The Libertarian Manifesto by John Hopper
From Internet: Knowledge and Community
Stephanie Kallwass
I found John Hospers, The LIbertarian Manifesto to be very interesting and made me think broadly about the government I live in and how I view human rights. The first thing that caught my attention was on the first page when it was written, “Opera-lovers often say, ‘the state (or the city, etc.) should subsidize opera, so that we can all see it. Also it would be for people’s betterment, cultural benefit, etc.’” Because the only background I have in this programs field (Internet: Knowledge and community) comes from some research I did on the Internets effect on culture, the first thing I thought of was youtube. Youtube, and other such sites, allow free viewing of videos, some of which I know because I’ve searched them, are opera. This pertains not only to opera but films, plays, pretty much everything. I understand this is not a libertarian concept because it is an infringement of the creators rights, (many of the uploads are unofficial and the creator of the films are receiving no royalties when I watch them). However it certainly has allowed my own interest in opera and other films to expand because of the ease of viewing. The Internet makes it very easy to infringe on peoples rights of intellectual property, because there is no government protecting this right, or at least its protection is sorely lacking. Another thing I found interesting was, staring about halfway through page 30, the manifesto classifies laws into three types. The first, “laws protecting individuals against themselves,” is the one I want to talk about. After reading this article I well understand what a breach this is of libertarian views, but what I wondered about was when Hosper wrote, “there should be no laws against drugs (except the prohibition of sale of drugs to minors.” The term minor in this context was created by the government to limit human rights until a certain age. The age of being a minor is different throughout countries and states so I have to wonder, when is one no longer considered a minor? Why is it ok, in the libertarian perspective, for the government to decide when one is considered capable of having their full rights? If the laws should not be allowed to restrict what humans can do to themselves, how come it is accepted to restrict the rights of a minor group the brackets of which are controversial across borders.
