http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/03/01/the-educational-wing-of-the-libertaria
n-party/
 
Susan, you can spin it all you want, but the bottom line is that you don't
have the courage of your convictions if you call it "fear-mongering" for
Carl to straightforwardly report that you would terminate Medicare and
Medicaid next week if you could.
 
We'll just have to agree to disagree over whether it's "encouraging"
micro-aggression when you announce that henceforth, micro-aggression will
only be policed when its victims are willing to pay for targeting,
contesting, winning, and enforcing a tort claim the cost of which is many
orders of magnitude higher than the cost of the damages involved.  This one
is just too obvious to bother debating.
 
It's also simply laughable to suggest that it would require "an omniscient
being who could See All and Know All and understand perfectly the interplay
between cause-and-effect perfectly" to know whether letting tailpipe
emissions go un-taxed would lead to more of them than otherwise.  If the
future is such an impenetrable opaque void to you, maybe you should end your
campaign for LNC and leave the steering of the Party to people who can see
far enough into the future to anticipate whether maybe -- just maybe -- the
sun might rise tomorrow morning.
 
We're talking about taxing gasoline so that a million micro-aggressing
commuters don't create so much of the smog I see as I type this looking out
over Silicon Valley.  Your comment about "murder[ing] tens of thousands of
innocents" is of course a red-herring attempt to change the subject, but I'm
happy to point readers to the debate you lost with me over how/whether to
end the Japanese empire's genocidal war of aggression:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/marketliberal/message/2393.
 
I completely agree that the "only" thing you advocate doing against
aggression is "add[ing] a '+1' to the non-aggressors column" -- and that's
why I think you're not as libertarian as I am.   I know you feel the
opposite is the case.  The most important difference between us remains that
you think the LP's foundational texts should declare your clean-hands
principles to be more libertarian than my anti-aggression principles,
whereas I hold that the LP should be more ecumenical in cases where people
like you and me each think that the other hasn't come far enough on the path
of libertarian intellectual development.

Reply via email to