Max replied:
> The latter seems like much too much of an
> expansive definition of libertarian. Few
> people would shrink from a support of
> "liberty." To me libertarian, large or
> small L, has always meant a disbelief in
> a need for any but a minimal state.
I think the minimalist state definition is too narrow. I think of libertarians (small "l") as anti-authoritarian, which means anti-capitalist as well as anti-government. Though I may have gone overboard by implying that Jesse Ventura is a libertarian.
Joe Noonan responded:
>What makes you think the big "L"'s aren't small "l"'s? All the LP
>members / supporters I've encountered have been small "l"'s as well.
We're running in different circles. All the big "L's" I've met were rabid free marketeers, which I consider very much anti-libertarian. I agree with the Libertarian Party on many issues (drug use for example), but overall I find the Libertarian Party platform simply an attempt to replace government authority with business authority, which in many ways is a more onerous.
I admit that this is a somewhat personal thing for me. I split up with an old girlfriend after she became a Randite, although she eventually mellowed into merely a "Libertarian." It changed her personality - she became much more selfish and self-righteous (I seem to remember Doug mentioning in _Wall Street_ studies done among Econ majors, who were found to exhibit more self-serving behavior than people in other fields - I think I experienced it first hand). Of course she came from a priviledged background, so it provided a rationalization for why she had it so good and why it was OK to be rich (as well as gave her an excuse for her racist tendencies, a la Charles Murray, which also grew more pronounced).
Brett