Libertarians and Birds Soaked in Oil

One of the weakest areas of libertarian thought is the environment.  When I read the articles from Lew Rockwell.com, one of the most popular libertarian websites (in the Murray Rothbard 'school'), which I do quite regularly because I learn from them, their failure to deal with environmental issues is sad and, frankly, a bit irrational.  It's like they can't see that our tremendous advance in science and technology, and then our industrial and population growth, makes environmental damage almost inevitable, and therefore must be controlled.  Furthermore, due to the tremendous political power of corporations, the only countervailing power that can adequately begin to address their environmental potential for damage is government.  This is where their ideological rigidity shows up big-time.

I say all of the above while at the same time acknowledging that I've learned a lot from Lew Rockwell.com about the economy, war, and political philosophy in general.   The knowledge that allowed me to forecast and prepare for the '08 economic crash largely came from economic libertarians, who most definitely did not have their heads buried in the sand, like virtually every more 'mainstream' economist.  (If you sensed a certain negative emotional upsurge when you read 'mainstream' in the previous sentence, you got it correct!  They were 'out to lunch'.)  But libertarianism has its weaknesses, and this is definitely one of them.

How ironic that Rand Paul has come to public attention and scrutiny right in the middle of the Gulf oil disaster.  The MSM attacked him for his views on Civil Rights, when in fact, the weakest area of his thought is the irresponsibility of the BP oil spill.  I'm now seeing on the media that he made a statement, calling some Democrat (Obama?) 'unAmerican' for criticizing BP. 

Give me a break.  If Rand Paul doesn't start saying things that will endear him to the liberal press (antiwar, anti-bailout, anti-big-bank), they are going to crucify him, and then even if he is elected by the citizens of Kentucky, which is very possible, he will be 'damaged goods' and ineffective on the national scene.  And that would be a tragedy for our country. 

We desperately need a 'conservative' stalwart who is anti-war, anti-Wall Street, and anti-Federal Reserve.  Otherwise, we will be swallowed up and consumed by the military-industrial complex, the health-industrial complex, and Wall Street.