Friday, December 11, 2009

What do you call someone who describes themselves as a libertarian, but who calls for Congress to stick its nose into 'fixing' the BCS?

Inconsistent? A liar, as no slice of libertarianism could ever justify Congress muddling around with something as private as the way in which college football teams structure their season? Something even worse?

A key principle of any political belief (whether libertarianism, liberal or conservative) is that one doesn't abandon those principles just because doing so provides something that one views as positive... and anyone who does so can not in any good faith continue to describe themselves as a libertarian. The cost of abandoning the principle ALWAYS outweighs whatever short-term benefit one can derive from the bribe.

Liberals who believe the biggest threat to society is a government with unlimited power to spy on its citizens are right to protest anti-terrorist measures that they believe go to far. Conservatives who believe national security comes first should brush aside complaints that the government can eavesdrop on cell phone calls.

If the federal government decided to give me a million dollars (and just because, not in return for any services, my having won the lottery, etc.), I hope I would have the backbone to turn it down. If I didn't, I could no longer describe myself as conservative, I would, apropos of the old line, have to resort to something along the line of 'I now know what I am and I've settled on the price'.

For Ziegler, the price for selling out his (proclaimed) libertarian principle is a playoff system in college football.