PJ Media

Non aggression sounds fine to me. I dissent from the idea that non-aggression includes ignoring aggression elsewhere when we have the ability, and reason to intervene. Contrary to the deluded ramblings of most, Iraq did not spring forth fully formed from the head of the current President in 2003. We’ve been enmeshed there since 1991. To be against an intervention in Iraq is to ignore the past 20 years of our involvement there. It is, quite frankly, revisionist, trite, and shallow.

If you can’t look honestly at the history of post-WWII U.S. foreign policy then you can’t ever be a libertarian.

So now we are the great fools for deciding international communism was worthy of opposing from 1945 to 1991? Again, who looks deluded here?

If you’re a dummy and think that Islamic fundamentalism grew as a response to “cultural inferiority” instead of as a response to the U.S. overthrow of a democratically elected secular leader and support for a torturing kleptocracy for 20 years then you can’t ever be a libertarian.

You’re a ‘dummy’ if you think that Islamic fundamentalism is in any way related to the overthrow of a ‘secular’ dictator of the Ba’ath party who ran a aliberial, repressive cult of personality at the expense of his subjects who happened to be mostly Muslim.

It takes a basic sense of decency and honesty which is why Stephen Green, Glenn Reynolds, etc were never real libertarians and is why real libertarians are glad to see them stop using an honorable political label for their wretched ideology.

And here is why I don’t subscribe to ‘Libertarianism’. If you do not conform to the Orthodoxy, you are a Heretic and thus Shunned.