Recent Updates by Topic

Popular Opinion Pieces

Op-Ed

Down With Seat Belts!

Print: Email: Share:

Don’t Kill the Messenger

Elections are gearing up and I’m feeling some political heat. Many have hopped on the Barack Bandwagon or are bunkering down at Camp Hillary. Others are salivating at the mere thought of a McCain burger with a super-sized order of Freedom Fries and an Iraqi invasion to go. [Ed: are Nader Nuggets now on the menu?] Amid the campaign clamor, however, there remains the oft-forgotten and woefully misunderstood political tradition: that of libertarianism.

I’m surprised that libertarianism hasn’t been more of a hit with the granola-crunching Ithacans who dwell ’round these parts — mostly because “libertarian” sounds kind of like “liberal” and rhymes with “vegetarian.” You would assume it’d be an automatic smash.

Most people seem to only have a vague idea of what a libertarian is. The political tradition can be summed up in a single word: liberty. It is a philosophy that values extensive personal liberties and opposes state intervention of any kind.

But the best way to get the point across is with an example. I’ll start with a politically explosive one: seat-belts. Thought they were a non-issue? Actually, libertarians are anti-seat-belt. Or, to be more accurate, they are against governments using their authority to mandate seat-belt use. According to libertarians, citizens should have complete liberty over their own lives; they should be free to take whatever risks they choose. So, while seatbelts themselves are hardly the libertarian anti-Christ, they are a good example of “paternalistic” government intervention.

Ever since I was a little girl, developed a weird thing for Wolf Blitzer, and started watching CNN, I’ve had two questions burning in my mind. Why are fiscally responsible people such assholes? And, why are laidback liberals incapable of balancing a checkbook?

Are libertarians liberal or conservative? Neither. Instead, they are socially liberal and fiscally conservative — a political cocktail I find most appealing.

So, now that we’ve got the basics down, let’s look at another example: abortion. Libertarians are vehemently opposed to restrictions on abortion rights. BUT, importantly, they’re not necessarily pro-abortion; in fact, many remain uncomfortable with the idea. The thing is that while libertarians may not be pro-abortion, they are decidedly pro-choice. They simply don’t believe that it is the government’s right to make decisions about a woman’s body. This is a crucial distinction.

Libertarian social policy has always fit nicely with my more general life philosophy: do what you want and let me do the same. For example, if you’re against gay marriage, then don’t walk down the aisle with someone of the same gender. If you’re opposed to recreational drugs, don’t snort them. And, if you’re disgusted by the ‘moral failings’ of prostitution, don’t slip the blond broad who lurks on your street corner a handful of greenbacks and tell her you’re ready to get all kinds of frisky.

But truly, this is perhaps the most important legacy that libertarianism can impart on us. With libertarianism, we can have the ability to take the moral element out of many debates. Rather than, say, gay rights being argued along “ethical” lines, they can be approached with an emphasis on individual rights. So instead of trying to evaluate the moral implications of gay marriage, we can simply recognize that, at the end of the day, our representatives have no right to make decisions about something as personal as individual sexual preference.

Think about it. Why should some city councillor have the power to dictate who I sleep with? Why is some senile senator qualified to restrict how you spend your hard-earned dollars?

People fear libertarian because they aren’t used to alternatives to state programming. In education, for example, libertarians advocate private approaches, such as a school-voucher system, that place power in the hands of parents. That scares a lot of people. But should it scare you more than the “No Child Left Behind” fiasco? It’s not like our kids can get any more illiterate.

What many people don’t know is that libertarianism is more than just an abstract doctrine; it’s the founding ideology for the third largest party in this here “land of the free.” Surprisingly, with over 200,000 registered voters, The Libertarian Party of the United States runs candidates in many states and captures a significant chunk of the popular vote.

This is not to say that I don’t have problems with some aspects of the libertarian approach. A good example is libertarian discrimination policy. Libertarians argue against anti-discrimination laws, on the basis that employers should be free to operate their businesses in accordance with their personal beliefs.

[Ed: From the perspective of a female student who is panic stricken at the thought of being forced to balance time-sensitive biological considerations with fears of being “mommy tracked” at the workplace and relegated to a life of mediocrity, I find this particularly alarming.]

It’s also likely that the U.S. electorate would have trouble swallowing some core libertarian tenets: non-interventionism in foreign policy and loosely-monitored borders, to name a few.

But even if we aren’t all jumping to elect the Libertarians to the White House, there’s still a lot we can learn from this tradition. In particular, its emphasis on personal sovereignty can help us find solutions to major moral issues.

So, let liberals bury themselves under the weight of a bloated government. Let conservatives try to move social policy back to the Middle Ages. Us libertarians just kick back and do what we do best: live and let live.

Katie Engelhart is a junior in the College of Arts and Sciences. Sh­­e can be contacted at kengelhart@cornellsun.com. Don’t Kill the Messenger appears alternate Tuesdays.

• Add new comment
• Printer-friendly version
• send to friend