Tuesday, March 17, 2015

I Agree With the Randians on This...

For the most part, the Objectivist/Randian worldview (as OLS does) maps nicely on the Libertarian perspective; indeed most knowledgeable followers consider the Randians, for the most part, to be libertarians.  But like all ideologies and worldviews, there are branches that differ on various topics, sometimes very viciously.  Foreign policy is such an issue within the Libertarian movement, as my post today make clear. Here, I link to a superb blogpost at the Randian The Objective Standard that takes a recent Cato Institute article to task for its assertion that Islamic terrorism is not an existential threat to the US.  And I have say, I come down on the side of the Randians.  Here's an excerpt from Craig Biddle's post at The Objective Standard:
Well, if the standard for determining whether a foreign aggressor poses an actionable threat to America is whether the aggressor will put the nation of America out of existence, then we can all sit back and relax; there is no such threat to speak of. If, however, the standard is whether the aggressor credibly aims to kill or otherwise violate the rights of individual Americans, then Islamic terrorism, the jihadists who engage in it, and the regimes that sponsor it pose a clear and serious threat to Americans—and thus to America.
It is true that Islamic terrorists won’t eliminate America (at least not anytime soon). But to imply that they pose no threat to America because they won’t eliminate America is absurd. A threat to the lives and rights of Americans is a threat to the very values that America exists to protect. The phrase “threat to America” means “threat to Americans.” It has no other relevant meaning.
That pretty much some up my view on this topic as well. Kudos to Biddle for his excellent response to the original Cato piece (available here).