Non-interventionist foreign policy turns out to be both government-only and wholly separate from defense policy.
Happy Thanksgiving, internet! Right just now I am thankful to learn that I was wrong all along about whether nonintervention has any compatibility with a proven military policy aka defense policy. Honestly, I have to dedicate this post to my US political hero, Austin Petersen. He ran the one and only morally winning campaign in the entire Libertarian Party in 2016 and who intensified my love for the US Constitution and civil liberties and economic rights the best any candidate could. Austin also opened me to the idea that many Nonintervention types, himself included, recognize the moral necessity of rejecting pacifist defense policy.
Foreign Policy vs Defense Policy
The difference between foreign policy and defense policy is something I must briefly apologize for presenting as two ‘sides’ of foreign policy.
- The policy of an independent nation in its interaction with other independent nations
Defense Policy (aka military policy)
- The policy of an independent nation in its own national security and its own military
Yeah, these are distinct political policy categories. And these two happen to be almost all the politics I ever talk about. I have other interests like Lord of the Rings, dinosaurs, American and/or Irish whiskey (I’m 22 and will be 23 on May 6th of next year, so basically 2017), and many others. But when I have politics on mind, almost all the political issues I think about are on foreign policy and defense policy.
What exactly is Nonintervention policy?
Nonintervention is a foreign policy that declares one’s government should not make military alliances but should make friendships via diplomacy and/or trade, and should not wage any wars that are not matters of the right of defense.
For some examples, do not wage war of aggression and also do not sponsor terrorism. Also don’t attack a tyranny that has neither done actual violence against you nor made threat of violence against you.
Come to think of it, all along I have had a specific aspect Nonintervention as one of my foreign policy beliefs; this one.
- The crux of United States libertarian foreign policy is unilateral free trade, and making friendships via diplomacy with the United States’ fellow Western Democracies.
But on the other hand, I can happily Thanks-give to Austin Petersen for introducing me to a principle of Nonintervention I can get behind instantly. So let’s talk what kind of Defense Policy is best for making libertarian Nonintervention electable.
Credible Defense/Military Policy
Libertarians have a really big problem making nonintervention electable and marketable. This is entirely because of radically pacifist and radically Just War Theorists acting up as terrifying and creepy ideologues. So how exactly do we as a movement make non-intervention electable?
Well, we start by telling these ideologues NO on everything they say. And next we refrain from ever shutting down anything that’s not at least as close to pacifism as Just War Theory by demonizing to those who propose alternative defense policies as ‘statist’, ‘neocon’, ‘warmonger’, ‘imperialist’, ‘dictator’, ‘nation-building fanatic’, or any of those other stupid labels those repulsive ideologues have.
Then we take a precursory look not just at American self-defense history (WW2 and earlier) but also at the US Constitution’s Preamble; in order to figure out what the US federal government’s official jobs are.
And of course this kind of researching will reveal two things for sure. Thing one is that the Preamble explicitly states that the US government’s jobs are:
- Establish Justice for the American People
- Insure Domestic Tranquility for the American People
- Promote the General well-being of the American People
- Provide Common Defense for the American People
- Secure Economic Liberty and Civil Liberty for the American people
And thing two is that doing these jobs on a military policy level historically required the US government to be absolutely, totally ruthless in defeating enemies of the American People. Doing its five full-time jobs properly required the US military during every single known America-involving war to do severely devastating annihilation to the initial aggressor.
Here in the digital age, acting rightly for US defense policy requires the sixteen US intel agencies to confirm with the Legislative Branch as to whether the tyranny in question poses a threat or not.
That’s what I got here for my revelation on Thanksgiving Day. Thanks readers,