Organic v. Contractual Society: Libertarian Assumptions Challenged

Social contract theory is a cornerstone of libertarian or classical liberal thought. In essence, this foundation myth posits that human beings, while in the "state of nature" - a time prior to the existence of any discernible society, first contracted with one another to form a civil society for their mutual survival and protection of their "natural rights" - life, liberty, and property - and then proceeded to agree to create the foundations of the state, a government which was contracted to act as a third party judicator of disputes between members of society, administrator of justice to those found guilty of violating the society's laws, and protector of society from foreign aggressors; in essence to prevent the violation of individuals' "natural rights" from threats without and within.

This fantasy tale is certainly more palatable than the completely abstract, modern liberal notion of "human rights". It reflects the existence of natural law, and is based at least on part on certain actual rights - namely those of the English people (and, arguably, by extension the Anglosphere). This of course is the first fact that belies the abstract notion of contractual government as classical liberals perceive it. All modern ideas surrounding liberty, rights under the law, and representative government are based firmly in the English political experience.

Reflections on Gay Marriage

I am frequently asked about my opinion on "gay marriage". In truth I have none, for in truth "gay marriage" does not exist; the premises on which the debate surrounding "gay marriage" is built are entirely false.

As is often the case, one needs look no further for evidence of the left’s stupidity on the matter than the words of Hilary Clinton:

[Homosexuals] are full and equal citizens and deserve the rights of citizenship. That includes marriage. That's why I support marriage for lesbian and gay couples. I support it personally and as a matter of policy and law.

This is the primary problem with the left’s arguments for allowing ‘gay marriage’: it takes for granted that marriage is some kind of right. What's interesting is that even if it were strictly a social right, under our current legal system it is arguable that gays are not actually discriminated against, as there is no law barring them from entering a normal (i.e. real), heterosexual marriage (having to write such a ridiculous tautology is painful). But the reality is that marriage is not a right of citizenship, and we need to stop talking about it as if it were.

The Egalitarian Rage Awakened

Living in New York I’m surrounded by all sorts of liberals and leftists, so it’s hardly surprising that I’m constantly finding myself in incredibly frustrating conversations about politics.

Of all the various species of leftist that inhabit this fair city, the one most likely to leap at the opportunity to start an argument with me seems to be the Feministus Novus Eboracus. Honestly, telling the average girl in this city that I’m a conservative seems to elicit the same reaction I’d expect were I to tell them I have the clap.

I know that as soon as one of my friends or I mention my political leanings it will be followed inevitably by a chorus of shrill, harpy-like screeching about the “war on women”. What drives me up the wall about many of these “feminists” is that in the same breath with which they attack traditional Western civilisation for being patriarchal or misogynistic or whatever other ridiculous slur some leftist pseudo-intellectual was able to come up with, they will attack our modern society for its “rape culture”, seemingly oblivious to the fact that said “rape culture” is a direct result of the destruction of the traditional values they claim were so awful and oppressive in the first place.