House, 218 to 212, Votes to Set Date for Iraq Pullout

[Urbane Guerrilla]

American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world and the defense -- against attack from abroad -- of the lives, liberty, and property of the American people on American soil. Provision of such defense must respect the individual rights of people everywhere.

Shouldn't a Libertarian Administration acknowledge and defend the property of Americans on foreign soil as well? They'd better if they want to stay an Administration, democracy being what it is -- fail in this and the statist parties will grab power right back from you. Attacks from abroad, whether across our nation's borders or in foreign areas, amount in the libertarian view to assaults upon property rights. Libertarianism is sworn to defend these.

The principle of non-intervention should guide relationships between governments.

But never does and never did. And what means have we to cause other governments to adopt the non-intervention/non-coercion principle?

Coercion. Nations are notably slow to respond to the simple presence of a good example.

The United States government should return to the historic libertarian tradition of avoiding entangling alliances, abstaining totally from foreign quarrels and imperialist adventures, and recognizing the right to unrestricted trade, travel, and immigration.

And should the LP ever find itself with the responsibility of leading and managing the country, it will be unable to do any of this with the world as it is currently constituted. The "imperialist adventures" idea, as far as the United States is concerned, is simply a straw man. Our political instinct is remarkably non-imperialist, and I do not see any likelihood it will change. Capitalism is of itself anti-imperialist, for imperialist thinking is supported not be determinedly freemarket capitalism, but by mercantilism, to which the United States has never subscribed. We shall always have to enforce -- by coercive means -- the libertarian principle of free trade so long as one nonlibertarian nation remains on Earth.

To become a truly viable political entity in the world, libertarianism and its practitioners must be prepared, baldly put, to make war. We've shrunk from considering what we should make war about. This won't help libertarianism come into being. It may well make it vanish.

Ask yourself this: does a libertarian republic prosper better, or worse, if it is the sole libertarian republic on Earth? Would it prosper better, or worse, in the company of other libertarian republics?

You know what answer to give.

Now how do unlibertarian nations become libertarian ones? What is the likelihood of some interest group opposing the libertarian liberation?

How libertarian do the nations have to become? Is there only one model of libertarianism or is it a varied continuum?

Can you realistically expect a withering away of the State?

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Shouldn't a Libertarian Administration acknowledge and defend the property of Americans on foreign soil as well?

Seriously, you are high right now, aren't you? The answer to your question is no. You would find common ground on this with certain millionaire Democrats with Balkan holdings though.

[cashc]

By the way I understand that much of what I feel about this is influenced by the fact that I live in an extremely conservative community.

I'd like to see some views from people outside "the bubble" as my home is sometimes called.