New Location for the Jeremy West Column

Alright, found a place to get more readers... My articles will now be found on nolanchart.com, more specifically at http://www.nolanchart.com/author620.html. The easier way to find me there is currently http://jeremywest.net. That will point there until I get bored of it and point it somewhere else.
>> Permanent Link >>

Mary Ruwart for President

Alright, while I still support Ron Paul for the Republican nomination, someone I agree with even more has jumped into the race for the Libertarian Party nomination. I've always been impressed by Dr. Mary Ruwart's concise answers to difficult questions in her Advocates for Self Government column, and don't remember a time when I have disagreed with her solutions.

After I heard she was running for president, I started reading her book, Healing Our World, the 1993 version of which is available free online.

Check out the book for a comprehensive explanation of the underlying principles of liberty and what Dr. Ruwart believes. Then join me in supporting her Presidential bid.
>> Permanent Link >>

Jeremy West Show is back!

The Jeremy West Show is back… in written form! Yeah, I prefer talking, but I’m too lazy to produce and edit podcasts. If I could just talk and someone else did the editing and podcasting, I’d still podcast.

The fact of the matter is, it took a lot of work to edit together the show even for the little coherence that ended up on the show. I know what I believe as far as political philosophy, but I’m not quick at articulating it. I spent ages after every episode editing out incoherent arguments and (more often) long pauses and lots of ums and ers. Why not just give myself the time to write what I think?

So, let’s start a dialogue here. If you don’t know what I believe, I do believe you can still find my incoherent ramblings by searching for “Jeremy West Show” on iTunes. Then you can respond here, and we’ll have a chat.

Cheers!
Jeremy
>> Permanent Link >>

The Jeremy West Show

Hey everyone, find my new liberty podcast at http://jeremywest.mypodpage.com!


>> Permanent Link >>

Why a Diverse Society Demands a Libertarian Government--updated April 10/2005

The United States of America is, and was always meant to be, a diverse society. Today it is more diverse than ever, and luckily much more tolerant of diversity than it was in the opening days of the “land of liberty”, days when slaves were counted as 3/5 of a person and women had to leave the decisions to their husbands.

But our diversity has always been envisioned as far more than simply differences of skin color or gender. The reason so many fled from Europe to the U.S. in colonial times was to come to a land where diversity of thought was tolerated—even celebrated. You see, in England at the time, only those who agreed with the Church of England were in the right.

Nowadays, fortunately, our government cannot dictate a religion or any way of thought. They come close sometimes, with anyone who disagreed with the president on Iraq being labeled unpatriotic or traitorous. However, by and large, these dissenters have remained free (albeit perhaps needing everything to be free, if they can’t make money any more like the Dixie Chicks).

Unfortunately, while our government can’t force thoughts on us, they can indeed force us to pay for the actions that result from the thoughts of others. This means that when you give government the power to carry out actions resulting from your thoughts, you also give them the power to carry out actions resulting from the thoughts of others—thoughts you may wholeheartedly disagree with. Take note, Christians. This means that while you may succeed, for a time, at forcing homosexual marriages to be banned, the government is at the same time, forcing you to pay for abortions. Lest abortion rights activists get too excited remember that the same government who takes money from pro-lifers for your cause gives your money to their churches through the faith-based charities initiative. Soon enough, they may also be paying for kids to go to religious schools which indoctrinate kids against your views.

Some of you think the government should take guns away from everyone. Some think it should outlaw liquor and tobacco, or at least be tougher on marijuana users. Others want teachers to be forced to pray with their students every morning. Many want illegal aliens more strongly prosecuted. Maybe you think the government should force people to eat healthily. How about a state that finds people who have racist or homophobic thoughts and forces them to publicly make amends? Or one that pools everyone's money and builds a one-size fits all medical program? A lot of people believe the government should stop people from gambling. And of course they’ve already forced people not to take certain kinds of drugs and to wear seatbelts and helmets, among thousands of other regulations. You probably agree with government enforcing at least a few of these things. But does your neighbor agree with the same ones?

The knee-jerk reaction to government forcing you to do things or pay for causes which you don't support is to vote in people who will force others to do things or pay for causes which you do support. All the world’s problems would be solved if only the dictators with whom you agreed were running it. Better still, why don’t you run the world?

The problem is, the best form of government to keep the powerful from representing simply their only interests is democracy (if anyone has ideas for a better model, please let me know). Democracy works well for advancing the ideals of the majority of yesteryear (actually, the plurality of yesteryear, but that’s another article).

"What do you mean the majority of yesteryear," you may ask, and I'd be glad you did. In the U.S. federal government, the candidates with the most accountability to the voters serve for two full years before coming before the voters again. Those with the least serve for six. Of course the most powerful politician (Did the founding fathers mean for him to be so powerful?) serves for four full years before the public has another say.

I’m forgetting one branch of government—oh yes, the judiciary. The longest serving current member of the Supreme Court was appointed by a President elected (basically, don’t get technical on me with the electoral college) by a very different public in the year 1968. Apart from the president (who was selected by the Supreme Court in the year 2000, according to many), these 9 justices may well be the most powerful officials in the country.

So you see, those making the decisions on how the government shall coerce whom are not even necessarily representing today’s majority. But let’s say they were. Where does that leave the other 49% (at least) who voted against them?

No one should be allowed to coerce someone who believes strongly that abortion is murder to pay for abortions. And no one should steal money from an atheist to give to a religious organization.

But what about the things on which the vast majority of us agree? Don’t we all agree that everyone should get health care? Ah—but even that is vastly more complicated than it sounds—while we may all agree that everyone should be treated for health problems, we don’t even come close to agreeing on how.

More importantly, once we give government the power to confiscate our money in order to pay for anything, even those things on which the vast majority seemingly agree (What about food, by the way? Surely even more people agree that everyone needs food than medical care. Should everyone line up at government offices to pick up their food? Hey—it worked well in Russia, didn’t it?), we begin back down that road where they are allowed to use your money for anything—even things with which you deeply disagree.

So, in order to have a nation in which true diversity—diversity in skin color, culture, thought, and individual action is cherished and protected, we must return to a land of liberty. We must return to a limited government whose only role is to protect us against aggression on ourselves or our liberties.

Perhaps more importantly to you—whether you are a Christian, an abortion rights activist, a gay rights activist, or an environmentalist, whether you’re currently in the majority (or lucky enough to be a protected minority) or not, one day the majority may be against you. And when they are, the government that you use to push your agenda today will be using all of its resources against you tomorrow. Be wary of how many resources you help it to gather!

This Presidential cycle, we're going to live with mob rule. Fifty one percent of the voters have spoken, and now W. will carry out their every desire. Thanks to all the power gained by the old Democrat ruling majority, the new Republican ruling majority can carry out its plans for years to come. Vote Libertarian next time. Any other party will just continue the growth of government power. Every other party will advance a greater version of the status quo. Any vote but a vote for liberty is a wasted vote.
>> Permanent Link >>

It's a Start

President Bush has finally proposed some spending cuts to go along with all the tax cuts. It's a start to bringing this government under control, but he continues to increase government spending in areas that should be funded by charities and chartitable friends, families, and neighbors.

Also, despite the government's insistence on calling it "defense", they continue to propose and pass spending increases for offense. Our government should defend our borders and our people, but they should not be on the offensive.
>> Permanent Link >>

I Agree with the President Wholeheartedly

George W. Bush, 2000: "I'm not so sure the role of the United States is going around the world saying this is the way its gotta be."
>> Permanent Link >>

Marriage

Thanks Elle for publishing Nia's link to this fascinating article on why the Bible is not a good source for debating gay marriage.
>> Permanent Link >>

It's the Repubilcrats, Stupid!

TeeJ:"Your dementia is letting loose your critical analysis. Both Mr. Kerry and Mr. Bush have bad policies with regards to most things. Few of them respect the American liberty we were intended for. Don't you see that the richest will always benefit in a system like ours, the corporations will, irregardless if it is Democrats or Republicans elected? Back in my day... I mean, back in the day, back a long time ago... the Democratic-Republicans defended the freedom. Now Democrats and Republicans are dominating together. There may be a conspiracy at hand but it's not the one you envision of Mr. Bush's. Mr. Kerry is no less complicit."
>> Permanent Link >>

Damn Hicks

Miscellaneous Objections: The Gays Is Comin': "it"s easy for people who are gay, or who live on the coasts, or who live in cities, to forget how radical a change in society they are really proposing. I think it's a good one. But people need [time to get] used to the idea. They need to be shown real, healthy families that they can relate to. They need, as condescending as it may sound, to be taught."
>> Permanent Link >>