Thursday, October 02, 2008

The Liberty Voice Revealed

I hadn't spent much time reading The Liberty Voice until the Delaware Country Political Reporter noted this story from TLV. The DCPR post caught my attention, so I clicked over to read what the voice of liberty has to say about the issues of our day. What I found surprised me.

The voice is not one of liberty. It is an eclectic confusion of positions that span the spectrum, though mostly aligned with the far left of the Democratic Party. Sure, it's anti-war, but that is the end of it.

While I agree with a few of the positions there, I am troubled by the lack of an ethical grounding. TLV seems to believe that liberty is what TLV wants it to be at any given moment. But such a usage of liberty is hollow. Liberty must be grounded in God-given rights, namely the right to private property.

But TLV doesn't respect property. In fact, TLV advocates the theft of income in support of a slew of government wealth transfers -- not a lot of liberty in that.

The Liberty Voice is not libertarian, it is not free market, and it is not liberty. TLV is simply rehashed leftist views cloaked by the word that inspired our Patriots. But our country was not founded on a desire to create a socialist utopia, it was founded by those who wanted government out of their lives.

It's amazing how a word can be twisted to suit an agenda.


Note:

According to TLV: Since Tiberi didn't want cameras, the incident became a violation of First Amendment rights.

Maybe the action offended TLV; maybe TLV felt the action was unfair. But liberty is not fairness, and liberty does not protect one from being offended.

In essence, TLV believes it has a first claim to the event -- LTV believes that it holds a property claim that supersedes the property rights of the private sponsors of the event. Hmmm.

It doesn't matter that the public was invited. LTV's belief is the same belief that created the pseudo right -- positive right -- to the property of someone else based on the nonsense of a "place of public accommodation" -- as if the public has a property right to a store simply because the store opens its doors to the public. That's nonsense. But so is the belief that an event which is open to the public automatically becomes public property, part of the public square. That's even more nonsense.

It's time for TLV to rethink its view of liberty or to drop the "L" altogether.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

There are no God-given rights. There are only the rights that we are willing to secure for ourselves.

The only right to property we have is that which we afford ourselves and which we are willing to defend. Property rights are no different than other rights.

In nature, the strongest accumulates the property (food, shelter, water) at the expense of the weak. As a Society, we do not accept that and as a group (Society) we prevent the strong from taking from the weak. But, we only limit this to the extend we determine.

Jim Fedako said...

10:11 --

Are you channeling Karl Marx?

Anonymous said...

Not Marx but other dead white guys. I would suspect that Marx was influenced, like anyone else in political theory, by the likes of Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau. These are the writers that have influenced my thought. I would even throw in a little Machiavelli for the harsh side of life.

Jim Fedako said...

Locke with Hobbes and Rousseau?!? Hmmm. Strange mix. Explains your earlier post.

Anonymous said...

All related to the Social Contract and how and why we join together in civil society.

Jim Fedako said...

You can always find a link between two concepts, but ...

Locke stood for liberty as a gift from God, while the other two saw no need for liberty and instead sought government as the means and the end.

Mix the two and you have nothing of substance.

Again, explains your initial comment.