On Liberty

Liberty, liberalism, libertarian. These are words that, on the face of it are pretty straightforward, no? For the sake of ease, let’s see what Dictionary.com says, shall we?

Liberty:

freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control.

Among others, of course. However, I’d say that’s pretty unequivocal. What about liberalism?

a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.

Again, among others. Again, pretty unequivocal. So, libertarian?

a person who advocates liberty, esp. with regard to thought or conduct.

So, pretty straightforward, one would have thought, eh? And, one would think that a political party with the word “liberal” in its title would be liberal wouldn’t you? Well if we need to be reminded, again, the Liberal Democrats demonstrate that they are not remotely liberal. On this occasion, the author feels that the highly illberal smoking ban is a good thing and in so doing reiterates the junk science spouted by the likes of ASH relating to second-hand smoke.

Bad though the article is, it is in the comments that we see the shrill screeching of the anti-smoker who wants to ban everything that he doesn’t like. Bad, yes, but this cretin, following several posts calling for ever more regulation of our private lives, calls himself a libertarian. Read it and weep.

So, the paradox continues – a party that claims to be liberal advocates state intrusion into the private lives of citizens and an ordinary member of that party wants to ban barbecues while claiming that he is a libertarian in –  and I quote – “the traditional sense”. I would refer this person to the definition above and ask him reconcile that with the desire to restrict, regulate and ban that which offends his sensibilities. Well, I would if I thought he had the necessary intellectual capacity.

Once again we have the corruption of language, the desire by the statists to steal words and twist them out of recognition – just as the TUC are currently misusing the word progressive in their attempt to whip up a general strike.

These people – and the poster commenting on the article in the LibDem Voice – refer to libertarians as “right wing” – and all too often, “extreme right wing”. Liberalism and libertarianism are neither right nor left. They are the antithesis of authoritarianism, which itself is neither right nor left. Libertarians are often right of centre, but the ideology itself is not. No, what we have here is the distortion of meaning, the misuse of words. The use of “right wing” or “extreme right wing” is code for “someone who disagrees with me” and is therefore not a nice person. Which is curious, because it is all too often the nastiest misanthropic, hypocritical liars who spout these epithets.

A liberal is lassez faire about others – whether they smoke, drink, snort cocaine, ride motorcycles, climb mountains or wear odd clothing in public. I don’t smoke and have never smoked. Not even a sly drag as a growing teenager just to try. I never wanted to. Yet, for all that, I couldn’t give a damn if others want to do it and have no problem catching the odd whiff of burning tobacco. It does me no harm. A liberal wants the state to mind its own business, not send the barbecue police around, not try to stop people smoking in their own homes or their own cars. A liberal will find no place in the liberal democrats it seems.

H/T Dick Puddlecote.