7 Examples of How Liberals Misrepresent Libertarianism

4: Racist policing

Let me ask my dear readers a question: Where can you find the most comprehensive, extensive list of police misconduct cases on the internet today? At http://www.policemisconduct.net, of course. And who runs this project? Why, the libertarian CATO Institute – funded in no small part by those boogymen Koch Brothers.

Now, isn’t it interesting that we socially liberal, fiscally conservative types (many of us self-identitfying libertarians) seem to be among the most passionate anti-police misconduct/racist policing advocates, and yet Miss Christina avoids that fact entirely?  In her version of things, police brutality just happens, and we fiscal conservatives are to blame:

“You know some of the programs that have been proposed to reduce racist policing? Programs like automatic video monitoring of police encounters? An independent federal agency to investigate and discipline local policing, to supplement or replace ineffective, corrupt, or non-existent self-policing? Those take money. Money that comes from taxes. Money that makes government a little bit bigger. Fiscal conservatism — the reflexive cry of “Lower taxes! Smaller government!” — contributes to racist policing. Even if you, personally, oppose racist policing, supporting fiscal conservatism makes you part of the problem.”

Seriously?

First of all, being fiscally conservative does not necessitate a belief that one must cut funding to absolutely everything, and strong cases for necessary goods remaining in place even if major tax reform occurred would surely result in many of the things Miss Christina talks about in her point being preserved. If one is socially liberal and also fiscally conservative, this simply means he might want to invest more of our existing tax dollars on these very things (like body cameras and the like) and not on wasteful, evil things like the illegal wars we wage on phantom enemies every few years. This does not require raising taxes, nor cutting them – it requires simply shifting the money to something more objectively useful. At that point, if any tax funding remains with no projects in which to invest, that will be the time to start considering cuts. Is Miss Christina truly incapable of wrapping her head around this? As if all libertarian types truly believe that absolutely no taxes should ever fund anything at all.

This is an absurd accusation, and does not line up with reality. While some anarchists might consider themselves libertarian, not all libertarians are necessarily anarchists. To conflate these two groups in order to make a shaky point about police brutality is wrong-headed and lazy, to say the least.