 |
|
|
L. Neil Smith's THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE Number 299, November 28, 2004 "Just minding your own business"
Send Letters to editor@ncc-1776.org
Dear Editor/Mr. Ed/Ken, Re.: Letter from Mike Lorrey I'd call Mike Lorrey's letter a rant, except that it isn't. Rather, it is instead a diatribe slanted towards a political ideal which is—in its entirety—antithetically against the idea of 'just minding your own business.' Or, as William Pitt once uttered: Lorrey has not only missed the whole idea of what libertarianism is, but has additionally attempted to attach to the idea of liberty, jagged pieces from corrupt polities in an attempt to reconcile libertarianism with his personal ideas on how to mind-the-business of yet others. In fact, Lorrey begins to sound like so many Rs & Ds, communists/socialists, and fascists. In the case he—or others of his ilk, miss the point? The idea of right and wrong is pretty much determined—in some people's minds, as what they say is right, and not right inherently. That difference is defined as: In the same way that my rights, liberty, and ownership of property do not in any way depend/rely upon the acts of yet others, then it may be said that interfering with the acts of those others who have done not a thing to you, is an act of outright aggression, plain and simple. If Mike Lorrey had simply stated that individuals having a concern about the legitimate rights of others—wherever those 'others' may happen to be, should just pick up and go do something themselves without hijacking a whole nation to do his bidding in the process? Why, I would have agreed wholeheartedly. But, he didn't. Instead, Lorrey would seek legitimacy of action by attempting to harness the whole of the Libertarian community, and pervert it to an otherwise distinctly different polity. The whole of human endeavor has everything to do with the matter of 'reciprocity.' That is, 'what goes around, comes around.' If you desire to be left alone, then it is incumbent upon you to practice what you preach. Since Lorrey desires to interfere in the lives of yet others in other nations, there will come a time when those nations will act in accord to the same dictates as Lorrey's: They will mind our business with the same degree of disrespect for individual liberty, and with the same intensity as Lorrey's ideas of moral high ground actions. The 'moral high ground' is actually a mound within a deep pit that resides within a deeper pit yet. Quote: That is about the best example as I might produce regarding the attempt to reconcile antithetical political themes. If the whole idea of libertarianism is 'mind your own business,' then any idea either contrary or divergent, is not libertarian. Rather, it is something else. To 'answer' the last question in the above quote, I would say only this: If you desire to ally yourself with others for any particular reason, then you must accept the fact that what they do now re-identifies you as well. The quintessence of libertarianism is simply this: You cannot be what you say you are if you do something different than what the idea of individual liberty dictates: Mind your own business. And, minding your own business is precisely what the ZAP is all about. If you step outside that envelope of personal acts, then you are not a libertarian—but are in fact, something else. Maybe some kind of 'hyphen' libertarian? in Liberty,
Re: Letter from "Chemical" Ali Massoud Ed. Golly, I guess there are some people who do have a "...Right Not To Be Offended." Who'da thunk? I find it interesting that Mr. Massoud trots out the same tired rhetoric as that used by several high-profile race warlords when they are faced with any criticism of their particular protected group. Perhaps the "Chemical" refers to large quantities of nitrogen, oxygen and trace elements raised to a high temperature. I consider myself chastised and castigated. "Biological" Charles Stone
TLE AFFILIATE Help Support TLE by patronizing our advertisers and affiliates. We cheerfully accept donations!
|
|
|
|
