The libertarian believes in the non-aggression principle, which means that the right of each person to his life, liberty, and property is inviolable. To the extent that corporations receive special privileges from the state that exempt employees from ordinary liability, the libertarian opposes them and their interests.
But that does not appear to be what this 'conversation' is about. These are merely liberals who believe that government should violate the non-aggression principle for the 'good' of the public. In other words, they are interventionists who oppose laissez-faire. This is not libertarianism.
The libertarian does not consider any non-coercive activity to be an infringement upon anyone's freedoms; and the libertarian does not believe in positive 'rights' or 'freedoms,' which he considers to be a blatant violation of true liberty, which he defines as the absence of coercion. Positive 'rights' can exist only to the extent that a person or group of people are denied their absolute right to ownership in themselves and their property, a flagrant violation of libertarianism.
To call this 'libertarianism' is an absolute disgrace. It is socialism couched as freedom.
Look ma! the liberals are trying out a new label.
Correct. What's hilarious is that some so-called 'libertarians' are cheering this on.
