Maggie's Farm

Wilkinson's piece is excellent, but misses some of the finer points of Libertarianism.

Libertarians are, more than any other 'Party', "The Big Tent". That is to say, we don't really have a party. We all kind've lump ourselves into a group and have varying degrees of alignment - which Wilkinson discusses with comments on how "mutable" beliefs are.

Still, I've attended many Libertarian events. There are many people there I can say I share my views with. Even my very good friend who is working the phones for Ron Paul (a step I won't take because I don't like to get involved in politics) has different views than I do, but we recognize that we have so much in common, even our differences are minor.

The problem with Libertarianism, as I see it, is the very size of the "Big Tent". We allow all kinds of nuts in. Some of them aren't really all that nutty with their core beliefs, it's how they tinge things where it gets nutty. At a recent event, I had one fellow blathering on about organic foods and vaccines, how they are related to rising autism rates, and how Libertarians can fix it. Now, I have autistic nephews, so I'm pretty well versed on the topic, and rather than spark an argument over a fine detail that I knew he was poorly informed on, I just nodded and stayed quiet. Overall, his core beliefs match mine, so why do I care if he doesn't want to vaccinate his kids and has doubled his monthly grocery bill with organic foods while he follows a very odd personal belief path?

I also met several pornographers and porn starts at another event in California. Again, this isn't a business I think really serves the image of Libertarianism well, but these were very intelligent people who made a very different life choice than most people would make.

I met conspiracy theorists, I've heard UFO stories, and I've met the race-baiters. They're all there. But the one thing that each of them has, at the end of the day, is the belief in letting individuals be themselves and keep government out of their lives. The other stuff is window dressing.

At no time, ever, did I hear discussions about removing government in total. The question has never been one of moving toward anarchy. The discussion has always revolved around the different levels of government size and efficiency and how to keep it 'honest' - or as honest as one can expect.

The idea that Ron Paul aligned himself and profited from race-baiters, and is suddenly disavowing them is absurd. Certainly, it's as absurd as me saying Romney is a Mormon and therefore believes in, and profited from belonging to, a religion which is not in the mainstream and has a history built on outright lies and misinformation. Certainly both Paul and Romney have these things within their personal framework, and they are issues to some people. But they are not issues which concern me because both politicians have moved past any point where those issues are meaningful, and both have explained their personal beliefs sufficiently for me to say that neither one has a problem in these realms, as far as I'm concerned.

I'm far more concerned with how both of them will plan to utilize their beliefs once they get into office. Based on their track records, I'm comfortable with my position regarding Paul versus Romney - which is to say I prefer one over the other, but am not opposed to either.

Libertarianism is a difficult prospect for many people to understand and accept. At its root, you have to accept a base proposition - everything you do is your decision, and you have to suffer the consequences and manage the expectations. But at no time should you be forced to worry about how the government is going to intervene and make your life more difficult.

Wilkinson doesn't have to be a "Bleeding Heart" Libertarian. I'm not even sure what that means, to be honest. At its base, being a Libertarian means you accept the individual as the root of all discussions of social, economic, and political rights and responsibilities. Beyond that, your own personal beliefs and experiences start to play a role and you're still a Libertarian - just to varying degrees.