I had the opportunity to participate in a call-in television show on CP-24, Tuesday, Sept. 30th 9:30-10:00 PM, representing the Libertarian Party of Canada. I’m just going to give a loose account of the interview, and the points aren’t in any particular order or word-for-word.

I was seated next to the Communist Party representative! This made it really interesting. We were interviewed by Lorne Honickman, who is a great host. I liked the format, and we had several people calling in. The time flew because there was a lot to talk about.

One of the points of agreement between the Communist and I was evident. We both got involved in politics because of our opposition to war.

It was a great warm-up for me in this campaign because I expect there will be more debates or appearances. I lost my concentration a few times and started rambling on one occasion and looked at the floor too much, so there were some things I regret about the interview but on the other hand, overall, I feel very good that I had the chance to make some strong statements and say what needs to be said.

I didn’t feel very good about my health care answer.  I want to say something less offensive to people and am painfully aware that I start losing sympathy from many in the audience at that point, as libertarians are inclined to do.  What I would rather do is explain the basic reason why I can’t
support the health care system.  If the system is voluntary, that’s fine if people wanted to come up with a voluntary system.  But it’s not voluntary.

There are prison sentences and fines for procuring or providing health care services outside of the system.   Restricting the supply leads to shortages and line-ups and I’m not trying to exaggerate by saying it is very extreme and by comparing it to communism.   If health care system defenders would care to tackle this argument, feel free.   If a doctor and a patient negotiate services outside of the system, would you want them to go to jail?  Think about it.  Libertarians – by definition – can’t support that.   Just because you don’t know about the fist behind the velvet glove, ignorance doesn’t make it go away.   It’s not libertarian to believe in that fist – in those fines and prison sentences.  That is the use of force.  Take them away and there’s no issue.  Violence doesn’t work.

Health care is a provincial responsibility, so technically I wouldn’t want the federal parliament to interfere with provincial jurisdiction.  Federally, we oppose the Canada Health Act.  But individually, personally, provincially, we want to see an end to the suffering that is caused by this lack of freedom. I mentioned that the U.S. system is not a free market system.

Again, I was hammering this point about freedom.  You can’t deal with poverty and economic problems and health care the way things are.   Canadians need more freedom.  Period.

We believe in a society based on property rights.  We believe in economic freedom, personal freedom, civil liberties.

I explained that we oppose drug prohibition, that we opposed the criminalization of victimless acts.  Hopefully that’s understood.  I know these ideas become too abstract.   I didn’t get a chance to mention it, but we want to see Marc Emery released.

Freedom of religion came up.  I said basically that Canadians need to value their traditions of freedom of religion and freedom of speech.    These are critical.   (Freedom of speech has been weakened already in Canada on multiple fronts – people need to restore it and they need to preserve it as an ideal).

I talked about the war in Afghanistan.  A caller challenged both of us on our antiwar views regarding Afghanistan and I gave a two-part answer on that because I think he believed that Canada was there just for peace-keeping.  Earlier I had tried to get the point across that NATO was killing civilians in Afghanistan.  This has been documented.  This is the reality. 

The two parts to my answer (and I really want to emphasize how libertarian arguments imply opposition to war except under special circumstances where there is a need to defend ourselves) –

1) Taxpayers shouldn’t be burdened with wars that they disagree with, because many Canadians do not agree with the war in Afghanistan and especially people who know that NATO is killing innocent people.   There is the financial burden on unwilling taxpayers and there is the moral burden placed on us also – of the men, women and children who die.  War in reality always involves murder and other crimes  (rights violations).

2) I don’t believe in forcing myself on other peoples’ problems.  Afghanistan is a problem for the Afghanis.  They are capable of working out their conflicts and resolving them peacefully or otherwise if left alone.    We shouldn’t be interfering.   (The government should only concern itself with the actual defence of Canadians).

(And I could comment on motivations for the war which is a big topic – the issue of government propaganda – and not to mention the paternalistic globalist ideology which people adopt and their peace-endangering “collective security” alliances.)

So in any case, this is why I say that overall I was pleased with the interview (despite some cringes), because there were things I said on that show that are hardly ever – maybe never – said in the mainstream media.  And all I’m about is getting that message out. All we can do in this world is speak the truth – about what concerns us the most – about what is most important to us.  Get that message out there.  Open your mouth and shout it out and stop holding back.   If it makes some people angry, that’s too bad.  Make them think and reconsider.

Lorne asked a really good question about unfortunate associations with other ideologies and I believe an anti-Bush caller may have linked Bush to libertarianism if I understood him correctly, so this is a serious problem for libertarians.   I mentioned that libertarianism is associated with people who call themselves “free market” advocates but who believe in and practice imperialism – i.e. most “conservatives”.  

(These ”conservatives” believe in their government, and the bed-time stories it tells them, especially when it’s breaking heads in foreign countries – they love that!  The liberal internationalists don’t have policies that are much better, and seem to kill and bomb just as many people, but they just come across as less insane than the neo-conservatives. )  

Real libertarianism is about peace, not bombing peoples’ homes and killing children and other innocents.    (I admire classical liberals such as Richard Cobden who advocated peace.)   The Libertarian Party started in the 70’s but our ideals go back to classical liberalism. 

I tried to emphasize that our society has a fake (non-libertarian) version of capitalism and there are (at least) two planks of the Communist Manifesto that have been fulfilled in Canada – the income tax and central banking.

Also I had an opportunity to appeal for more candidates and volunteers for the Libertarian Party of Canada. We have 26 candidates – in Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan.   I forgot to mention that a lot of those candidates are in B.C.     (I was hoping we would have some in Manitoba, Quebec and Nova Scotia – almost – hopefully next time).

The question about being included in the debate gave me a chance to mention the following idea:  I think that alternative parties are the tip of the iceberg and that all Canadian citizens should take action and do something about making our society freer and more just.   I used the word “reform” but it’s not exactly the right word.  I mean we need to change our attitudes as Canadians and take back control and transform our society into something where individuals are sovereign and free, where the government or justice system is responsive to us and respects our rights.

October 2nd, 2008

2 comments to TV appearance on CP-24

• Jean-Christophe Roux

October 2nd, 2008 at 1:06 pm

On health care:
(1) For a free/universal health care system, what we currently have is really expensive because of all the taxes that must be paid and because of the money supply that must be inflated in order to grow government’s budget at the lowest financial and political cost.
(2) Despite years of government monopoly over health care, things are not really improving.
(3)Big health care companies are in with government people to keep their market share and profits. Politicians are in with big health care companies to keep their control over our lives. Those who oppose big pharmaceuticals should really oppose government.
(4) How comes that to improve health care, it is better to run for office than to start an hospital? How demoralizing it is that the only way to improve health care is through an ugly combination of politics, corruption, and lobbying. If only free entrepreneurs had a chance to make a difference.

On libertarians and Bush, let’s not forget that many Randians call themselves Libertarians and are supporting many of the Bush’s policies. Also, Libertarians have the awful tendency to flirt with conservatism. Look at the political fraud Bob Barr in the USA who, day after day, speech after speech, redefines libertarianism as a breed of conservatism. Or look at the ghostly Dennis Young in Canada who brags his “conservative values”. When one runs as a Libertarian, one needs to be ready to support most if not all the ideas of the leaders or pseudo-leaders. I am more and more reluctant to call myself libertarian because of that. Anarcho-libertarian is much better. Anarcho-capitalist is cool also. Anarchy is wonderful, except that it was hijacked by some communist terrorists. At one point the key question to emigrate to the USA was “are you or have you been an anarchist?”.