Libertarians on the Wilson and Brown Case

As libertarians, we claim to have a solution. We claim to know a better way. We claim to be the ones striking at the root of the tree of evil instead of hacking at branches. So why are so many of us responding as a community as though the most important question were whether Wilson was justified in shooting Brown?
—E. Lee MacFall, Libertarians are Missing the Point on the Darren Wilson Case | Towards a Better Way

The assertion of having a solution or “better way” runs counter to individualism. Yes, I believe that most people would fare best in a civilization in which people refrain from aggressive behavior, in which laissez faire free market economics precludes using government force—which is necessarily aggressive—to interfere in the market, even under the premise of protecting people (which is most often a lie). But to insist that everyone else follow such a blueprint and trust to my judgement for their own lives, would be anti-individualist.

Peppered throughout MacFall’s article are a number of collectivist phrases, like, “…we claim…,” and, “…us responding as a community….” In that respect, he misses a core value of libertarianism.

And finally, if the question of justified use of force is not the most important question, then it isn’t about the shooting. Then the shooting becomes nothing but a springboard for airing other grievances. And, to start from a presumption that Wilson murdered Brown, even though evidence disproves most of the claims in support of that, is to start with a lie. What sort of moral conclusion can anyone draw from a lie?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s