Arvin Vohra, the Vice-Chair of the Libertarian Party is also a contributor here at The Libertarian Vindicator. Recently Arvin has been caught up in some controversy for comments he made about the military. After many bombs thrown back and forth between Libertarians Arvin clarified his views on this issue.
I, as the founder/editor of this site, wanted to publish these views here on The Libertarian Vindicator for people to have a dialogue and give Arvin an avenue to explain himself:
As requested: I want to clarify that my view on massively downsizing the military are my views, not the only LP views. The current LP platform is very vague on the subject. It can be interpreted to mean anything from shutting down the military entirely to having a military base in every town on earth, depending on what you deem necessary for defense. My interpretation of the platform is that it encourages us to leave NATO, shut down all foreign wars, shut down all foreign military bases, bring the troops home, and end all current recruitment efforts. Others in the LP leadership have very different interpretations.
Similarly, my views on culpability are my own, not the LP’s. Current international law holds soldiers accountable for war crimes, even if the order comes from above, but it does not classify the U.S. involvement in foreign civil wars as a war crime. I personally view U.S. involvement in foreign civil wars as morally bankrupt and dangerous, and I believe that those involved in combat duty are engaged in morally bankrupt actions. Again, my views, not the LP’s.
There are those in the LP whose views are very different from mine. I’m happy to work with anyone, however, who wants to massively downsize major parts of the state on the issues that w agree on.
However, I cannot, in good conscience, agree with the view that those in the military share no culpability for the actions they do while in the military. That makes, to me, is a position that is illogical and unprincipled, and ignores the underlying principle of personal responsibility so vital to this movement.
Those in parts of the military entirely unrelated to foreign meddling: let me be clear on this. I believe that those issues should be handled in the voluntary, free market. Search and rescue, for example, can be handled through free market programs, just as roadside assistance is today. Free market services in such areas would not be squandered on nonsense like drug confiscation, currently a major part of coast guard operations. But I do believe many of you are correct in pointing out that those who work only in search and rescue do not have nearly the same level of culpability as those involved in foreign civil wars. Those who work in search and rescue, and not drug enforcement, combat, combat support, etc.: calling you specifically murderers was not called for. I disagree with how your work is funded. I hope to find ways to phase out government funding in favor of free market coverage. But if all you do is rescue swimmers, then it wasn’t fair to call you a murderer or an accessory. For that miscategorization and distraction, I apologize.
In this area, I continue to respect those who disagree with me on this, and hope to work together to dismantle major parts of the state.