Dean Esmay, Cox, Forkum, various animals

Dean Esmay interviews Cox & Forkum:

Q: A large number of self-described objectivists and libertarians firmly opposed the war in Iraq. Yet you have been generally supportive of the Bush administration's war policies. Why the disconnect, do you think?

FORKUM: The disconnect is that Objectivists aren't libertarians, not if they follow Ayn Rand's ideas consistently. She explicitly rejected libertarianism as anarchism years ago, and today it's even clearer why she did. Prominent libertarian organizations opposed the war with Iraq as meddlesome government intervention, as if all government action is inherently wrong.

Objectivism, however, holds that government is essential to a just society but must be limited to protecting individual rights. Such protection sometimes involves foreign intervention, such as waging wars against hostile enemies. If anything, it was a lack of intervention -- from the Iranian hostage crisis to the USS Cole bombing -- that emboldened the Islamist murderers of 9/11. Objectivists might disagree about military priorities, such as whether Iraq should have come before Iran, but none that I know were against war in principle. I recommend that people read the op-eds at the Ayn Rand Institute for more information.

Q: You seem to pick on Democrats more than Republicans. Why is that?

COX: I can't draw elephants.

He can, mind you, and donkeys too. Go read and see the article over on Capitalism Magazine, they have put the appropriate cartoons between the dialogue, which makes things ... well ... more clear ... as in cartoons.

Thanks to Andrew Medworth for the pointer by the way. Check out his blog, it looks very interesting to me. And he beat me to it because I wanted to link to Mark Steyn also -- see Andrew's previous post -- dammit ... .

21:11 Gepost door Flint | Permalink | Commentaren (0) |  Facebook |

De commentaren zijn gesloten.