The Shotgun Blog
« (Video) Tubas good, central banking bad | Main | Tug of war »
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Harper trashing libertarians?
My phone started buzzing off the hook tonight with claims that Harper was trashing libertarians in his speech. Stephen Taylor's twitter reports:
Harper: sympathy to libertarian ideal - but libertarians often unlikely to take respnsibility. eg drug abuse and unreg'd mrkts
Harper: conservatism is the three f's... Freedom, family, and faith
Does not compute. If you don't trust people to be moral or responsible, then there is no room for freedom in your philosophy.
It will be interesting to hear the partisan spin on this speech tomorrow. I've heard that some didn't interpret it this way. I can come back with the Tory take, but while I think some Conservatives can claim ignorance - as they don't even realize that Harper's statement is insulting to libertarians (though it should be obvious) - Harper knows better and doesn't have that luxury.
Edit: An attendee of the speech offers a clarification: Harper wasn't saying that libertarians are more likely to engage in drug abuse, but that it's an example of how people are not worthy of freedom. These are the things that can get lost in Tweetlation.
Anyway, it's a good thing we have laws, otherwise we might have drug abuse and unregulated markets in Canada. Right? Right? ha.
Posted by Janet Neilson on March 12, 2009 | Permalink
Comments
Well Duhhh. Of course Harper is trashing Llibertarian extremist freaks. I would denounce anybody splitting the centre right.
Mind you, it is hard to take you guys seriously.
Be thankful Harper even gave you the time of day.
Posted by: epsilon | 2009-03-12 11:40:19 PM
I find the above comment rather hilarious, considering that it's more often 'social conservatives' that are complacent about fiscal (and every other kind of) conservatism and the CPC's gradual leftwards drift. In my experience, libertarian conservatives have been the loudest in opposing the 'hug the middle' tactics... but perhaps that's what epsilon means.
I'm still waiting for transcripts of Harper's remarks, but he's treading dangerous ground by purposefully excluding libertarians, most of whom side with the CPC. A not insignificant portion of party activists are libertarian or libertarian inclined.
Posted by: RL | 2009-03-13 12:09:31 AM
epsilon...you speak in tongues of a leftard (!?).
Although, I have to agree that Harper has done nothing.
Posted by: xiat | 2009-03-13 12:15:29 AM
Yes Epsilon, libertarians are the "freaks." This is despite not being the ones advocating dropping bombs on or wanting to tax/steal from people. You're in the majority "epsilon" but that doesn't mean that _your_ world view isn't the freaky one.
Posted by: Jason | 2009-03-13 12:31:40 AM
I can confirm that Harper, did indeed trash libertarians. I was in the room. Stephen Taylor clearly saw the look on my face when he took pot shots at libertarians as I was only a few yards his left.
In one breath, Harper said he sympathized with libertarian ideals. In the other breath, he goes on to say we're essentially naive and how his government's populist approach is the only sensible way forward.
He also went on to compare libertarians to the Wall Street bankers who he asserted caused this problem, drawing a connection between the libertarian position for less regulation and the Wall Street lobbying for less regulation.
He essentially said libertarians want less regulation, but then want government handouts when they get themselves into trouble.
He also noted Canada will come out of this recession a stronger, "well regulated economy".
I will blog on this soon.
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-03-13 12:38:24 AM
I look forward to reading it, Mr. Brock. It's sounding worse with every additional bit of information, though.
Posted by: RL | 2009-03-13 1:39:12 AM
What Harpoer fails to see is that the majority of Libertarians are ex conservatives and republicans...there's a reason for that.
Posted by: JC | 2009-03-13 4:23:41 AM
Mike, sounds like I'll see you around today. Look forward to your blog.
Posted by: Janet | 2009-03-13 5:45:12 AM
In the other breath, he goes on to say we're essentially naive.....................
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-03-13 12:38:24 AM
Which libertarians are, especially in light of the conviction on terrorist charges of Mohammad Momin Khawaja the day before. Most libertarians want rid of the Anti-Terrorism Act as an affront to "property" rights. How many people would have died had Khawaja not been apprehended
I find it amusing that libertarians continually complain about the policies of the CPC when they have their own party, a party that got less votes in the last election that the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada. Libertarians are irrelevant.
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-13 6:20:54 AM
Most libertarians want rid of the Anti-Terrorism Act as an affront to "property" rights
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-13 6:20:54 AM
Back that up government boy!
How do you get that "most" Libertarians want to do "anything" in particular.
Where are you pulling these "facts" from...your A**?
Just more slanderous propoganda from a proponent of all things statist.
Posted by: JC | 2009-03-13 6:47:26 AM
He also went on to compare libertarians to the Wall Street bankers who he asserted caused this problem, drawing a connection between the libertarian position for less regulation and the Wall Street lobbying for less regulation.
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-03-13 12:38:24 AM
Bank failures 2008
US - 25
Canada - 0
Bank failures 2009 (as of March 3)
US - 16
Canada - 0
Whose banking system is in better shape?
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-13 6:48:44 AM
So Stig. You don't believe in "property" rights? Perhaps you would feel more comfortable in China ... Who cares how many libertarians are out there. This has absolutely no bearing on being right or wrong. It is now clear that Stephen Harper has betrayed libertarians and fiscal conservatives alike.
Posted by: Charles | 2009-03-13 6:53:36 AM
Hopefully, Canadian libertarians and fiscal conservatives remember this come the next election. Canada could use a libertarian opposition party. How many times will libertarians be stabbed in the back by conservatives and let them get away with it?
Posted by: Brad | 2009-03-13 7:40:38 AM
Most libertarians want rid of the Anti-Terrorism Act as an affront to "property" rights
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-13 6:20:54 AM
Back that up government boy!
Posted by: JC | 2009-03-13 6:47:26 AM
Platform of the Libertarian Party of Canada
"We question the need for an anti-terrorism law and security certificates."
http://www.libertarian.ca/english/lpc-platform-may-2007.html
The only people who question the need for anti-terrorism laws are terrorists and libertarians.
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-13 7:47:07 AM
So Stig. You don't believe in "property" rights?
Posted by: Charles | 2009-03-13 6:53:36 AM
Where did I say that?
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-13 7:49:47 AM
Platform of the Libertarian Party of Canada
http://www.libertarian.ca/english/lpc-platform-may-2007.html
"Only a simple declaration of identity should be required for entry into Canada under normal circumstances."
"Immigrants and refugees should be admitted freely to Canada.................."
So libertarians wish to give up secure borders as well. 7000 people bought this BS in the last election. Of that 7000, 6500 voted for the Libertarian Party because they would legalize pot. You're irrelevant.
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-13 8:37:36 AM
its time to pull out that wonderful list of the top 100 greatest Libertarians in Canada,, maybe someone will recognise more of them this time..
oh and theres Marc Emery in there,Mr Number Three-- the man who legalized pot and all drugs, escaped justice from the jaws of America before it was defeatd by the Taliban, as well as being elected Mayor of Vancouver- - the new capital city of North America- and all on the same day - between bong hits
Posted by: 419 | 2009-03-13 9:27:01 AM
You're oversimplifying, Stig. Many libertarians are concerned about portions of the Anti-Terrorism Act that are perceived as a threat to due process. As a libertarian I obviously support the prevention of and deterrence from terrorism, as terrorism is a blatant infringement of the personal liberties of others. The biggest concern for a lot of people is the possible inclusion of measures that allow for preemptive arrests without warrants. If our previously existing laws were being enforced properly, there would be no need for an Anti-Terrorism Act.
The same goes for what many libertarians call "cosmetic laws" that purport to deal with issues such as violence against women. Seeing as how we oppose violence (self-defence is another issue) in general, regardless of age, sex and gender, we want our existing, all-encompassing laws enforced properly rather than throwing cosmetic band-aid solutions at the problem.
Secondly, the Libertarian Party does not speak for all libertarians. If it did, it would be a lot bigger and would receive more votes! People are ignoring the fact that many small-l libertarians were/are members of the Conservative Party and worked hard on CPC associations to get the prime minister and his government elected. Had Harper directed his comments at the Libertarian Party, I don't think quite as many people would be upset right now. There are still libertarians who support the Conservative Party. Heck, there are libertarians within the Conservative caucus!
Thirdly, not everyone in favour of either legalizing or loosening the rules surrounding marijuana uses marijuana — or is even necessarily in favour of personal drug use! If freeing up police resources to go after murderers and rapists makes me a hippie, then a hippie be I. While we're at it, did you know that many libertarians support tougher sentences for convicted murderers and sex offenders? We are not soft on crime. We want dumb laws — banning pit bulls, for instance — taken off the books and we want our law enforcement branches to be able to go after people who seek to infringe on the liberty of others. (We also have crazy beliefs in things like fair trials and due process.)
Finally, the stereotype that all libertarians want a stateless society in which we can all do whatever we want is false and insulting. Libertarians are not opposed to social values, despite what some might have you believe. We just believe the instilling of social values is the role of parents and families, not the state. And how about all those people who oppose abortion on libertarian grounds (saying the fetus has the right to life and liberty)? The libertarians who support charter schools so they can send their kids to a school that promotes their own beliefs? The libertarians who want the government out of the marriage business altogether so that religious groups can set their own definition of marriage without interference from the state?
Conservatives and libertarians do have a lot of common ground, which is why it's distressing to hear that the PM said these things. We're supposed to be working together to advance the cause of smaller government — which does not preclude personal moral values — rather than sniping at each other.
Posted by: Ker | 2009-03-13 10:13:45 AM
Janet's indignation is laughable. Harper abandoned his libertarian consistency (if he ever had any) when he chose to get involved in major party politics. Libertarian political action can consist of the Libertarian Party which, in Canada, is a cruel joke, or engage in the love-hate relationship of trying to influence a major party, most likely the Conservatives. By either alternative , progress, if any, has been glacial.
Janet and other libertarians should get more of a sense of humour if seriously trying to grow libertarianism as one would have much more success as a comedian for example, than in politics.
As for Harper, even cross-dressing as a liberal-lite, which he has to be to stay in power, is much preferable to what we now have down South.
Posted by: John Chittick | 2009-03-13 11:30:03 AM
Secondly, the Libertarian Party does not speak for all libertarians.
Posted by: Ker | 2009-03-13 10:13:45 AM
I'm always amused by how quickly libertarians distance themselves from the Libertarian Party when specifics of libertarian policy are presented. The libertarian view of things is based on abstract theory that even though know can never be implemented, and like Academic Marxists will always be able to claim that their system hasn't worked because it has never been fully tried, and for that reason libertarians are best described as utopians of the right. Keep dreaming.
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-13 11:34:54 AM
its time to pull out that wonderful list of the top 100 greatest Libertarians in Canada,, maybe someone will recognise more of them this time..
oh and theres Marc Emery in there,Mr Number Three-- the man who legalized pot and all drugs, escaped justice from the jaws of America before it was defeatd by the Taliban, as well as being elected Mayor of Vancouver- - the new capital city of North America- and all on the same day - between bong hits
Posted by: 419 | 2009-03-13 9:27:01 AM
Why do you have such a hate-on for Marc? Are you just jealous that he is a more successful, more principled man than you will ever be?
Posted by: DrGreenthumb | 2009-03-14 12:32:16 PM
Jealous of a messiah complexed pothead about to spend the rest of his life in a US prison?
Yeah man, like that'd be soooo coool....
Posted by: epsilon | 2009-03-14 8:19:58 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.