Libertarianism=Reactionism

Most people believe that Jesus Christ was a teacher of morality. Of those people, many would hold that a moral teacher was all that He was. If the person who holds this preexisting assumption reads a book about Jesus, say The Bible, then it is likely that this reader will evaluate Biblical assertions about miracles, the Son of God, the Savior of Humanity and a path of Spiritual sanctification as merely a flowery literary tool for making a point about moral human interaction, because after all in their eyes, that is what it is ultimately about. Obviously, the Christian would view this assumption as true only in part in, that Jesus did in fact teach moral lessons, but also so limited in the scope of who Christ is that this assumption itself would, at best, be misleading and at worst, totally false.

To a target audience of Christians, the previous steps of logic are both powerful and easily recognizable. Powerful because the subject matter is close to the Christian core and easily recognizable because most all Christians in one form or another have been made weary of the conscious or unconscious process of making scripture say what a person wants it to say, rather than what it actually says. The concept of over blowing one characteristic at the expense of other characteristics is not a mental process of interpretation that is restricted to the evaluation of scripture. I would assert that this process is pervasive across society at large. I have found this to be unashamedly the case in the dissertation of many libertarian schools of thought; which seek to read the Constitution solely in the light of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. Often, this school of thought has convinced itself that the Constitution’s main point is exclusively the limitation of the Federal Government. In this way, this thinking is not too dissimilar from the person who interprets The Bible as just a book about moral teaching; because Jesus was, in their eyes, just a moral teacher. As a result, the libertarian of this tent tends to have a limited edification to offer a civic discourse and while offering some good thoughts, is usually unable to defend the full range of consequences of a libertarian’s suggested course of action.

The point of this comparison in methodology of interpretations is neither to draw an equivalency between theology and politics (which in my mind there isn’t) nor is it to disparage or frustrate the libertarian. For I find a kindred spirit with the person who is alarmed at what seems to be the over reaching, power hungry and bloated federal bureaucracy. Rather, my aim is to humbly offer some intellectual accountability. It is a reactionary position; to believe in the infallibility of one portion of the founding documents; so much so that we would throw a spotlight on one part and thus leave the rest of the insight of the Constitution in the dark. Granted, the wisdom of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments have particular pertinence in our current age of big government. However, to focus on ‘State-Rights’ exclusively, would be to forget the lessons learned by the Articles of Confederation and the necessity of the Federalist Papers and debates. To assume that giving power back to the states is a silver bullet to our society’s problems, leaves bigger fish in the pond, that need to be fried. For example, the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Amendments, which tax achievement and elects Senators by thirty second sound bites of an editors discernment, have more to do with the paliferation of a power hungry bureaucratic Federal Government than a limited interpretation of the Enumerations Clause and States Rights. Ultimately, it takes the continued vigilance of patriotic minded citizens to balance what goes into and comes out of our guiding documents. Ultimately, the exhortation of these few words is to encourage the individual who holds true to Jefferson’s statement of a government governs best that governs least, to look at all parts of our founding documents, and broaden their view of the available options of what may make our civic society better.