5 ms·

Gary Johnson wants to get rid of the Department of Education[0] and is against mandatory vaccinations[1]. [0]: https://www.johnsonweld.com/education https://ww

• lettergram 10y ago
  I'm not going to get into a flame war, but pretty much everything related to libertarians are freedom of choice. I strongly agree that mandatory vaccinations on a national level should not be required. As long as it does not harm me, I don't think I should disallow someone to do it. That is to say, I don't think I should, or society should pressure our beliefs on others. I would vaccinate my own children because it makes sense to, but I wouldn't force my neighbor to at gun point because that isn't going to help anyone. Which is the whole premise of the libertarian party.
  • JoeAltmaier 10y ago
    But everything affects others, especially in this ever-more-connected-and-congested world. Standards are useful for computer, and for people. Libertarianism has attractions, but idealism only goes so far. I believe the Libertarian world would collapse in flames (or disease, or hunger, or congestion).
    • deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    • jshevek 10y ago
      There are multiple approaches to structuring society consistent with the idea that violence shouldn't be used to coerce people into desired behavior. There are multiple libertarian worlds.
  • allendoerfer 10y ago
    I really like the idea of the small state. Things should be as simple as possible, but not simpler. Children have rights and when parents do not protect these rights, the state has to. There is a hierarchy of rights. The right of the child to be healthy is greater than the right of the parent to ignore scientific evidence.
    • JustSomeNobody 10y ago
      Very well said. (I know we're supposed to avoid comments like mine, but this one needed it.)
    • lettergram 10y ago
      I strongly agree with that in general, I just think it might be enforced differently. For example, you lose social security benefits if you do heroine, but heroine isn't illegal. In the case of children I agree for like polio, but perhaps not flu. Either way it's hard to judge and the major point of libertarians is that the state should decide. For example, a west Nile vaccine makes sense for almost everywhere. Besides the bay area which has no mosquitos. I'm sure Gary Johnson would agree to some extent, and he has already changed his mind when presented with evidence.
      • allendoerfer 10y ago
        > I strongly agree with that in general, I just think it might be enforced differently. For example, you lose social security benefits if you do heroine, but heroine isn't illegal. I think it should be illegal, but junkies should not be prosecuted. So I have a similar stance. The US seems to be goldmine for political activists. It is already very rich and successful and many of its social problems can be changed just through policies (e.g. prison population). It is interesting how different (neo-)liberalism is seen in Europe vs. the US. When conservatives in the US speak about liberals they mean ordoliberalism and leftism, meaning increasing rights for people and decreasing rights for corporations, while Europe's left means the exact opposite, when it speaks about neoliberalism. Both are wrong. (Neo-)liberalism includes both social liberalism and market liberalism. Maybe "individualism" is an easier term to describe the general idea. It should be seen as a second dimension on top of the left-right spectrum. You can introduce liberal policies that harm or help the poor or the rich. I do not know the Libertarian party in the US, but what you are describing as libertarian here does not seem libertarian to me at all. Just careful and sensible liberalism. Libertarianism has some anarchist vibes to it. I would say the Tea party has libertarian policies.
  • hueving 10y ago
    People skipping vaccines does affect you. http://www.vaccines.gov/basics/protection/ http://www.vaccines.gov/basics/protection/
  • anexprogrammer 10y ago
    Suggest you find out about the herd effect[1] as far as vaccines is concerned. Not having full vaccination does harm you. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity
  • philsnow 10y ago
    Not enforcing vaccinations leads to loss of herd immunity [0] which means that you (and any children you may have) are more likely to catch whooping cough, typhoid, etc etc. Therefore by your logic, you should be for mandatory vaccinations. This is a valid and consistent opinion for a libertarian to hold. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity
    • jessaustin 10y ago
      In the second paragraph of your link, one learns that only certain individuals with particular conditions actually benefit from herd immunity over simple vaccination. We can assume that none of those people are libertarians, so the "valid libertarian opinion" is simply to vaccinate and let others do as they will. The primary victims of the lessened herd immunity that results from less than total vaccination are the people who don't vaccinate. This is a problem that solves itself. Presumably Gary Johnson simply opposes the creation of some sort of Trumpian Vaccination-or-Death Squad.
  • colemickens 10y ago
    >As long as it does not harm me, I don't think I should disallow someone to do it. Oh, so you don't understand the most fundamental bits of science at play in the vaccination debate. Why am I not surprised. I recommend you Google "vaccines herd immunity". Children have already fallen gravely ill in some places in CA because of the stupidity enabled by this "libertarian" mindset.
• empath75 10y ago
  While I'm personally in favor of mandatory vaccination for kids, there's an argument to be made for not requiring them by law. There's all kinds of ways to use the levers of government to induce people into getting their kids vaccinated without making them mandatory.