I had a wonderful exchange with a libertarian who began to follow me on Twitter. I think, although not certain, that I disagree with him on most everything, but I really valued having the exchange and the opportunity to better understand a different perspective. His tag line reads “Seeking good debate on issues that separate us. Freedom & less government will improve the human condtion, resolving many of our differences,” and he has offered just that, good debate. Actually, we agree 100% on the idea that freedom will improve the human condition. The notion of what Freedom is, and how we achieve it is where we may differ. Anyway, I have thoroughly appreciated the discussion so far, but trying to share deep thoughts in 140 characters is rough.

He has a photo of Ronald Reagan as his Twitter image, which is interesting because many feel that Reagan grew the government more than all Presidents between Washington and Carter combined. But I didn’t realize it was Reagan at first. All I saw was a white older man, and it got me thinking about the notion of Privilege and Libertarianism. I realized I had never heard anyone who was not a person of privilege support libertarian ideas. And I began to wonder how privilege sets the stage that allows libertarian ideas to seem as if they are a plausible solution for all people. In otherwords for those who have privilege, small government seems like a solution because from their perspective a bigger government that makes demands is meddling. But what about a person who is disenfrangised? These are, in my opinion those for whom government must be there to protect, right?

@4yourcountry THX for the follow. Do you think there is a correlation between libertarianism and privilege.

@tcwaters you me that privileged people are libertarians? No I don’t (ann rand + hayek were not rich)

@4yourcountry Jim, privilege is not really about wealth/ being rich. That may be one type of privilege, but not the only.

Interestingly, any quick Googling, didn’t find pages that identified Ayn Rand as a Libertarian. Rather, she is described as an individualist and an objectivist. I see the connection, but I also see difference. For Rand: (emphasis is mine)

The government acts only as a policeman that protects man’s rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.

@tcwaters Interesting question, not sure. My guess is if you are low on moslows [should be Maslow] pyramid, you worry more about food than freedom (N Korea)

This got me thinking as I had talked just a few days ago to a Trans person who had recently been fired for being Trans even though she had been a exemplary employee. Are non-discrimination laws a way that the Government “protect’s man’s rights” or is this goverment overreach? Does she care about Freedom? Would it be easier for her to rise in Maslow’s hierarchy if she wasn’t denied the right to work?

@4yourcountry Maybe but ability 2 work is connected to lwest lvl, and lck of discrm protections can mean a person can be fired for being gay

@tcwaters Libertarian’s “leave me alone)” morality benefits many “Its not my business if your gay” – in my mind is than anti disc laws

@4yourcountry Yes, but if a person can be fired because they are gay, and therefor they never rise above the lowest rung of maslow’s- see?

What do you think? Looking forward to any commentary that follows.