My qualified Libertarianism (final)

In an earlier post I talked about my complete disgust with the Republican Party national leadership, and that I’ve come to believe there is no home there any longer for sincere conservatives.  The Republican Party is bereft of any ideas beyond trying to pretend they are something other than “me too ” Democrat-lite.  If conservatives are to be credible when they claim “I’m not a Republican, I’m a conservative”, they need to officially quit being officially Republicans; only then can they begin the long hard slog of reclaiming their integrity and re-educating the public on the heritage, the nature, and the value of American conservatism.  The Libertarian Party (whatever it’s present flaws) appears to be a natural match.

I haven’t even begun to look into the present state of the Libertarian Party.  It’s been years since I’ve read anything of or about them.  I suppose you could say that the first libertarian “literature” that I read was “Atlas Shrugged”, back in high school.  For being such a supposed “blockbuster” and “prophetic” work, I thought it was disappointingly silly and shallow (will I be banned from the Party for saying that?  Is Ayn-worship required for LP membership?  Hope not.)  And way back then there was still a debate within the “movement” as to whether or not a Libertarian political party was self-contradictory.  I trust that they’ve worked all that out between the “anarcho-libertarians” and the realists.  I hope so.

It’s enough to make you cry to realize how recently it was that President Clinton was compelled to declare that “the era of big government is over”.  Now, God help us, it has come roaring back with a vengeance,  having been resuscitated and nurtured back to health (and put on steroids) by none other than <weep> the Republican Party of George W. Bush, under the philosophically misbegotten monstrosity called “big government conservatism”.  Has there ever been a more blatant and cynical contradiction in terms?

So now it’s come to this- a Republican Party trying to market itself as the “right” kind of big government as opposed to the Democrats who supposedly practice the “wrong” kind of big government.  A pox on both their houses, as they say.

This gives a Libertarian-Conservative coalition it’s most favorable opportunity.  I believe the most significant, and historically momentous realignment in American politics will be between the “big government” statism of the Democrats and Republicans on the one hand, and a Libertarian-Conservative coalition on the other, spearheading a rediscovery and renewal of the traditional American values of individual liberty and limited government.

One of the things that used to bother me about the Libertarians was the perception of their “amorality”.  With the wisdom of passing years, I finally “get” it… politics shouldn’t be the source of your morality, private or public.  Politics OUGHT to be amoral, at least in the sense in which it operates in the realm of what theologians call God’s “common grace”, in which He “causes the rain to fall upon the just and the unjust”.  Perhaps one reason that Democrats are so successful is exactly that- their politics IS their religion, and they believe in the righteousness of their cause with no less zeal and extremism than the most rabid religious extremist.

Another point on which I take exception to Libertarianism is illustrated by a recent Dennis Prager radio show, during which he was waxing apocalyptic about the economic agenda of the Left.  The gist of it was the oft-repeated accusation that the Left wants to Europeanize America, turn us into a continental-sized version of either a) France, b) the Netherlands, or c) Sweden.

“Imagine!” Dennis exclaimed. “Over there they actually have laws that tell business owners when they have to close!  If you want to offer your goods or services to the public later in the day than that- or stay open 24 hours- you can’t.  It’s illegal!  It would be an ‘unfair advantage’ over those who close earlier- imagine that!  Is that what you want to see happen in America?”

Well, I thought to myself, that’s exactly how it used to be in most of America- by custom if not by law.  Businesses closed so people could go home for dinner and spend the rest of the day with their family.  And NOBODY opened on Sunday- that was the sabbath rest, Christian or non-Christian.  Even today, throughout much of the South, there are still laws prohibiting the sale of alcohol on Sundays before noon.

I believe that it was a better, healthier society before the age of 24/7 commercialism.  I suppose that a Libertarian objection would be something along the lines of,  “But if there are people who want to buy something at 2am, or on Sunday, and someone is willing to operate a business to provide that to them at those times, why should anyone prevent them?  Why should they be compelled to ’suffer’ the restrictions on their activity imposed by the majority?”

To which I would answer, “Why should the majority by compelled to suffer a debased globalized commercial culture, with economic consequences that are hostile and destructive to the individual, the family, and the community, just to accommodate spur-of-the-moment, buy-it-now whims of a minority?”

The Europeans (and earlier, wiser generations of Americans) are correct.  It is an unfair advantage, and an irresistible economic pressure that results finally in the debasement of the quality of life of the society and culture at large.

I remember in my hometown when shops first began to open on Sundays only in December, just for the Christmas shopping finale.  Then they began to open on Sundays in November; and then some, and finally all, began staying open in January, and finally, year-round.  Now its almost 24/7/365.

Another exception I take is to the naive arguments about prostitution being a “victimless crime”.  No, folks, prostitution is not a victimless crime.  Cities that have succumbed to that notion have been learning how foolish their decision was.  Google “victimless crime” and “prostitution” and you’ll find many articles addressing the issue.

Finally, an important first step will be to find a more credible spokesman than the unfortunate Ron Paul.  Lord have mercy!