This is a kind of long one, but I tend to ramble... Sorry... > Sorry for sending this, but I felt the need to reply to the uneducated, > libertarian (the least-aptly named "political group" I've ever come > across) propaganda recently posted to the list. So, I'm uneducated, eh? We'll come to that later. The libertarian party is so named because it is the only party which recognizes the sovereignty of the individual, in other words, liberty. > Get rid of public > education? What a moron. I assume you were privately educated, > apparently with little success. Remember not everyone's mommy and daddy > are rich, some people need public education. Actually, I am a recent graduate of a public (government) school. An interesting point, by the way; socialist institutions, like the government schools, will always by nature stagnate. Right now our public schools, especially those in poor areas, are failures. A family living in a poor neighborhood is so bogged down by property taxes, income taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, that they are forced to send their children to the horrible schools that happen to be in the area thanks to compulsory education laws. Their children may soon learn that a life a crime pays, which is not a hard lesson to learn when attending schools that are based on theft, the redistribution of wealth. Meanwhile, the rich kids in the suburbs get the public schools that are mediocre (rather than hellish) or private schools. Oh, the poor are so much better off now, huh? Education can only improve if it is subjected to the free market and economic laws such as competition, where invariably the quality goes up and the cost goes down. The only way for a socialist institution to accomplish this is espionage and theft. > I've drafted a slogan for > you, you can use it if you like: "More inequality, more inequality." > Also, I often find these simple words of wisdom should be pondered and > absorbed by libertarians: Money does not equal merit. Equality cannot be achieved by humanity. The best that can be done is to have a government which looks at humanity not as a mass of people to be divided into groups but as individuals. The rights of the individual, every individual must be preserved, and beyond that government should have no function. If our government wishes to help the poor, minority groups, etc. (which it does not; politicians just enjoy the power), it cannot deprive other groups (even the rich... and I know being rich is just eeevil) of their rights in doing so. One group of people cannot have more rights than another. Every individual must have equal protection. Group rights can only be secured by these means. > Also, I'm > curious, why aren't there any poor libertarians? While framing a > response to this one, consider how much each response relies on > stereotypes. Finally, have you ever tried a political view that wasn't > fed to you by a silver spoon from your parents? Why aren't there any poor politicians? Also, while my personal life has nothing to do with a philisophical discussion, my parents are moderate republicans, which is worlds away from my views, and they use stainless steel. I tried their view for a bit, you see, because 12 years in a socialist institution tends to make you a socialist. However, upon discovering how to think in my own terms rather than those set by the government schools, I soon realized that capitalism--real capitalism--is the only just government. It is the only for of government which recognizes that every individual has rights that must be protected, and the rights of one group cannot be sacrificed for the rights of another. Ernie the Slave Machine
