Nathaniel,

I appreciate your response. Because the origin of the term is unclear, I'm
still not comfortable calling myself a "libertarian", even with a small "l"
but I do understand and appreciate more where you're coming from on this and
your clarification on the distinction you've made between the Libertarian
Party, and the word "libertarianism".

Monica Pignotti

----- Original Message -----
From: <n6666b@...>
To: <nathaniel_branden@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 8:19 AM
Subject: Re: [nathaniel_branden] Re: Response to NB's Essay


> Monica,
>
> That many people are confused about Objectivism and about libertarianism
> hardly needs to be argued. That is why, in my own books, I define
precisely
> what I mean by libertarianism. My experience is obviously different from
> yours, in that I can hardly think of a single person I've talked to who
> thinks libertarianism means anarchism (taken literally). Given the amount
of
> confusion about these terms today, whatever position we take we will need
to
> do some explaining and also we will need to define our terms. So that's
not
> a shortcoming peculiar to libertarianism.
>
> AR was not willing to surrender "selfishness" because of people's
confusion
> as to the meaning of the term. I am not willing to surrender
> "libertarianism" to the likes of M. Rothbard and P. Schwartz. One could
cut
> through this whole be describing oneself as a "limited government
> libertarian." Or, for some of us, an "Objectivist libertarian.
>
> Life is good.
>
> Nathaniel Branden
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> nathaniel_branden-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Visit Nathaniel Branden's web site at:
> http://www.nathanielbranden.com/
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>