An unnecessary war?
The schism between libertarianism and social conservatism has been exploited ruthlessly by the statist left and some of Ron Paul’s disciples.
But social conservatives want more freedom, not less. On that, at least, SoCons and libertarians should be united...
In defending their own freedom, social conservatives have not forgotten the phrase “free exercise thereof,” three words in the First Amendment that anti-religion leftists usually ignore.
With their debatable critiques of social libertarianism and progressivism, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich et al. are right to point out that government is increasingly hostile to those who choose to exercise their natural right to be free of the anti-conservative mandates and social engineering projects of the radical left.
Conservatives and libertarians may choose to have constructive conflict over some issues (e.g., expanding the role of government in homosexual relationships), but if there's any hope of reducing the oppressive power of the state, social conservatives and libertarians need to present a united front.
The distinction between "personal freedom" and "economic freedom" is a sham.
- Paying taxes for schools that indoctrinate my kids to left-wing ideology -- personal or economic?
- Incandescent lightbulb ban -- personal or economic?
- Cigarette taxes that penalize smoking -- personal or economic?
- Higher personal income taxes -- personal or economic?
- Contraceptive mandates -- personal or economic?
Personal freedom and economic freedom are inseparable.
Why is this important?
Progressives use their personal freedom scam to mislead libertarians into thinking that outside of the economic realm, progs and libertarians share some common ground (e.g., marijuana, gay marriage, abortion and the war against "fundies" and shadowy theocrats).
Don't be fooled. Progressives have always wanted to control everything, personal and economic (and they'll use religion to get what they want, if they can).
Progressive statists buy political support with ephemeral state-approved personal "freedoms" the same way they buy votes with redistributed income.
Could it be that the paranoid "social conservatives want to create a totalitarian theocracy" meme and the idiotic "libertarians believe in no government and want poor people to die" mischaracterization come from the same place (and for the same dishonest and divisive reasons)?