The following is for those who question my Libertarian credentials.
I was first introduced to Libertarianism when I watched speeches from Harry Browne on C-Span. The man was truly brilliant, in spite of his foreign policy positions. After being introduced to Libertarianism I found I agreed with a great number of their conclusions. The following is a brief list of areas in which my personal/political philosophy overlaps with those of most libertarians.
• I believe the purpose of the 1st amendment is to protect free speech. I therefore advocate for absolute free speech as outlined by John Stuart Mill in On Liberty.
• I believe the purpose of the 2nd amendment was to allow the populous to always maintain the capability to overthrow the US Government, if it became tyrannical. In my opinion, this becomes clear if you carefully read the 2nd amendment and understand that militias meant every able-bodied freeman.
• I believe in a robust defense of civil liberties for all Americans.
• I advocate for the legalization of all drugs currently considered illegal under US law.
• I am strongly morally opposed to abortion, but I am hesitant to make it illegal.
• I am in favor of making legal immigration to this nation easier.
• I feel that the government should not be considered the first solution to a problem.
• I believe in free markets and capitalism rather than government control and corporations.
• I am an advocate for civil unions, but I do not feel government belongs in marriage, which should be left to religions.
• I am opposed to a theocracy, but I respect freedom of religion.
I should note that, while I agree a great deal with libertarians, there are disagreements. I try to make this clear by always describing myself as a conservative/libertarian. The following are potential areas of disagreement.
• I believe the best form of government is that which is closest to the people. As a result, I feel states should be returned to their rightful place of prominence rather than advocate for the complete abolition of government.
• I do not believe in granting the rights of US citizens to foreign nationals. It could very well be argued that my support for libertarianism ends at the border, because I recognize the difference between a society governed by the rule of law under a constitution and an anarchic international system.
• I reject international law as a fundamentally flawed misnomer and illegitimate. International law cannot exist, because law, in the west, is rooted in the consent of the governed. Law, divorced from an overarching system of governance is, by definition, nothing more than international norms. International norms hold no more real authority than social norms, unless they are codified within a legal system. There is no international constitution and therefore, there can be no international law. As an aside, let me say that I find the very concept of international law repugnant and antithetical to individual liberty and pluralism.
• I reject an isolationist foreign policy that attempts to apply domestic values to international relations, because the international system is anarchic, while a nation governed by equal application of the law, under a constitution, is not.