On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs; a Libertarian Response

A essay circulating on the internet, called "On Sheep, Wolves and sheepdogs" asks us to view the world as if there is a warrior class providing us freedom, and protecting us from all the dangers in the world. This essay uses the metaphor of sheep and sheepdogs, an ironic choice really, and paints the military as the faithful protective sheepdog, and the general public as the docile sheep. Since I am not in the military, I am apparently a sheep, and somehow owe my freedom to the sheepdog, and I am also apparently helpless without the good sheepdog. Is this anywhere close to true ?

To illustrate a point, let me extend the metaphor.

First, lets consider "the sheep". Not all sheep are the same. Wild bighorn mountain sheep are tough characters. They live where few other animals can survive, by their own guile, and they prefer the rugged mountain freedom to the safety of the farmers pen. They are vigilant, and when wolves attack, they join together to defend the herd, their loyalty is to their herd. But sadly, there are few of the bighorn sheep left. Many have been caught in the farmers pen. The farmer has cut off their horns, and domesticated them. The farmer provides food and a warm pen, but he also fleeces the sheep once a year, and takes a few of the lambs for slaughter.

Now since the sheep really aren't any safer in the farmers pen, the farmer gets a sheepdog. But the sheepdog does not serve the sheep, it serves the farmer. The sheepdog will jump and bark at each of the farmers whistles, and, since it has been trained to obey the farmer without question, it will chase a pigeon as easily as a wolf, depending on the farmers command. And sometimes the sheepdog will herd the lambs to the slaughter.

But deep in the heart of each sheep is the memory of the mountains, and of the free roaming herd. Maybe someday, the farmer will let the gate open just a little, or make the pen just a little to small, and the sheep will once again claim their birthright, no longer beholding to farmer or the sheepdog for their lives.

Postscript: Given the recent events concerning blackwater security, we must ask just who are the "sheepdogs" and who do they serve.

Ron Paul And Sun Tzu

One of the main arguments against a non-interventionist foreign policy is that it is either defeatist, and would just give up the middle east to "the terrorists", or that it fails to recognize a grave danger from radical muslims. The argument is that certain groups of people in the middle east are an extreme danger, so we should

More practical and focused would be to reduce the threats of jihad and Shariah by banning Islamist interpretations of the Koran, as well as Islamism and Islamists. Precedents exist. A Saudi-sponsored Koran was pulled from school libraries. Preachers have gone to jail for their interpretation of the Koran. Extreme versions of Islam are criminally prosecuted. Organizations are outlawed. Politicians have called for Islamists to leave their countries.

Islam is not the enemy, but Islamism is. Tolerate moderate Islam, but eradicate its radical variant

In other words, intervene in the most sacred of pursuits, deny freedom of religion to a group of people. Imagine the reaction in the U.S. to banning certain christian sects, say the Mormons, or seventh day adventists. Putting military pressure on the muslim world will serve to strengthen and unify them. They become even more of a threat. The ultimate consequence of the strategy of confrontation is war on a scale not seen since WWII. Might it be possible to subdue the entire muslim world ? lacking that, should we simply wipe them out ? ? Anyone that respects life must reject this.

Still, it would be wrong to say no threat exists, so how might we deal with this ?

What would the greatest general, Sun Tzu Do ?

In "the Art of War" He says -

Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans;
the next best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces;
the next in order is to attack the enemy's army in the field;
And the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities.

Well, we are essentially doing what Sun Tzu says is the worst strategy, essentially besieging walled cities, in Iraq.

We should instead be trying to balk the enemy's plans. To do this, we would need to be non-interventionist (as Ron Paul points out), and humanitarian and open towards moderate muslims, and dismissive of Bin Laden and his radicals. Initially, we should have attempted to do everything possible to eliminate bin laden, and we should continue the hunt.

Now, more importantly, we should be doing everything possible to eliminate the fear generated from his propaganda, and to factionalyse the muslim world. Pipes and others fan this flame of hate, without really much evidence, and help the muslim world to coalesce. How can the moderates in Iran gain any strength, when we keep threatening their country ? I'm sure Muslim moderates are called cowards, traitors, and defeatists and many potential moderates, driven by fear of the US, move to the extremist for security.

This division between west and east, the suspicion and confrontation towards all muslims is just what Bin Laden had in mind. Thus, we should follow Sun Tzu, and Ron Paul, and Balk the Enemies plans, and prevent the junction of his forces. A non-interventionist strategy is the only thing that will do this.

Libertarian Ideals are OK for 1776, but in 2007..?!?

The world is too complicated and people are too stupid for a libertarian system to work. That was the final argument made by a socialist friend, after I described the emergence of the Ron Paul Campaign. Well, at least he came out and admitted what he really thought.

And in the end, that is everyone's final argument against too much personal liberty. People just can't take care of themselves. I'll even admit, it often appears like this is true. Main stream media is filled with stories of human misconduct and stupidity. Jerry Springer, Maury Povich, Law and Order, CSI, Law and Order - special victims unit, NCSI, . . . Not to mention all the stories on crime, corruption and deceit shown on the news networks. With the failings of humanity so prevalent in our media, how can one not come to the conclusion that a group of intelligent elite should rule humanity?

I disagree with my socialists friend's assertion, however. I believe that individuals, working in their own enlightened self interest, can provide for themselves and can create an enlightened, healthy society.

Impossible you say, problems are too complex. There's Global Warming, Terrorism and WMD, Famine, HIV, Mad Cow Disease, all those ATV accidents, these are all problems that require global cooperation, and that cooperation can only be provided by a strong central organization.

C.S. Lewis said “Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

To escape these tyrannies, libertarians and constitutionalists must provide concrete solutions to those problems that scare people into giving up their personal responsibility. We must re-educate people that their biggest obligation is to themselves, and that they, and only they, have the power to solve such problems. In the next few Blog entries, I will suggest libertarian answers to these practical problems, and provide details from the perspective of the individual. This new way of doing things cannot be explained by a sound bite like "let the free market work" or "give people more choices". Breaking the stranglehold of the statist philosophy of individual inadequacy will take education, and lots of it. We have been educated (brainwashed?) to believe focus on the individual is wrong. Reversing the trend to more and more centralized control of society will take time, but I believe it is important to begin now.