Perry de Havilland throws up a good one on just why there can be no such thing as a "Libertarian Democrat."

And there you have one of the classical errors of the left: the idea that corporations have great power to coerce in and of themselves.
Now it is true that corporations often behave disgracefully (no one has
ever accused Samizdata of being soft of corporate wickedness or being
reflexively well disposed towards Big Biz) but the overwhelming way
they do this is by using their vast wealth to manipulate the power of
the state in their favour. When the state uses the power of eminent
domain to take land from people so a wealthy corporation can profit
from it, that is an example of state power. When corporations
get subsidies and regulations which make it harder for new market
entrants to compete with them, that is an example of state power.  When corporations use laws to bust unions and restrict reasonable rights of workers to organise, that is an example of state power.

[…] It is just a variant of the notion that the only way to stop corruption in high places is to get rid of high places.

And if you know anything, you know that the democrats are nothing if they aren’t premised on the collectivist ideal of enslaving business in the name of "protecting" consumers and workers. Their "virtue," if you’ve the effrontery to call it that, is that they’re at least up-front about their premises and ideals. Republicans are frauds: they give lip-service to pro-business interests and then whore themselves during their entire terms in office, spreading their legs like female dogs in heat.

I used to think that, at least in the area of down-deep personal philosophy, republicans often had strong libertarian tendencies. No longer. This whole "illegal" immigrant hysteria has ruined that notion utterly, for me. If America is about anything, it’s at visceral root about people in possession of virtually nothing but hope thumbing their noses at anything and everything standing in their way and setting off for a whole new life. It’s why America is what it is — the best and most tenacious came here. But, now, the republicans wish only to let the meek sissies in, those prepared to bow to authority and stand in line for years. Yea, that’s the kind of people I want. Good voters; always doing what they’re told. Better chance of turning them into republicans, and failing that, at least we can keep the numbers down.

Don’t for one second be so naive as to think that this has to do with anything but the standard republican/democrat power struggle. The democrats want the uneducated immigrant in large numbers because they’ll vote democrat (just like most stupid people who happen to vote do), and they’re right. The republicans want to restrict entry to small numbers for the same reason and make them wait in line, so only those with at least some means get through, keeping down the numbers of potential democrats. And all the while it’s a struggle over real people’s one-and-only real lives, being used as pawns, with every sort of justification being thrown about but with never a single ounce of the honest truth of the matter. Democrats don’t have to worry because so far, the numbers are in their favor. Republicans don’t have to worry because whoever looses their chance to make a better life will eventually have God to sort it all out.

There isn’t an ounce of libertarian or individualist political philosophy in either of them. Whatever there may have been has been exposed as either gone or as never having existed.

Richard Nikoley

I'm Richard Nikoley. Free The Animal began in 2003 and as of 2021, contains 5,000 posts. I blog what I wish...from health, diet, and food to travel and lifestyle; to politics, social antagonism, expat-living location and time independent—while you sleep—income. I celebrate the audacity and hubris to live by your own exclusive authority and take your own chances. Read More


  1. Alex on June 8, 2006 at 11:51

    That's why I vote Perot Party! =)

  2. Kyle Bennett on June 9, 2006 at 06:33


    "So you agree with selective enforcement of our laws?"


    "Which laws do you think we should enforce and which we shouldn't?"

    Should: The Bill of Rights, laws against Murder, Rape, Theft, and maybe one or two others.

    Shouldn't: The rest

    "that is a frightening number that we have know [sic] idea if they are criminals"

    To which I argue: "Heck we have enough criminals running around that are legal citizens of this country", and add: but Jon, we don't even know if *you* are a criminal. What should we do about that?

    Be prepared to have anything you advocate that we do to people that *might* be criminials done to you as well.

    The only way there is to know if someone is a criminal is to prove that he committed a crime. That's a simple fact of nature that applies to everyone, citizen or not.

  3. Richard Nikoley on June 9, 2006 at 10:15

    "…that is a frightening number…"

    Yea, I know: the sky is falling…for a coupla millenia, now. So what's new?

  4. Jon on June 9, 2006 at 03:17

    So you think illegal immigration is no big deal? So you agree with selective enforcement of our laws? Which laws do you think we should enforce and which we shouldn't? So I guess we should just throw open our borders and let who ever wants to come in?

    We have between 11-20 million illegals in this country and that is a frightening number that we have know idea if they are criminals in their former country or not. Heck we have enough criminals running around that are legal citizens of this country and yet we should just let the millions of people that snuck into this country illegaly stay and not face some sort of penalty. We might as well just throw open the doors to all of our prisons if we do that.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow by Email8k