We have a site, as many of you know, called Orphans of Liberty and it says it has a range of views, from libertarian to centre-right, including classical liberals. Somewhere in there is room for the true conservative.
The question over “do as thou wilt” is to ask why that’s also regarded as the satanist maxim and why the “dark side” would see such a maxim as efficacious? In our society today, it’s pretty clear to see. When a person knows no personal constraint whatever, then his moral fibre weakens – just ask Anakin Skywalker. Hence the overreaction to slights, road rage, rape, anything which would hinder his desire to do something.
Yes, “don’t you dare impinge on me” produces individuals but not individuals as we’d like to be around and this then becomes, not an issue of liberty but an issue of respect for others. Hence the classical liberal position of freedom, as long as it doesn’t harm/impinge on others.
As this can’t be socially engineered but has to find its happy medium, then it will, by definition, be weighted towards freedom, as enshrined in the American constitution.
There needs to be some middle position, weighted towards liberty, as just said and yet recognizing the need for self-constraint, with the education system built around such a framework of mores, e.g. our loosely based Judaeo-Christianity, to ensure some form of protection whilst still ensuring personal freedom, yet without the need for the State wading in.
In that system will always be the uncontrolled and those who’ll impose on others so what is done about them? In a truly free system, I’d pick up my shotgun and deal with it that way.
Into that comes this:
Drivers face £80 fines for any litter thrown from their vehicle, even if it was a passenger who threw it
Council zoning regulations are weighted towards the beauty of the countryside and harmony of the buildings [even though most building is an eyesore these days]. Yet it restricts freedom and imposes unnecessary costs on the taxpayer.
What of litter? Nearly every schoolkid, at some stage, has been presented with this by teachers as an issue to discuss, so what’s the solution? Should there be no fine at all, should there be anything called a fine in the first place, should the fine be steep for wilfully uglifying [itself an ugly word] our surroundings?
Or are we, in our libertarian cocoon, happy to wade through the dog ordure and cigarette butts, polystyrene food remains and spittle on the path, in order to satisfy the test of freedom?
I draw no conclusions.