Maybe it is. I’m not a Ron Paul apologist. I served my time in the revolution, and I appreciate his introducing me to folks like Lysander Spooner, so I could become a voluntaryist.
When he was in the military, I would say he was a potential murderer. I don’t know if he ever killed anyone.
Is he an enabler of murder? I don’t think so. He’s done more than most people to stop needless killing. However, he does participate in illegitimate government, which does take lives and he knows better, because he knows the Constitution has no authority.
Of course, if you can get a low-paying job then obviously that’s a better route. But, from the parameters he shared with us it seems as if he can’t find a job anywhere. Obviously, I don’t know for a fact whether or not that is true.
These arguments are not going to get you very far. You are basically attacking the person, as opposed to making a sensible argument. It is akin to some people’s strategy of calling everything that disagrees with them “Keynesian”.
So what do you call a soldier on foreign soil killing foreign women and children?
Say you joined the Air Force and all you did was sweep the mess hall floor, you’ll still be helping the state do its dirty work. Say you sabotaged an invasion of another country, that would be libertarian.
Well, enough of them went to combat to bomb Iraq and Afghanistan.
Let’s not play games here. If you sign up to be a killer, you might be asked to kill. That’s not an unreasonable outcome of joining a military currently in over 100 countries, and fighting two major operations.
I may be defending killing humans, but you are too. If they were fighting for self-government, then killing US troops might not be immoral. But they have always had strong evidence that killing U.S. troops would not achieve that goal, but the opposite.
Teachers who teach in public schools, using State mandated books, are also helping the State “do its dirty work”. Should a libertarian teacher quit? I’m not sure that this is a legitimate argument. If you are in the military with the intent and purpose of killing another human being I agree with you, 100%. But, most Air Force jobs are not combat, and you can choose your MOS.
Unfortunately, I don’t really think you know too much about the military. In general, I will agree with you, but you can choose your MOS (military occupational specialty). You know which MOS’ will go to combat and which ones will not. Very, very few MOS’ are combat MOS’ in the Air Force. Most of time you will be a desk jockey. There is no chance that you will see combat, and if there is then I would argue that you should go AWOL (and there is no shame in going AWOL; I went AWOL before I was deployed, albeit admittedly for different reasons).
OTOH, I agree with Juan that if there is a better alternative you should go with that.
If he is teaching them libertarianism, then no. That would be sabotaging the state’s indoctrination.
Say you join the Air Force and all you do is maintain the fighter jets on base, are you not helping the state do its dirty work? I say yes. Say you throw a monkey wrench into the engine and cause the fighter jet to crash, that would be libertarian.
You can move out of the country. You can go to jail. Alternatively, you can pick up a rifle and physically fight the State. There are a lot of libertarian options. You just aren’t stupid enough to commit to certain death.
That’s right. But the money has to come from somewhere, doesn’t it? Maybe it is borrowed or printed. This is econ 101. Nothing is free.
We end the state when we stop participating. We end the wars when we stop volunteering for them (western governments are terrified of implementing another draft). Those are libertarian outcomes. Participating in the state, and volunteering to work for the state, aren’t how we move towards libertarian agendas, and I don’t see how those are compatible with the NAP.
