Liberty Hangout special pleading for Donald Trump, why though?

I tend to take people at their word.

For example, when someone comes to my place of business and tells me they want a suit, I tend to believe them and try to help them out. When my mother tells me she misses me and I should stop by more, I try and do just that. So, when a website’s name suggests they would be a hangout for individuals with an inclination towards liberty I think “awesome meng! Count me in.”

. . .

Then comes the trashy clickbait and special pleading that tells me why I have to support the President in his latest twitter campaign across our headlines.

While you won’t need to read the plodding argument’s of this delightful author if you finish this article you can read it here.

To begin, Mr. Marrazzo obviously missed my last post about what I think Trump’s tweets are really about, but I’ll reproduce the necessary portion here for what I hope is your benefit

What Trump is doing

What President Obama was able to accomplish through his charm and a friendly media President Trump has turned on it’s head and accomplished the same mission – a distraction from the horrors of government. It’s no secret that trust in the media (especially cable news and other major publications) has declined recently, and a major part of Candidate Trump’s appeal was his confrontational style with major outlets like CNN and the New York Times. Whether or not Trump believes or even cares about the unbecoming things he tweets or not, he uses his supporters distrust of the media and his opponent’s blinding hatred to influence the narrative. Where the media was enamored with Obama, they are enamored with hating and discrediting the Trump campaign.”

Basically, Trump’s “bizarre” tweeting practices serve the very real purpose of allowing him to control a narrative, even one that will heavily skew against him. Before continuing however, I should digress and breakdown Mr. Marrazzo’s argument for you will all due haste (it’s not a difficult one to follow)

Why Libertarians should support Donald Trump (as told by Mr. Marrazzo)

  1. The Military discriminates don’t cha know?
  2. The Military even discriminates against mental diseases, imagine that!
  3. Transsexuals are mentally diseased, because.
  4. Don’t you know soldiers already commit suicide a lot?
  5. Transsexuals commit suicide a lot too – because they’re diseased.
  6. The military needs to make sure their people “can perform in the most difficult situation” (see: killing)
  7. Don’t you know their (you know, the trannies) operations cost a lot of money? libertarians should be happy that tax dollars are not going to pay for them!
  8. Transsexuals are fundamentally unstable people – did I forget to tell you that?
  9. “Libertarians should side with Trump in this decision for the sake of the taxpayers, for the sake of the civilians at stake, the sake of reducing military spending, and fundamentally for the sake of the mentally ill trans people.”

I don’t want to waste precious written words on the minutiae of his argument (for that you should listen to the corresponding podcast). Instead let me handle this in broad strokes while I have your attention. I would think it evident to anyone who subscribes to Libertarian principles that the realization of said principles are a reduction in the size and scope of The State. This broad understanding can of course manifest itself in different ways, but the sophistry on display in this chain of argumentation misses the mark on what Libertarians should advocate for.

The problem for Libertarians (and with hopeful extension all Americans) isn’t whether there are transgendered individuals in the military, whether they seek a sex change operation, or even whether tax dollars should pay for it – the issue is the Warfare state. Talking about whether people who identify as transgendered are mentally ill and therefore unfit for service completely sidesteps the argument and points Libertarians should be discussing – whether the wars in the Middle East are actually protecting the country and more importantly whether they are just. If Mr. Marrazzo was actually concerned with disseminating Libertarian ideas he may have written an article about how this is yet another political football for the Trump administration to use and distract not only the media, but the American people from our wars. He would talk about how this is the kind of story that drives news coverage in today’s world, and how it helps people stay away from deeper insights and remain in the shallow end of the intellectual pool (where politicians and media personalities prefer to play.)

Maybe this is what a Liberty Hangout is supposed to be about – supporting a political figure with more power than King George III could have dreamed of wielding – I could have sworn we were supposed to do the opposite. It was my understanding Libertarianism was supposed to be for the individual and against tyranny. I thought in today’s age as writers and commentators we should work to ignore the distractions of the media and political class, while advocating for our ideas of a freer more peaceful foreign policy that doesn’t let unhinged neocons leverage the American economy to destabilize and ruin an entire region of the world for the glory of Democracy.

But hey, I’m sure you guys got plenty of hits – so congrats.

Questions, comments, gripes or complaints?