I want to lay all myths about my particular kind of libertarianism to rest. I am going to carefully explain every neolibertarian principle we have had since 2003 and that I have adhered to since 2011 when I was a 16-year-old High School Sophomore in Second Semester and was just beginning to learn how to properly analyze politics and geopolitics. These Principles were defined in 2003 by Dale Franks.
The policy that maximizes individual freedom is the best policy
Neolibertarians believe, as I have believed since second semester of my high school sophomore year, that the first and last and every priority of social policy and of cultural policy should inherently be individual freedom and free-society policies. Wikipedia as of just last year even says that we support “freedom of choice“. This means we are typically if not Pro-Choice not just on abortion but also on…
- Voluntary Euthanasia
- Gay Marriage
- Large Sugary Sodas
- Energy Drinks
- R-rated movies
- M-rated games
- Revealing fashions
- Trans fatty Meats like beef
- Gun Ownership
- Recreational Drugs
- Voluntary Prostitution
- Consenting Adult Porn
Me, individually, I am pro-choice on all of the above.
The policy that offers the least amount of government intervention or regulation is the best policy
As neolibertarians, we believe in a very minimalist-minded government. We basically say “Let the government handle domestic infrastructure, emergency services, foreign policy, and military defense; but nothing else”. The one-word label for this kind of government, NOT to be confused with Monarchy, is in fact a “Minarchy“.
Now, a minarchy can be either a presidential or parliamentary republic, or it can be a constitutional monarchy that limits its royal family’s powers with the rule of law. My nation, the United States, is perhaps the best-known example of a presidential republic, although senseless expansions of government power make us currently NOT a minarchy, very regrettably.
The policy that provides rational, market-based incentives is the best policy
Fiscal libertarianism is colossal in neolibertarian logic, we believe quite strongly in the science of supply and demand and we say that government management of the economy is a bad idea and that corporatism, the destruction of the free market and replacement of economic individualism with corporate monopolies, is also heinous. Typically us neolibertarians support free-market healthcare and endorse the enactment of school vouchers. Usually, neolibertarians like me espouse the idea that tort laws against damage by fossil fuel are the only energy policies that can make positive results. This belief is called free market environmentalism. The most consistent of us, including me, also endorse free trade policies that have nothing to do with fair trade and even less to do with Donald Trump’s walled-border and muslim-banning ideas.
A foreign policy of diplomacy that spreads liberal democracy and individual freedom and abolishes authoritarian states
Plenty of people here on social media sites will lie about us neolibertarians by claiming our foreign policy is identical to neoconservative foreign policy. But when you look at our fourth core value, you immediately notice many things wrong with that claim:
- Neoconservatives believe in using nothing but unilateral military force to spread democracy, but they never support spreading individual freedom like we the neolibertarians endorse.
- Neoconservatives think that multilateralism and diplomacy are inherently forms of appeasement, they are very black-and-white about foreign policy options whereas neolibertarians like me see innumerable shades of gray in the middle, those of us in public offices would carefully examine diplomatic options to ensure they are not one-sided.
- Neoconservatives tend to be okay with a corporatist economy, as opposed to capitalist, and socially they are okay with Jewish and/or Christian religious conservative legislation. Neolibertarians like myself are very much NOT okay with these things. With us, domestic policy entails individual freedom and economic individualism and also secularism.
- Neoconservatives, according to their actions under George W. Bush, think that liberal democracy is inherently the only kind of democracy possible, whereas neolibertarians like me realize that democracy is normally characterized by mob rule and that there are roughly 30+ different variants of democracy.
A military policy of using defensive war at the sole discretion of Congress, but only against nations who clearly & directly endanger America or its friends
Yes, I did link ‘friends’ to Wikipedia definition of friendship, to once again parent Congress about what a friend is. Friends are absolutely not prolific sponsors of enemy movements. Friends also do not ever regard religious nationalist enemy movements as heroes first and as villains later.
But that is not the point of this section. The point is that neolibertarians like me only support military force against nations who are very clearly direct threats to America or to its friends. A friend of America has individualism [including economic individualism], pluralism, and social equality as values in common with America and uses these values as reasons to instinctively side with America against any and all initial aggressors, and sponsors NONE of the wars of aggression against America.
Finally putting all that friendship stuff aside, and focusing on types of war, defensive war is basically the opposite of war of aggression, of which the latter is war for the sake of conquering. Examples of defensive war include:
- Retaliatory war to punish a very recent assault of people of America and/or peoples of nations who are sincerely America’s friends
- Preemptive war to end a clear and direct threat of immediate war of aggression
- Preventive war to end a clear and direct threat of developing future war of aggression
- Humanitarian war to punish the perpetrators of some recent or current Post-nazi Holocaust against the people of an honest friend like Israel or Ukraine
What do all of these have in common? They all involve exertion of what is known in legal theory as the Right of Self-defense. Click this link to Wikipedia and you will learn it has a bunch of other names. Neolibertarians like me believe in the right of self-defense applied to military policy, but only when there is indisputably a war of aggression being waged against America or against any of the US’s most sincere friends. This is once again how we differ dramatically from neoconservatives in terms of when it may be justified to use war. We believe war needs to only be used in direct defense of America or its friends, as for bringing Western Culture values to the world neolibertarians like me claim we need to rely primarily on free trade, globalization and civil diplomacy.
Perhaps I have done at least a decent job of debunking myths about neolibertarians, and perhaps now people can learn how pretty much all of us, including me, think. Thank you all for the read,