Well, yes, there are such things. There are pro-choice Catholics, violent pacifists, etc. There are no shortage of pro-Life Democrats and pro-choice Republicans.
Do you demand that the Libertarian Party engage in a massive purge, to rid itself of all the neoconservatives taking refuge there? Great. I’d enjoy watching.
But the Libertarian Party is a haven for many neoconservatives, and you can’t refute that by making up definitions. Arguing from the dictionary is really bad debate form, and doubly bad when you are the one making up the entries in the dictionary.
But think of the immense market for Wal-Mart freedom, freedom for the little guy! We’ll charge really low prices, and then fight for your freedom, to the extent the funds hold out (less our salaries and bonuses.) It isn’t as good as the freedom that rich guys have…but it’s better than none at all!
In their minds, Libertarians probably do truly believe that their philosophy supports the little guy. The small businessman or the entrepreneur who out-competes by doing it better or through the use of better technology.
But the reality is that large businesses enjoy economies of scale that make it impossible for small businesses to complete. And disruptive technology often creates a “winner take all” environment with little regard for the people whose industries are disrupted.
Is Randy Paul considered a libertarian? Because his signature is on Tom Cotton’s letter to Iran, the one that says the next iteration of the US government may void any agreement based on current negotiations. This would seem like an inappropriate thing for a genuine libertarian, as it greases the rails of the war machine. Perhaps Randy is just a poser?
Rand Paul just couldn’t resist a chance to stick the knife in Obama’s back. Principles don’t matter. Like the Roman Senate of old, these 47 guys just got knife-happy.
That’s the thing your definitions can’t account for. There are most certainly some atheists who are members of the Catholic Church, who attend and celebrate Mass, who bring their children in for Baptism, and so on. I know a few of those.
(Also, I didn’t use the word “all.” You engage once more in a distortion of what I actually said, by the deliberate introduction of words I never wrote.)
I personally know several neocons who associate themselves with the Libertarian Party, but I politely decline to name them. Call that McCarthyism if you wish, but I do know these guys. They aren’t “prominent,” but, then, I never said they were: you introduced that word. They may not be “real” libertarians, but they are taking haven in the Libertarian Party. And that was all that was said, and you have not successfully rebutted it.
Although I think it is actually relevant to the thread. One of the reasons the modern style of libertarianism is stupid is that it is in the process of being highjacked by people whose actual philosophy contradicts the nominal tenets of libertarianism. It’s sort of like having second thoughts about labor unions, once organized crime became so involved in them. Organized crime and labor rights have nothing to do with each other…in the purest dictionary definition. But Jimmy Hoffa could have told us differently.
(Those of us Democrats with experience of Lyndon LaRouche can tell similar stories. Political parties under the laws of free association are very difficult to keep purged of heretical intrusions.)