Quote:
Originally Posted by AceArcher
Cereal question here...
Mathgeek, you seem to offer quite a few quips aimed at Libertarians based on only the libertarian standpoint in regards to cannabis.
I would have guessed / thought that in most regards you would generally agree with the libertarian platform (let's leave whether they are a viable option or not out of the discussion for now)....
I think i speak for most on here when i say that we understand that your not a fan of cannabis legalization / decrim... but what about all their other platform positions.
ie... http://www.lp.org/platform
Also... I bet the trolling would work quite well. I could certainly imagine that it might make a very effective method for finding concentrations of fish.
Also... Nissan over merc.... uhhhhhh YAMAHA? |
For many years I thought my only differences with libertarians were suicide, drugs, porn, gambling and abortion.
Since Sept 11, I've also realized that I am uncomfortable with the degree of isolation many libertarians advocate in foreign policy. I do think that the US should be much less interventionist in foreign wars and avoid being the world's policeman. But when US soil is attacked, or US citizens, we need to put a hurt on the bad people. I also feel strongly that we need to live up to duly passed treaties and international obligations that we have duly incurred. Even if they were a bad idea, backing out on duly incurred treaty obligations is a worse idea. In these cases, we should look for a mutually agreeable way to disentangle ourselves from international messes.
I have also grown to be a convinced federalist. Just because I believe something is a "good idea" or a "bad idea" for government to be involved with; I feel even more strongly about keeping the proper separation between the Constitutional roles of federal and state powers. As a resident of Louisiana, for example, I shouldn't strong arm the federal government for my "good idea" policy changes at the federal level if the matter at hand is not a proper federal power, and I shouldn't exert undue influence on policy issues in other states. It's OK for 50 states to have 50 different state level drug laws, driver's license requirements, drinking ages, etc. The Libertarian party platform almost demands uniformity of laws in different states.
I wouldn't mind too much if the feds got out of the drug game, but the US really needs to extract itself from some duly passed international treaties first, as well as (at the Federal level) get out of welfare, health care and higher education. Legalizing drugs would be much more tenable if the federal government would let abusers crash and burn (per a libertarian philosophy). Legalizing drugs while providing a "safety net" for drug abusers sounds like a step toward libertarian policies, but in the end will yield a bigger and more controlling government.
It is interesting to me that libertarians usually are making public policy pushes for the most egregious parts of their overall platform. Rather than less taxes and smaller government, 2nd amendment rights, and reduced regulation on businesses, they tout stuff like drug legalization, gambling, and pornography. Some even tout gay marriage.
Gambling is a great example where "legalization" increases rather than decreases government control and involvement. I fear drugs will likely turn out the same way.