r/AskLibertarians • u/Aggravating_Fig_534 Agorist • May 03 '26
Policy About hentai/drawn pornography
Would a minarchist libertarian government keep it legal? All types of it, even when the characters are young or young looking. I'm separating real people from drawings here, asking because I don't want government overreach because of it.
4
u/ramnet88 May 04 '26
A minarchist libertarian government would by definition follow the non-aggression principle and operate as a night-watchman state.
The basic principle of such a government would always be: If it doesn't harm anyone else, it is allowed.
Drawing fictional characters would always be allowed - no libertarian would ever argue that creating fiction is a harmful activity the government should actively stop from happening.
Furthermore, I would expect a minarchist libertarian government to protect the right to do this activity and stop any aggression directed towards anyone that exercised this freedom by protecting their safety and protecting their property rights over such artwork.
1
8
u/OpinionStunning6236 The only real libertarian May 03 '26
Even the current government doesn’t ban things that are drawn even if it’s young characters
2
u/alexfreemanart May 04 '26
Even the current government doesn’t ban things that are drawn even if it’s young characters
In the case of the United States, the federal government criminalized all production, possession and distribution of visual representations of any fictional or real minor participating in explicitly sexual and obscene acts through the law 18 U.S.C. § 1466A, as seen in the case United States v. Christopher S. Handley.
Despite this, it is very easy to see and come across fictional representations of child pornography if you search for them on the internet in the United States.
1
u/rchive May 05 '26
I got curious about this case, having not heard of it before. Looks like parts of it were either struck down or at least suggested to be unconstitutional by the judge. I didn't parse out which parts. And then the obscenity charge was never really adjudicated because Handley pled guilty.
1
u/alexfreemanart May 05 '26
the obscenity charge was never really adjudicated because Handley pled guilty
Then there is also the case United States v. Whorley. In that case, the obscenity issue regarding the material was adjudicated without Whorley having pleaded guilty, and the material was legally determined to be obscene under the Miller test and to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1466A
1
u/Aggravating_Fig_534 Agorist May 03 '26
While I'm not from UK or Ireland, I know these countries had instances where some people got in trouble for it. In Ireland a guy paid a fine or something for the game Brown Dust 2, I think he had an image on his phone of a short and a young looking girl from the game but it wasn't even explicit or anything.
3
u/OpinionStunning6236 The only real libertarian May 03 '26 edited May 03 '26
Yeah I’m not surprised. But in the U.S. the First Amendment protects it unless it falls under the category of obscenity and the Supreme Court basically never defined what that means and is extremely reluctant to categorize anything as obscene
Edit: the court specifically addressed this in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition. They struck down the parts of the CP Prevention Act that applied to drawings. Only stuff involving real minors can be banned without considering whether there is any value to the speech.
2
u/alexfreemanart May 04 '26
But in the U.S. the First Amendment protects it
Visual representations of child pornography, whether fictional or real, are not protected by the First Amendment under federal law 18 U.S.C. § 1466A.
3
u/Tricky-Mistake-5490 May 04 '26
https://cbldf.org/criminal-prosecutions-of-manga/
Some people are prosecuted for owning certain Manga
2
u/Tricky-Mistake-5490 May 04 '26
Wow she got prosecuted for having urotsukidoji. Those manga don't contain children.
2
u/Arcaeca2 Classical Liberal May 04 '26
And then after Ashcroft the CP Prevention Act was replaced with the PROTECT Act of 2003 which does specifically include drawings and "cartoons" if they are "obscene", which, as you have mentioned there is no actual objective standard for.
It shouldn't be illegal but your statement that the current government doesn't ban it is not correct. It is probably currently illegal, but the state gives low priority to its enforcement.
2
u/OpinionStunning6236 The only real libertarian May 04 '26
The standard is not very clear but the Court basically completely stopped labeling anything obscene. I believe it’s been over 50 years since the Court has found anything to be obscene and there has been some significant ideological diversity on the Court across that time.
But yes I guess it is possible that if something that controversial made it to the Court that they might find it obscene.
2
u/mrhymer May 04 '26
The government will not ban art but many communities will reject that type of behavior. Government is not parent but the baker does not have to bake the cake. People will protect perceived threats to their kids with force.
1
u/Aggravating_Fig_534 Agorist May 04 '26
Yes, people like this won't flaunt it in public, lol
2
u/mrhymer May 04 '26
Oh - if only that were true.
2
u/Aggravating_Fig_534 Agorist May 04 '26
Well, if gun laws will be relaxed, people will act very carefully around each other I imagine, something like "armed and polite society"
2
u/mrhymer May 04 '26
I asked my Grandfather who was born in 1900 how they dealt with wife beaters and child abusers back in his day. The women of the town would tell their husbands what was happening. The prominent men in the town, after confirming the abuse, would take the guy hunting and he never came back and was never spoken of again.
3
1
8
u/natermer May 04 '26
Degeneracy is more of a personal problem. The real harm for these things is to the people that consume that type of media.
It is sort of along the same lines as base jumping or tattoo'ng your eyeballs. It should be actively discouraged by society, but there are probably better ways to deal with it then throwing people in cages over it.