Worst Principles

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness—-That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. The Declaration of Independence

Libertarians believe in the American heritage of liberty, enterprise, and personal responsibility. Libertarians recognize the responsibility we all share to preserve this precious heritage for our children and grandchildren. - Libertarian Party

Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market. - Libertarian Party

          Article I Section 8 (U. S. Constitution)

The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

[. . .]

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;  (Note: And even where one might invoke the Tenth Amendment, individual states have broader authority to regulate industry.)

Someone bring back Peirce and James and Dewey.  Please!

Let me start off by saying that there may be a legitimate Constitutional argument against the mandate in the health care bill that recently passed.  (Although the ability of states to opt out of the mandate undercuts this somewhat.)  But let’s get serious.  The Constitution is not the root of opposition to the law.  The opposition is philosophical.  More importantly, it is a philosophy allowed by the Constitution, but not endorsed by it. The word “Constitution” is meant to give more weight to an argument with weak – or at least highly challengeable – practical substance. 

Now, let's deal with the fact that the often (though not always) put forth idea by Libertarians is that the Founding Fathers were Libertarians, the Constitution is a Libertarian document, and they are the protectors of our Founding Principles is factually insupportable and utter horseshit.  You want to be a Libertarian, be my guest.  All the cool kids are doing it.  But why don’t you go ahead and apply the non-aggression principle to your abuse of language and history and stop trying to cram Libertarianism down people’s throats by claiming that A) the Constitution backs you and B) that apparently the Constitution isn’t so much a document that defines and restricts government power so much as an authoritarian document that, through the tyranny of the law of dead generations, prevents us from exercising self-determination.  Because, frankly, that is what you’re doing when you make that argument.  The Constitution is an often vague framework that sets up the institutions of government and their methods of dealing with each other and the public, along with a list of particular reserved rights (with the right to expand that definition reserved in the 9th Amendment) that are not to be legislated against, though it may be the will of the majority.

When this authoritarian, and make no mistake imaginary, Constitution is invoked against the self-determination of what Jefferson called “the living generation”, it undercuts its authority (the Consent of the Governed) and begins to destroy itself.

When, as more than a few Libertarians still do, one asserts that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is unconstitutional, they do not injure the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in the mind of their listener, but they injure the Constitution.  Now, the Constitution is a mighty thing.  This comparison only inflicts a mere chip.  But over and over again, chip chip chip, the Constitution is destroyed by those seeking to convert it to their own political ideology.  Engaging in Orwellian word-power games makes their claims of being defenders of liberty ludicrous at best.  I, and most others, reject the tailored definitions of freedom and liberty of such people.  They are pernicious equivocations.

Recognize the right of people to choose not to live in a Libertarian society.  Every time you invoke the authoritarian pseudo-Constitution, invoke discrimination as fundamental to liberty, you do harm to both.  If you do ultimate harm to the Constitution, society could become untethered to any semblance of stability, balance, and perennial civil rights.  People live in the real world.  Theories can go fuck themselves when they refuse to function in the real world.

Parodox, meet simple-minded absolutism.

I'll be back later to clean up the brain chips.