Titled Rethinking Libertarian Minimalism

That's the proposition I put forward earlier this week on my blog, Miscellaneous Objections, as part of a broader discussion of the future of libertarianism, and it has drawn a number of interesting -- and often heated -- responses.

Questions of foreign policy have always been difficult for those of us who espouse a philosophy of limited government domestically, and they have only grown more difficult, though at the same time more critical, since September 11, 2001.

Unfortunately, instead of reassessing their minimalist instincts when it comes to intervention abroad, many in the institutional centers of the libertarian movement -- principally at the Cato Institute and, to a lesser extent, at Reason magazine -- have remained mired in a pre-9/11 mindset.

Here, I would like to address some of the key arguments people are making against both the need for a coherent (or at least vaguely cohesive) libertarian foreign policy and the premise that one doesn't exist already.

Right after the 2000 election I made up my mind that I would never vote Republican straight ticket again. From that point forward I was going to split my ticket among conservative/libertarian Republicans, like those from the Republican Liberty Caucus or for the Libertarian candidate.

Unfortunately 9/11 happened and that did change everything (for me). After 9/11 many in the Libertarian Party made it clear, to me anyway, that hawkish Libertarians were not welcome. I tried to stick with them for a while anyway by continuing to receive several different email newsletters from several Libertarian Think Tanks or advocate groups. However, I have cancelled or don't read most of those anymore because the anti war rhetoric coming out of the Libertarian camp sounds so much like that coming from the far left.

I still agree with 85% of what Libertarians believe but until they take national security seriously I am going to vote Republican Liberty Caucus or for the most conservative candidate Republican or Democrat.