Why Ask a Libertarian? And Why Now? #1

On June 15, 2011 Gillespie and Welch used short, rapid-fire videos to answer dozens of reader questions submitted via email, Twitter, Facebook, and Reason.com. In this episode, they answer the question:

"Why ask a libertarian? Why now?"

This is number 1 in the series. For the complete series, go to http://reason.com/archives/2011/06/10/ask-a-libertarianand Reason.tv's YouTube Channel at http://youtube.com/reasontv

Produced by Meredith Bragg, Jim Epstein, Josh Swain, with help from Katie Hooks, Kyle Blaine, and Jack Gillespie.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • sarcasmic||

    Will there be transcripts for those of us who have video blocked from our workstations?

  • ||

    "Why ask a libertarian? Why now?"

    I'm sure it has nothing to do with a certain book authored by two certain Reason writers that was just published.

  • ||

    Are you saying they're just shilling for Big Nick and Matt?


    ClubMedSux|6.15.11 @ 11:10AM|#
    "Why ask a libertarian? Why now?"

    I'm sure it has nothing to do with a certain book authored by two certain Reason writers that was just published.


    You almost seem to make it sound like there's a conflict of interest or something there...

    Damned Self-Interest!!

  • Spiny Norman||

    Is Matt really taller than Nick or is he standing on a box?

  • ||

    Nick started out at 6' 5".

    The Jacket gives, but The Jacket takes too.

  • Michael||

    FYI, the YouTube link is broken.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    What are you, too good to put the dot between tube and com yourself?

  • ||

    Wow this makes a lot of sense when you think about it. very cool stuff indeed.


  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Why do libertarians here seem to generally support expanding government recognition of marriage as a right ahead of supporting the individual's right to marry sans approval of the state? Why the uncharacteristic pragmatism on this one issue? (Boom! Serious question, boners.) (Are they taking questions from Hit and Run comments?)

  • ||

    Are they taking questions from Hit and Run comments?

    Not after yesterday's thread.

    As far as marriage goes, I think we should get the magic word out of the statute books, say that for legal purposes any two adults can enter into a standard domestic partnership agreement specified in the statute, and can vary the terms of the agreement in writing in any way they wish.

    Then we can argue about whether to allow more than two adults to enter into the standard agreement.


Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.