Dear Editor, Christian Libertarianism is an oxymoron. Libertarianism is a viable political opinion, but it is not one that can be legitimately derived from the Christian perspective. In the article Christian Libertarianism a Viable Option (Vol. 3, Issue 2), Lindsey Hubbart presents the idea that the government should pass laws that honor the “Golden Rule.” However, we argue that this is contradictory to the ideological viewpoints of Libertarianism because the “Silver Rule” more accurately represents the essence of Libertarianism.
Essentially, the “Silver Rule” instructs people, “do not do onto others as you would not want done to you.” As Christians we are called to follow the “Golden Rule,” which compels us to instigate action in society which benefits humanity, while the “Silver Rule” falls short of calling us to be the light and salt of the world.
In Hubbart’s article, she idealizes free markets as a means of alleviating poverty. However, free markets are not fair markets. Theoretically, free markets may seem logically sound, but in practicality these forces in the U.S. have actually increased the gap between the poor and rich . It is surprising that, as a woman, Hubbart would agree with these free markets that perpetuate systemic privileges for the dominant class, such as women receiving only 78.3 cents per dollar that a man make. For someone who doesn’t want systems to impose morals, the free market system excels at encouraging the idea of greed by creating a consumeristic culture, which is incongruent with the ideas of following Christ and self-sacrifice.
We, as Christians who abide by the “Golden Rule,” are compelled to reject the ideas of Libertarianism and pursue political perspectives that move beyond simply protecting ourselves, and to seek betterment for those less fortunate than ourselves.
Eli Casteel and Kevin Gleim