My nuanced libertarian thoughts and unsubtle personal feels about war with the Houthis
Will I be burned at the stake?
WARNING: I'm a libertarian. Some of what I write below may offend the Left, the Right, or both. But as Walt Whitman asked, "Who are you who only wants to be told what you've heard before?"
*****
As a voluntaryist libertarian, I consider taxes both immoral and impractical. They are immoral because they force peaceful people to do things against their will. They are impractical because they encourage sloth and poor performance. Taxes protect government projects from the severe consumer punishment that regulates non-government institutions. For these reasons...
I oppose President Trump's use of taxes to fund attacks on the Houthis. But I oppose this abuse of taxpayers less than many libertarians would. Here's why...
I asked two AIs to steelman the case for the Houthis attacking Red Sea shipping. They both gave one primary answer - solidarity with the Palestinians. That negatively impresses me.
The Palestinian desire to impose a Sharia kleptocracy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea is antithetical to libertarian conceptions of enlightenment morality. For me, having solidarity with the Palestinian cause is like having solidarity with the bubonic plague. I reject that justification for the Houthis’ attacks on Israel and Red Sea shipping. But this doesn't quite rise to full-throated support for U.S. retaliation against the Houthis. That's because...
I would prefer that the world's shippers pay to keep their own shipping lanes open, rather than imposing the cost on American taxpayers.
I won't win that argument any time soon. So I'm left with the current policy, which I grudgingly support within the context of all the caveats offered above. It would be good for the peace of the world if the Houthis lost the capacity to attack anyone, and I will only cry a little if that is achieved using tax money.
I'm also painfully aware that U.S. involvement increases the risk of 9-11-style blowback terrorist attacks. When you destroy conventional forces, peace may follow, or asymmetric alternatives like increased terrorism. To make terrorist blowback less likely, it would help a lot if the Iranian people toppled their theocratic rulers. Nothing could do more to turn down the Islamist heat.
Those are my nuanced libertarian thoughts. But if you want my unsubtle personal feels, they are these: SMASH THE HOUTHIS!
I now wait for the libertarian thought police to come and burn me at the stake for heresy.
If you like my work or just want to keep an eye on me because you hate me, please subscribe. It's free. If you want to encourage me, do a paid subscription. If you have "subversive" or "heretical" tendencies, please like it and comment so the algorithm shows this article to more people. Share it on social networks.
Copyright © Perry Willis 2025
Perry Willis is the co-founder of Downsize DC and the Zero Aggression Project. He co-created, with Jim Babka, the Read the Bills Act, the One Subject at a Time Act, and the Write the Laws Act, all of which have been introduced in Congress. He is a past Executive Director of the national Libertarian Party and was the campaign manager for Harry Browne for President in 2000.
No burning at the stake for you, Perry Willis. Just kudos for your excellent writing and your nuanced libertarian thoughts.
No argument from me. The tools of Islamic state-sponsored terrorism should find their karma quickly, as should "libertarian thought police". Your nuanced argument highlights the fact that not every correct policy position needs to be actionable. Arguing against "do something! [with OPM, of course]" has its own merits.