For the next few days we will be reproducing a variety of news and opinion on terrorism by libertarians and Objectivists, especially any reasonable, intelligent, witty or humorous offerings. They won’t all be consistent and we won’t all agree with all of them, to the degree we even have a settled view on all particulars. So don’t expect consistency, hobgoblins!
The Libertarian Response to Terrorism
I’ve received several variations of this question
since starting my “Question of the Week” series.
Having never studied the terrorism issue, I’ve
been ignoring those queries.
since starting my “Question of the Week” series.
Having never studied the terrorism issue, I’ve
been ignoring those queries.
But I got several new emails on the topic after
what happened in Boston, so I’m answering
simply to make one point. There’s no way to
create a perfectly safe, risk-free society.
what happened in Boston, so I’m answering
simply to make one point. There’s no way to
create a perfectly safe, risk-free society.
That being said – and with the caveat that I
have no expertise in this field, here are some
random thoughts on the topic.
have no expertise in this field, here are some
random thoughts on the topic.
Libertarians want less interventionism around
the world, and perhaps that will reduce hostility
against the United States, but some of these
nutjobs hate us because of our freedoms. So even a perfect foreign policy (whatever
that even is) provides no guarantee we won’t get attacked. That being said, I
thinkRon Paul has screwed up big time in some of his criticisms of U.S. actions.
Being against nation building does not mean you have to be against killing terrorists.
the world, and perhaps that will reduce hostility
against the United States, but some of these
nutjobs hate us because of our freedoms. So even a perfect foreign policy (whatever
that even is) provides no guarantee we won’t get attacked. That being said, I
thinkRon Paul has screwed up big time in some of his criticisms of U.S. actions.
Being against nation building does not mean you have to be against killing terrorists.
If you want to cause trouble, find a bunch of young men with no purpose in their
lives and lots of time on their hands. Combine that with religious extremists who
tell those men that they will get a bunch of virgins* in paradise if they die while
killing Westerners, and you have a nontrivial supply of future terrorists. I suspect
part of the answer will have to come from within the Islamic community, though
I confess that I’m puzzled by the inaction on that front even though one imagines
that 99 percent of Muslims don’t support terrorism.
lives and lots of time on their hands. Combine that with religious extremists who
tell those men that they will get a bunch of virgins* in paradise if they die while
killing Westerners, and you have a nontrivial supply of future terrorists. I suspect
part of the answer will have to come from within the Islamic community, though
I confess that I’m puzzled by the inaction on that front even though one imagines
that 99 percent of Muslims don’t support terrorism.
Terrorists and would-be terrorists get information from the Internet that fuels
their hate and provides knowledge on how to conduct attacks. I’m
rather sympathetic to drone attacks on the scum in the Middle East who are
directly seeking to instigate/plan terrorism, but I don’t see any feasible or
desirable way to control and/or regulate the Internet (just like I don’t see a
feasible or desirable way to regulate video games, even if it was shown that
violent games somehow inspired Newtown-type killers).
their hate and provides knowledge on how to conduct attacks. I’m
rather sympathetic to drone attacks on the scum in the Middle East who are
directly seeking to instigate/plan terrorism, but I don’t see any feasible or
desirable way to control and/or regulate the Internet (just like I don’t see a
feasible or desirable way to regulate video games, even if it was shown that
violent games somehow inspired Newtown-type killers).
Close monitoring of pro-terrorist websites and chat rooms is a very legitimate
and proper function of law enforcement and the intelligence community.
Being a Muslim shouldn’t be a cause for investigation and harassment by
the government. Being a Muslim who uses the Internet to visit such sites is a
cause for investigation and harassment (and the same is true for members of
any other group with a history of violence).
and proper function of law enforcement and the intelligence community.
Being a Muslim shouldn’t be a cause for investigation and harassment by
the government. Being a Muslim who uses the Internet to visit such sites is a
cause for investigation and harassment (and the same is true for members of
any other group with a history of violence).
Monitoring of Mosques also is a proper function of government, just as I also
have no objection of law enforcement monitoring militia groups, environmental
groups, etc, etc. Obviously, the monitoring of any group should be selectively
focused on those strains that are believed to espouse violence. I don’t know
where you draw the line between freedom of religion and incitement of violence,
but I have zero sympathy for radical Imams preaching hate inside the United
States and would like to see them shut down/imprisoned/deported if they cross
that line.
have no objection of law enforcement monitoring militia groups, environmental
groups, etc, etc. Obviously, the monitoring of any group should be selectively
focused on those strains that are believed to espouse violence. I don’t know
where you draw the line between freedom of religion and incitement of violence,
but I have zero sympathy for radical Imams preaching hate inside the United
States and would like to see them shut down/imprisoned/deported if they cross
that line.
Yes, I’m disgusted by the leftists in the press who obviously hope for a “right wing” link any time there’s an attack. These are the same journalists, by the way, who weren’t even slightly bothered by Barack Obama’s association with Bill Ayers, a real-life terrorist who bombed the NYC police department, the U.S. Capitol, and the Pentagon.
I favor immigration, but I want people who believe in tolerance and hard work. There should be some sort of test, however imperfect, designed to weed out those who do not believe in assimilation. I’m still flabbergasted that the U.S. government is so bloody incompetent that it gave a green card to the so-called Blink Sheik. Such people should never be let in the country and there should be mechanisms for quick deportation (perhaps halfway across the Atlantic) if they do slip through the net.
*I hope these are the virgins they meet.
P.S. Like anybody with common sense, I want’ our anti-terrorism policies to be based on cost-benefit analysis, which is why I’m generally critical of the Transportation Security Administration.
Addendum: I’m getting lots of comments and emails about this post. In retrospect, I can’t claim to be speaking for libertarians, so perhaps I should have used a title such as “What Are Your Thoughts about How to Deal with Terrorism?” Though I don’t think there’s anything in my views that is inconsistent with libertarianism. Assuming, of course, you’re not an anarcho-capitalist. But even if I was in that camp, I would want to voluntarily contract with a private firm that would hunt down terrorists and kill them. Sort of like the group in the new Tom Clancy novels. By the way, I also like the Vince Flynn novels, so I probably am more bloodthirsty than the average libertarian.
American Express—Savings High Yield Savings Account With No Fees And Competitive Rates. |
Daniel J. Mitchell
Daniel J. Mitchell is a top expert on tax reform and supply-side tax policy at the Cato Institute.
Be the first to read Daniel J. Mitchell’s column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.
Join the Debate
81 Comments So Far
How about squeeze them dry of information, and then a double tap to the back of the head?
How many people who have thought about killing their mother-in-law have actually done it?
If we are going to allow these types of students into our country; the number should be greatly reduced to the number we can effectively follow and monitor.
Otherwise, how does allowing these students in justify the cost of 9/11, the Boston marathon, and what else?
You lost all credibility there. The US is not even in the top 10 free nations anymore. There are many more nations that are more free than we are. If they “hate us for our freedom”, then why aren’t these other countries being attacked at least AS OFTEN as we are?
Any way you measure it, we are much less free than we were when Obama took office. We have been losing our freedom since before FDR.
Surpressing religion when Islam is everywhere is still not the right thing to do. But I can sympathize with denying Islam to flourish.
We didn’t like Russia going into Afghanistan but now I understand. We went into Afghanistan and now I think we are the same.
At least Bill Ayers was trying to stop an unjustified war against the innocent people of southeast Asia.
Given your interest in cost-benefit analysis, Dan, why don’t you compare the relatively trivial actions of Ayers and his colleagues against the tens of thousands of Americans who died in Indochina?
And They Work For Obama.
Arif Alikhan – Assistant Secretary for Policy Development for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Mohammed Elibiary – Homeland Security Adviser
Rashad Hussain – Special Envoy to the (OIC) Organization of the Islamic Conference
Salam al-Marayati – Obama Adviser – founder Muslim Public Affairs Council and its current executive director
Imam Mohamed Magid – Obama’s Sharia Czar – Islamic Society of North America-Islamic Society of North America
Eboo Patel – Advisory Council on Faith-Based Neighborhood Partnerships
Anybody feel safer now that these folks are helping influence U.S. policy??? and we wonder how Boston could have happened?
We coddle and baby them while they are attacking killing us, American Citizens.
What’s happening with the Ft. Hood killer?
The Muslim leader, Muhammad, rode a horse and swung a sword killing the infidels.
Jesus rode a donkey gave love and peace to non-believers.
I am on the side of individual rights
Samuel
I really think that is the only way.
It’s hard to build overseas what we have been unable to maintain at home.
Blowing things up, killing many, and leaving them free to elect the muslim Brotherhood as their new government (after we rebuild their country on our dime and update their infrastructure for them) is either a psychotic attempt at humanitarianism, or the worst military plan in all of history.
Our goal is to remain free. Their goal is to terrorize us and force us to lose freedom.
Our response should be to protect our freedom and refuse to be terrorized. We should not give these men the glorification of evil geniuses or leaders in a war. They should be seen as what they are, not frightening, dangerous and evil, but as stupid, foolish and wrong. Government monitoring of mosques and planning domestic drone attacks simply plays into their hands. We must maintain our freedoms. Ridicule is our most appropriate and effective weapon.
Why didn’t someone put a bloodhound on the trail of the second shooter immediately? (Indeed, why did he escape in the first place?)
And why didn’t police hold their fire when they had the suspect trapped in a boat? (In the event, they shot him in the throat, making talking impossible.)
I watched the female member of the mosque that Tamberlan attended say he did not become radicalized there. She sounded so sincere and her words seemed heartfelt to all the world.
But I know she is lying and I know that mosque contributed to Tamberlan’s ideology.
P.S. It is substantially more than 1%.
Waging a war on Islam would mean the genocide of about a billion people. It’s not a government job, it’s a religious one. Pull the armies out, and send the missionarries in.
War does not equal genocide. KKK is not bombing muslims in foreign countries.
AND, God’s army will destroy all his enemies.
Why look across the seas for them? We have a ready supply right here in Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, LA, Stockton, Newark, Camden, Gary, St. Louis, Miami… et al.
But libertarians don’t believe in compassionate government, so we’ll never be able to address poverty, exclusion, and other societal problems that make people susceptible to terrorist ideologies.
Please tell me where the compassion is in government intrusion?
Yup! I’m from the government and I’m here to help…..
-Yes, but that doesn’t mean:
1) We need to have 800+ bases in 120+ nations around the world & be a self appointed “policemen of the world” at our expense
2) We need to invade nations
3) It’s OK to use drone strikes that often kill more innocent bystanders than terrorists
4) We all have to live in a Police State where we are all basically guilty until proven innocent, no search warrants are needed & the state has the power to ignored our God given, Constitutionally protected rights
5) The President can indefinitely jail, or ordered killed people based on suspicion only without a trial
Wake up to reality in Police State USA today, Mr. Mitchell!