It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So where are the conservative and libertarian utopias?

page: 11
23
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 10:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
Then by all means point to an example of a Anarcho-Libertarian utopia.

That was the point, there are none, Libertarian, Anarcho or Anarcho-Libertarian.


Certainly not, you are no authority.

Sorry but you do have a reading problem. The appeal was to Thomas Paine.




posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 10:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

That was the point, there are none, Libertarian, Anarcho or Anarcho-Libertarian.


Focusing on the fringe aspect is pointless as the Libertarian movement is more centrist and would be the most likely to grow to a operating system.


Sorry but you do have a reading problem. The appeal was to Thomas Paine.


No, you have a habit of making vague replies and Paine is not the only one who would think 'more freedom=more conspiracy' is an absurd premise.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
Focusing on the fringe aspect is pointless as the Libertarian movement is more centrist and would be the most likely to grow to a operating system.

Seems to me the one with the focusing problem is you. Do you understand the difference between providing a utopia and providing an example of a utopia?

If a Libertarian utopia existed, even the staunchest authoritarian could offer it as an example. Anyone could do so.


No, you have a habit of making vague replies and Paine is not the only one who would think 'more freedom=more conspiracy' is an absurd premise.

You have done it again. I never said Paine would agree with my premise. You said Paine would be appalled if you agreed. That is an appeal to authority, not me apealing to Paine, not Paine agreen with me, but Paine shaking his head if you ever agreed with me.
edit on 3-4-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 11:58 AM
link   
I see government as a tool. An invention of man, composed of men (and women), to help navigate the waters of ignorance and ineptitude. Government in its most simplified definition should be inversely proportional in size and scope to man's self-responsibility. I tend to believe that if we could travel into the future and observe humanity's subsequent evolved forms we would see severely reduced government across the board. One day people will be able to look at the concept of government not through the eyes of republican, democrat, communist or libertarian, but through the eyes of an energy resource manager. Laying teams and labels aside we could judge our government model based on energy efficiency alone and come to a consensus that centralized power is vulnerable to corruption, centralized decision-making is not nuanced enough, and centralized enforcement not empathetic enough to improve our unique individual lives.

Additionally, there is no example in the faceless, resource-efficient, time-proven intelligence of nature that shows any degree of centralization like "developed" nations experience today. It learned long ago that complexity and increasing the web of local connections was the most resilient system form. This is not apples and oranges, the ability to read nature's textbook is the power to skip the millions of years of trial and error that preceded us.

I know that I am much more empowered and wise today then before when I had no internet with instant answers to my questions. Using this modern tool, I can quickly learn any number of skills and find a vast library of homemade inventions that bring self-sufficiency closer and closer to realization. Taken to the macro, does this not pave a road to an empowered and knowledgeable human race with less and less need for large governments? If used right, I think it does. Yes, there will always be psychopaths but I prefer a psychopath to only have the means to wreak havoc on his local community then to enable and facilitate his control over an entire nation.

Does this make me pro-libertarian? To be quite honest, I don't know all that a libertarian espouses but I think the growing number of them says something about the awareness of just how broken our current models are. There are no examples of utopia, regardless of system of government, but I can't believe that in 2015, given everything Americans have witnessed in the recent past, that we are so resigned to the current acting forms of government that we can't try anything else.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 02:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
When you ask for examples of something that has never existed in history to this point you are being disingenuous.

Or you are pointing out the fact that things don't really work out the way they appear on paper.


Like socialism?



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 02:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon
Like socialism?

Yes, like everything.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: muse7

Whoa slow down OP, do you know what Libertarianism actually stands for? It's more of the Democrats and Republicans that empower the rich and want to return to the 1300's feudal system than the Libertarians.

Libertarianism is not perfect, my utopia would be a bit different because I believe the world belongs to everyone. Does this mean you can and should pick the corn your neighbor has planted and eat it? No. I believe that every person has a right to the fruits of their labor as long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights of others. This would empower the poor, not hurt them.

Hypothetical situation: A person works at a factory and saves enough money to buy some land they can build a ranch on and live off of without having to work the factory job. They buy the land, get married, build a house, raise sheep and everything is going fine. All of the sudden the Government comes to the persons door saying you have to pay a $1200 tax on your land, and $500 for your house, $50 per a sheep, plus your marriage isn't real because you didn't apply and pay for a marriage license. The person now must sell most of their sheep to pay the taxes and continue breeding and selling the rest for the rest of this persons life so they can pay the government all it's taxes.

Now why should this person pay additional money for something they paid to own? Unless... they actually don't own it at all, at least in the Government's eyes?



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 07:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

Seems to me the one with the focusing problem is you. Do you understand the difference between providing a utopia and providing an example of a utopia?


I do not think he was looking for a metaphorical utopia but instead was making a troll bait thread about why there are no Libertarian utopias. Hence the reason the Original Poster has not bothered to revisit the thread.


You have done it again. I never said Paine would agree with my premise. You said Paine would be appalled if you agreed. That is an appeal to authority, not me apealing to Paine, not Paine agreen with me, but Paine shaking his head if you ever agreed with me.


Either way, the premise of more freedom equating to more conspiracy is absurd at best.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 08:24 AM
link   
My take is on paper a 100% libertarian society looks nice.

In reality in the world as it exists today it would fail.

It certainly would no bet achieved overnight.


First is internal factors. You would not be able to roll everything out over night. If you did Large Corporations and powerfully individuals would gobble up land and resources overnight and turn a libertarian paradise into a servile hell. For it to work everything and everyone needs a clean slate. You need restart the whole system from the very beginning. If any traces of the old world are left they will overpower the new libertarian system. Rich poor, middle class, big business, small business. A new slate needs to be started.

Second is external factors. You cant have a 100% libertarian army in a world were non Libertarian country’s have professional army’s. Im still laughing at crop duster air forces.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 10:00 AM
link   
And the other thing in a 100% libertarian society how would police work?

Im curious to how well some of you have thought this through.....

Im hopping I wont get the answer I think im going to get.
edit on 4-4-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

War would be different with really libertarian country. War would be more like the British Retreat to Boston in 1775.


Err no cause we live in 2015......



That only worked because the British army fell apart because of bad communication.

After that the British army held its ground in most battles (expect the odd few like Saratoga) right up until the french landed. You guys were in a stalemate until a professional french army landed.



But that's all irrelevant.

If we are talking about history lets fast forward to the war of 1812?

The US had to adopt a professional army because of the damage a professional army did.


You know what? It is probably impossible to conquer the USA.
BUT
War does not always mean conquest. sometime it can just mean raids and causing damage.
Thats what the British army did in 1812, it was not there to hold land, just reek havoc and it did.

In this day and age its even worse.

If China or Russia wanted to do that they would smash your crop duster airforce and bomb your cities to dust. Your AR-15's would be useless while they are dropping bombs at 50,000 feet.


The American Volunteer Group, AKA "the Flying Tigers" were in large part crop dusters.


Chennault faced serious obstacles since many AVG pilots were inexperienced, BTW inexperienced means not possessed of billions of dollars and several years of training.

When Japanese planes attacked, Chennault's doctrine called for pilots to take on enemy aircraft in teams from an altitude advantage, since their aircraft were not as maneuverable or as numerous as the Japanese fighters they would encounter. He prohibited his pilots from entering into a turning fight with the nimble Japanese fighters, telling them to execute a diving or slashing attack and to dive away to set up for another attack. This "dive-and-zoom" technique was contrary to what the men had learned in U.S. service as well as what the Royal Air Force (RAF) pilots in Burma had been taught;
en.wikipedia.org...


The inexperienced, well paid, and privately disciplined Flying Tigers, lead by an aviation entrepreneur, killed 40 to 1.

You have been raised into a fetish for government.



edit on 4-4-2015 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 10:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
Focusing on the fringe aspect is pointless as the Libertarian movement is more centrist and would be the most likely to grow to a operating system.

Seems to me the one with the focusing problem is you. Do you understand the difference between providing a utopia and providing an example of a utopia?

If a Libertarian utopia existed, even the staunchest authoritarian could offer it as an example. Anyone could do so.


No, you have a habit of making vague replies and Paine is not the only one who would think 'more freedom=more conspiracy' is an absurd premise.

You have done it again. I never said Paine would agree with my premise. You said Paine would be appalled if you agreed. That is an appeal to authority, not me apealing to Paine, not Paine agreen with me, but Paine shaking his head if you ever agreed with me.


Libertarianism is not a Utopia. The market will still have periods of shortage and unemployment, but they will be shorter and widely foreseen. The improvement of the standard of living is based on an increased level of technology.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
My take is on paper a 100% libertarian society looks nice.

In reality in the world as it exists today it would fail.

It certainly would no bet achieved overnight.


First is internal factors. You would not be able to roll everything out over night. If you did Large Corporations and powerfully individuals would gobble up land and resources overnight and turn a libertarian paradise into a servile hell. For it to work everything and everyone needs a clean slate. You need restart the whole system from the very beginning. If any traces of the old world are left they will overpower the new libertarian system. Rich poor, middle class, big business, small business. A new slate needs to be started.

Second is external factors. You cant have a 100% libertarian army in a world were non Libertarian country’s have professional army’s. Im still laughing at crop duster air forces.


True.

Libertarianism will most likely occur in a way similar the current progressive/socialist system has. That is, people will have to vote for Libertarianism one repealed law at a time over several generations.

The Flying Tigers killed 40 to 1 because of an entrepreneurial leader rather than a lifetime of training.

The Wildcats had to develop new tactics in order to combat the Zero. Basically the Wildcats flew side by side in pairs and therefore had a larger kill zone. The Wildcat pilots did not use the training they had accumulated, aside from the kinds of experience a crop duster has, the Wildcat pilots had no training at all.

You grasp of reality is very superficial and indoctrinated.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
And the other thing in a 100% libertarian society how would police work?

Im curious to how well some of you have thought this through.....

Im hopping I wont get the answer I think im going to get.


Insurance type arrangements, with competing providers, would cover all emergency services. Many people don't understand that ES are being paid for right now. An insurance situation would pay for them directly and with competition to keep the price low and the various competitors on their best behavior.

A Free Market system will find the best way to provide emergency services, no one today knows what that will be.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
I do not think he was looking for a metaphorical utopia but instead was making a troll bait thread about why there are no Libertarian utopias. Hence the reason the Original Poster has not bothered to revisit the thread.

That is what you are focusing on.

I think he was saying "If they are possible, where are they?" and I think it is a valid question.


Either way, the premise of more freedom equating to more conspiracy is absurd at best.

It doesn't equal it or guarantee it, it allows it. That is true.

For example, lets say the SCOTUS decides that the 2nd allows for the ownership of any weapon that the government owns. That would be more freedom in that area. It doesn't mean that someone, anyone or everyone will go out and buy an F22 but it would allow it.

I believe that the stance of the Libertarian Party to roll back government but not to roll it back too far is becuase they see this. Of course the pitch is tailored for effect.



edit on 4-4-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 11:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
Libertarianism is not a Utopia.

Of course not, it is a political ideal. The thing is that political ideals are often sold as the key to utopias and somehow they all fall short. Some much shorter than others.


edit on 4-4-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

I see you got the private service answer but the real world implementations of "private services" usually look like the Cosa Nostra, warlords and feudalism.
edit on 4-4-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:01 PM
link   
utopia? there will never be utopia and i think most libertarians realize such a thing, libertarian society is all about free interaction without regulation, letting things do as they will naturally. where it goes is up to the people, there is no guarantee that it won't become corrupted but well everything comes with risks.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman
a reply to: ketsuko

Take away corporate personhood.

That would go along way by itself.


Better yet, take away personal corporatehood.

That's the path to freedom. Not that anyone understands it. Courts today aren't enforcing laws, they are enforcing contracts. Good luck with that rabbit hole.

Corporations don't have rights, people do. You are assumed to be a corporate entity unless you show otherwise, which is not easy.

Remember the govt cannot license an unlawful act. Driving a car is NOT unlawful. If you are engaged in commerce, you need a license. If everyone is recognized as a corporate entity, then everyone needs one. You have a fundamental human right to travel on the common way, as a person, but not as a corporate entity.

In other words, the freedom is there, it is buried under layers of bureaucratic bs, that no one know how to assert it.

Freedom to me, means the govt should never know my name, unless some other person makes a claim against me before the govt. Then, when said claim is satisfied, they summarily forget it.

Freedom means I don't need a license to fish or hunt to feed my family. If I want to start a commercial hunting or fishing enterprise, sure, but outside of commerce, I should be allowed to revert back to a human being. I should have a right to live without having to pay someone.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: crazyewok
And the other thing in a 100% libertarian society how would police work?

Im curious to how well some of you have thought this through.....

Im hopping I wont get the answer I think im going to get.


Insurance type arrangements, with competing providers, would cover all emergency services. Many people don't understand that ES are being paid for right now. An insurance situation would pay for them directly and with competition to keep the price low and the various competitors on their best behavior.

A Free Market system will find the best way to provide emergency services, no one today knows what that will be.


And who makes sure the corporations that handle the law obey the law themselves?

What happens if some negligent parent does not buy issuance and a pedo rapes there kid?

What happens if a crime happens to multiple people all with different company’s? Who works with who?




edit on 4-4-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
23
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join