libertarianism

was listening to the radio the other day and they were discussing the change in the licensing laws which will allow pubs and clubs to serve booze 24 hours a day.
there was the usual hand wringing about binge drinking. the usual debates about work related issues and general questions about health and safety.
i have to declare a certain bias here: i don't drink. i grew up in pubs, i have seen what booze can do, both my parents were alcoholics. i also know sensible drinkers who know how to enjoy themselves and not cause problems for anyone around them (ok richard you don't count in this case as you are a sloppy drinker). the issue of booze, like so many things, is that on it's own it's fine, but once you add people you have a whole world of problems.....

anyway one of the participants in this debate was the head spokesman for the libertarian movement in the uk.
he was arguing that the state shouldn't interfere with licensing laws and in fact anyone, anywhere should be able to sell booze if they choose to. (this particular argument was countered by saying that the requirement to have a license meant that troublesome establishments could be closed down easily..)
when the libertarian chap was confronted with the medical issue he pointed out that tax on booze meant that drinkers more than paid their way.

now i have to say i didn't like the bloke - he had one of those voices that meant you knew he was just talking down to everyone who was involved in the debate. you could imagine his pinched cheeks and thin bloodless lips. one of the commentators on the show did point out that the libertarian guy didn't sound like the sort of person you would want to leave you kids with (while this might be true it was such a cheap debating point that the commentator lost so much ground it was not true).

anyway libertarian guy was so certain in his views, there was no wavering, no sense that there was grey in the world.
for libertarians: "every individual should have the right to do as he pleases with his property (which includes his own body), to the extent that doing so does not infringe on the same rights of others to dispense with their property as they please" (go here for more). where they see a role for government and the state it is in a minimal sense and then only in so far as it protects individuals liberty.
in many ways this is a utopian view, and as such it allows it's adherents to pontificate to a great degree about all sorts of things because they know that no one is going to vote them in, and because of the nature of what they are arguing they do not have to take responsibility for what they are saying. (the socialist workers party is in a similar position, it can bang on about not doing this, or not doing that because it will never have to worry about the practicalities of what they argue for).
the libertarians are philosophers who know their hands will never get dirty by what goes in the real world so they can argue that the ills of society are down to the fact we are not "free".
like anarchists and revolutionary socialists the libertarians are just people who are keen to hear their own voices, their own theories and are all keen to forget that the world is more complex than their theories.

i am not advocating a fully pragmatic politics that moves any which way the wind blows, but even the most attractive theory has to be tempered with a good old dose of reality.