One perennial question that every society has wrestled with is, "what is the proper role of government in a free society?". Libertarians (or rather, right-libertarians) argue that the proper role is as minimal as possible, and akin to a night-watchman, while statists argue that the proper role is as large and comprehensive as possible, and akin to that of a micromanaging nanny. The former protects individuals only from very narrowly-defined force or fraud, as well as foreign attack, while the latter pre-emptively protects individuals from all possible threats that exist or that one could imagine, including from themselves. The former believes only in negative liberty at the expense of positive liberty, while the latter believes (nearly) exclusively in positive liberty at the expense of negative liberty.
Twenty-One Debunked and the TSAP believe that both extremes are quite incorrect and often disingenuous, and that the proper role of government (at any level) is that of a macromanager. Negative and positive liberty ought to carry (roughly) equal weight. A welfare state, broadly defined, need not be abolished and need not be a controlling nanny state either. And protecting individuals from themselves against their will, at least as far as consenting adults are concerned, is a fundamental overreach of the proper role of government in a free society. And, of course, once you are an adult, you are an adult, period.
QED
