

Do libertarians care about freedom? - liotier
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/07/the-limits-of-libertarianism/

======
mindcrime
_They need to come clean: either they really care about freedom, in which case
they need to support the rights of workers in the workplace_

How exactly where the worker's rights violated? Was there a contract or
agreement somewhere saying that he was guaranteed perpetual employment, or
that drug use (or lack there of) was explicitly NOT to be considered a factor
in his continued employment? If not, there's really no valid argument that his
rights were violated.

And here's the problem that libertarians always struggle with: _real_ freedom
has implications that aren't always obvious, and that can - on occasion -
clash with our preconceived biases regarding what is "right" or "fair" or
"Just".

I will posit that a "free society" is one where nobody is using force or
violence to compel someone to do something against their will. In this world,
an employee is free to seek whatever employment he wants, and take or reject
any given employment situation without needing to request approval from
anyone. He/she can also quit whenever desired. But the flip side is that the
employer is also free to end the situation when they want, free from any
compelling outside force.

So if you smoke weed and your boss fires you, it doesn't matter if "the state"
considers it legal or not. What matters is what your employer thinks. You
aren't entitled to a certain job for perpetuity, regardless of your actions.
Actions have consequences, and that's a fundamental tenet of libertarian
thinking.

~~~
wmf
Perhaps the author considers recreational drug use to be a form of protected
activity such as religion or a form of protected diversity akin to sexual
orientation.

------
maxharris
What about the right to free association? Suppose you had a girl/boyfriend
that was using drugs, unbeknownst to you, and that this was a deal-breaker for
you. Who would argue that you have no legal right to break up with them once
you found out?

You have a moral right to choose the people you hang around, because the
consequences to your own life can be disastrous. Can you imagine landing in
jail (and the incredible strain of testifying in a trial) because you were
used by your friends as a getaway driver, without your knowledge? This kind of
thing actually happens in real life:
[http://www.mainlinemedianews.com/articles/2014/07/18/main_li...](http://www.mainlinemedianews.com/articles/2014/07/18/main_line_times/news/doc53c90720bf986205030311.txt)

Given that each of us has the right to associate freely on a personal basis,
why should that right be so blithely ignored when the relationship in question
involves money?

Granted, pot is not nearly as dangerous as other drugs can be (including
alcohol.) However, the whole question of the danger involved is best decided
by the individual, not the group. After all, it is _your_ life that's on the
line when dealing with others, not the group's.

------
sharemywin
little bit of a stretch. I wouldn't want a security guard drunk either.
Doesn't mean I don't think workers should have rights.

