40yahoogroups.com>, Kenneth Gregg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > I can think of no institution, save that of prisons, which are > more > > socialist than the military is. Do you honestly think that, > simply > > because you have been, or currently are, involved in such an > > organization that it is libertarian in any respect? I have come > across > > libertarian prisoners, usually in for non-violent offenses, and > even a > > few people in the military that claim to be libertarians, but I > see no > > connection or affiliation between libertarianism and military law, > > military installations (at least not until they are sold to > private > > interests), WMDs, biological weapons, standing armies, ecological > > destruction of wide swaths of land called "test ranges" > and "proving > > grounds" (such as we have here in Nevada), deaths of thousands and > > thousands of ordinary people, and the like. > > > > Perhaps you can provide defenses for all of these, each of which > is an > > essential element of the current military. > > > > Cheers! > > Just Ken > > > > > > doug craig wrote: > > > > > The military is not anti Libertarian. > > > > > > --- Eric Dondero Rittberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > <mailto:ericdondero%40yahoo.com>> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Ummm, geez, I dunno? Maybe to protect freedom? > > > > Just a guess. > > > > [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/
