Manburapa
Dana,I think perhaps that you have been plynaig "gotcha" for so long that it is going to be difficult for us to have a meaningful conversation. My sentence "As long as there are public schools they should run with efficiency and transparency" was meant in the same sense that I might write, "As long as the US is a republic, we're going to need people willing to enlist in the armed forces to defend her."I wouldn't be advocating the destruction of the republic with the second sentence, and I wasn't advocating the destruction of public schools in the first sentence.I have been spending a lot of time with Delaware libertarians over the past two months, and I suppose you would be surprised to know I have found as much variance of opinion on specific issues under that title as you might find, say,Pro-Life Democrats (Bob Casey Jr.)Gay Republicans (Log Cabin)What I have found is a lot of thoughtful, concerned people who actually wrestle with issues rather than trying for an immediate ideological response, and who feel betrayed by a non-functional two-party system.To answer your question as openly and honestly as I can about a hypothetical referendum on public education: I would not vote to abolish it and I would advocate against its abolition. Some of my libertarian friends would agree, some not.If you want a good look at my views on public education, you might try reading the two posts I wrote last month on Vision 2015.Libertarianism in the 21st Century is not the ideology of Lysander Spooner or whoever you appear to have been reading.I frankly believe that the growing move back toward a libertarianism that is both socially liberal and fiscally conservative, with a resistance to coercion whether it be by statist or corporate bureaucrats is gaining ground precisely because of what progressives and social conservative have in common.Both groups want to use the power of the state as a weapon of social engineering. Under the pretext of talking about social justice or family values, both groups agree that a powerful national government is the ticket to legislating their version of a utopian America.Both progressives and social conservatives practice selective outrage over various issues, but when the doors are closed they make deals together that preserves their hold on status quo politics.Both progressives and social conservatives feel the need to coerce people into making the "correct" choices.I realize that you will tell me that libertarians want to control people just as much, but that we want to have the private sector do it. On that you're wrong, but I don't have the inclination to prove it to you, because it wouldn't matter if I did. It wouldn't change your stance, and it wouldn't change mine.So where are we? You have my full permission to keep taking potshots at libertarianism here and in any other forum you'd like. If people are gullible enough to believe what you say, that's an education problem we'll ultimately have to deal with, and I don't think we'll have any trouble doing so.As I write this, I am realizing that the worst nightmare for progressives and social conservatives would be a genuine movement to build a society based on individual responsibility and the absence of coercion, because that would summarily defeat all the statist and corporatist ideas that come out of our legislatures and leave American citizens free to pursue life, liberty, and happiness in their own fashion without your supervision or approval.The thought that such could ever happen has got to be pretty disquieting.You may now have the last word on this issue. I don't need it.
Manburapa Dana,I think perhaps that you have been plynaig "gotcha" for so long that it is going to be difficult for us to have a meaningful conversation. My sentence "As long as there are public schools they should run with efficiency and transparency" was meant in the same sense that I might write, "As long as the US is a republic, we're going to need people willing to enlist in the armed forces to defend her."I wouldn't be advocating the destruction of the republic with the second sentence, and I wasn't advocating the destruction of public schools in the first sentence.I have been spending a lot of time with Delaware libertarians over the past two months, and I suppose you would be surprised to know I have found as much variance of opinion on specific issues under that title as you might find, say,Pro-Life Democrats (Bob Casey Jr.)Gay Republicans (Log Cabin)What I have found is a lot of thoughtful, concerned people who actually wrestle with issues rather than trying for an immediate ideological response, and who feel betrayed by a non-functional two-party system.To answer your question as openly and honestly as I can about a hypothetical referendum on public education: I would not vote to abolish it and I would advocate against its abolition. Some of my libertarian friends would agree, some not.If you want a good look at my views on public education, you might try reading the two posts I wrote last month on Vision 2015.Libertarianism in the 21st Century is not the ideology of Lysander Spooner or whoever you appear to have been reading.I frankly believe that the growing move back toward a libertarianism that is both socially liberal and fiscally conservative, with a resistance to coercion whether it be by statist or corporate bureaucrats is gaining ground precisely because of what progressives and social conservative have in common.Both groups want to use the power of the state as a weapon of social engineering. Under the pretext of talking about social justice or family values, both groups agree that a powerful national government is the ticket to legislating their version of a utopian America.Both progressives and social conservatives practice selective outrage over various issues, but when the doors are closed they make deals together that preserves their hold on status quo politics.Both progressives and social conservatives feel the need to coerce people into making the "correct" choices.I realize that you will tell me that libertarians want to control people just as much, but that we want to have the private sector do it. On that you're wrong, but I don't have the inclination to prove it to you, because it wouldn't matter if I did. It wouldn't change your stance, and it wouldn't change mine.So where are we? You have my full permission to keep taking potshots at libertarianism here and in any other forum you'd like. If people are gullible enough to believe what you say, that's an education problem we'll ultimately have to deal with, and I don't think we'll have any trouble doing so.As I write this, I am realizing that the worst nightmare for progressives and social conservatives would be a genuine movement to build a society based on individual responsibility and the absence of coercion, because that would summarily defeat all the statist and corporatist ideas that come out of our legislatures and leave American citizens free to pursue life, liberty, and happiness in their own fashion without your supervision or approval.The thought that such could ever happen has got to be pretty disquieting.You may now have the last word on this issue. I don't need it.