Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'politics'.
I'm watching the news and Trump is saying - it took the police eight minutes to get to the school when the shooting started, if the teachers carried guns... Is he really saying that school teachers should carry guns so they can shoot the children? THAT'S INSANE! Maybe I got it wrong, but it came across like that?
The libertarian point of view is based on one main rule: Never initiate the use of force. This is sometimes known as the non-aggression principle. The reason I brought this up is that over in another thread, libertariansim was described as being mainly a system oft 'every man for himself'. I feel this is a caricature of libertarians that has taken root in political discourse and I'd like to refute it. To start off, I'd like to post a short video that talks about the perils of using force to do good, and the (lack of?) morality involved in the idea that it's OK to do good with other people's money that has been taken by force. The reason I picked this video to start is that it keeps the focus on the issue of force. You would never use force to compel your neighbor to donate to the homeless shelter where you volunteer. You would probably consider that immoral, even if it wasn't you holding the shotgun, but a mayor, But it seems like once we move away from the personal to the community, the societal distance makes many people let go of that simple idea that it's wrong to force people to do things. And that's where libertarians separate from most. We LIKE charity and helping and cooperation and society and big projects of historical scope. We just think that the only moral way to do it is through voluntary participation.