Erb a Libertarian? Who Knew?

Me at Q&O, just now:

As for abuses of power by government and by police forces — yeah, those things are wrong and immoral and I oppose them. Despite false assertions by some, I certainly do not like ‘big government’!

Yet you fight for it, almost as a matter of instinct, at every chance you are given.

You seemingly rationalize doing wrong, because you claim it will reduce suffering… for example, supporting theft, to support ‘welfare’ spending. Big government, again… see? So much for honesty and so much for principles of freedom.

Your preening about ‘morality’ is utter nonsense, Erb, because the basis of morality to my mind is based first in honesty. You miss on both counts.

Your statement about big government and welfare is a primary example:

I simply find a working welfare state good for economic freedom

So, you don’t like ‘big government’, eh? What kind of government is it, do you suppose, that will be able to confiscate enough funds to support such a system? And what does such a system do to the economic freedom of the people whose money is stolen to support it?

There’s lots more there, of course.

But look; This guy calls himself a ‘libertarian’.  Apparently, the word means nothing, if his claim is true.

Well, welcome to ‘Words Mean Things.”

 I am reminded (by virtue of this happening at Q&O) that there was a similar discsussion about Henke, not many moons ago, as to his being a libertarian of any stripe. But I will say that there’s a lot of difference between Henke’s understanding of the word, and Erb’s. I’m all for the ‘big tent’, and certainly my definition of ‘neolib’ is big enough to include him… and Billy, for that matter, as I’ve said several times. I consdier the ideas of most libertarians to be strong enough to smooth over and eliminate by matters of reason and logic, most of the variences.

The differences between, say Billy and Henke, as I said when that argument was in full bloom, are in terms of pholosphy, fairly large.  But not insurmountable…there’s still walls on this tent.. there’s still a limit as to how far such definitions can be stretched. At least we’re talking about the same subject… there’s a basis of conversation.   Erb trying to lay claim to the title of ‘libertarian’ strikes me as blowing the walls off any meaningful definition of the word.

Now, I consider it an open question if this misdefinition is more by intent, or more a product of his worldview that there are no standards.