A Brief Comparison of Libertarianism vs Liberalism

I once read a blog that confused libertarianism and liberalism. I don't remember the blog now, but I remember her confusion. I think she confused them because they are close in spelling. What she was talking about on her posting was liberalism and their merits. I commented on that post trying to tell her the difference between these two very different concepts. All she responded with, was a dismissive,  "uh....ok." She clearly didn't care or understand what I was talking about. Fine, it's her blog. Well, this is mine.

Liberalism as defined by wiki:

From the Latin liberalis, "of freedom" is the belief in the importance of liberty and equal rights.Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but most liberals support such fundamental ideas as constitutions, liberal democracy, free and fair elections, human rights, free trade, secular society, and the market economy. These ideas are often accepted even among political groups that do not openly profess a liberal ideological orientation. Liberalism encompasses several intellectual trends and traditions, but the dominant variants are classical liberalism, which became popular in the 18th century, and social liberalism, which became popular in the 20th century.

When I read the definition above, I think of concepts that are usually associated with the founding of America such as laissez-faire and separation of church and state, possibly a close definition of modern-day libertarianism. But for this discussion I'll limit myself to modern liberalism or post-1930's-FDR-statistism. The concept that most people think of when it comes to liberalism is actually, social liberalism or modern liberalism. The current US Democratic Party and the Korean DLP and Minjudang are considered modern liberals or leftists.

John Stossel recently wrote an article that is much more eloquent:

...By contrast, libertarians want government to leave people alone—in both the economic and personal spheres. Leave us free to pursue our hopes and dreams, as long as we don't hurt anybody else.

Ironically, that used to be called "liberal," which has the same root as "liberty." Several hundred years ago, liberalism was a reaction against the stifling rules imposed by aristocracy and established religion.

I wish I could call myself "liberal" now. But the word has been turned on its head. It now means health police, high taxes, speech codes, and so forth.

So I can't call myself a "liberal." I'm stuck with "libertarian." If you have a better word, please let me know....

 A typical reaction to libertarianism is, "What about the poor?" The poor aren't helped by the government. It doesn't help them become self-reliant but dependent upon the welfare. Libertarianism would get licensing and regulations out of the way so the poor can help themselves. Have people looked around Korea? There are all sorts of pojang makcha's and truck-based vendors and sidewalk sellers. Can you imagine if someone tried to do that in the states? The police would hassle these people.

Another point is referencing the Constitution. Liberals like to focus on the general welfare clause and expand the government to do good things for everyone. Libertarians tend to strictly interpret the Constitution because the intent of the Constitution was to restrict the government to specific duties. All of this beauracracy is rooted in FDR's unconstitutional expansions, and when the government grows it takes from our pockets and erodes the liberties and rights that were fought for 200 years ago.