Why the HELL are you NOT a Libertarian?

reply to post by debunky

OT: I am not a libertarian because I like the Idea of people cooperating for the common good. One example:

Ah another myth rears its ugly head... Libertarians cooperate with others for the common good the difference is they don't force anyone to cooperate it's all voluntary.

But your statement is a testament to media induced lies that anything that doesn't require overbearing government to accomplish is bad... Keep repeating those mantras we wouldn't want to upset anyone's status quo... Sigh!

[edit on 12-5-2010 by hawkiye]

reply to post by earthdude


Well, if you are talking about the Totalitarian/Anarchy scale, of course libertarians land on the right, that is what it is all about.

This will help-

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7a2e9c9aa11a.jpg[/atsimg]



Libertarianism is freedom plain and simple. It's basic premise, to do no harm is actually reiterated in the Hippocratic Oath.

Government's sole purpose is to protect the right's of the individual. That is it, no more, no less.

Strict Constitutionalists are Libertarian.
Social Democrats are libertarian on the social components.
Conservative Republicans are libertarian on the economic components.

Libertarians are the BEST of both worlds.

reply to post by endisnighe


It's corporate welfare. And both authoritarian parties are all up in it. Some use war and security to justify laundering my earned income to their corporatist friends and other use 'fairness' and the 'green' nonsense to launder my earned income to their corporatist buddies.

And as if stealing my income wasnt bad enough they go on to expand their reach and manipulate markets making my desired way of life impossible and forcing a manufactured status quo onto everyone.

At this point in my life I've gone beyond libertarianism and beyond even anarchism. I'm all set to watch the world burn. Anything that brings about the destruction of every organized anything I'm all for. Anyone who comes knocking on my door for money they decided I owe them or to tell me I can't do a certain thing that doesnt infringe on the rights of any other being deserves disembowelment. Imposing a will on others whether by dictatorial decree or democratic mob rule is evil in its most absolute sense and I'm really, really, really, tired of it.

Originally posted by earthdude
I would be a Libertarian but the ranks are full of complete nut cases. I lean left but some of the Libertarians fall over into the extreem right.

Wow what a completely ignorant statement. So you let the extremist of some group decide what philosophy you will embrace... Sigh

And if you're going to name call then it behoves you to specifically point out and define nut cases and why you think they represent libertarianism so we can debunk your flawed assertions? Also for the mentally challenged the OP was not refering to the Libertarian party but the philosophy...

Libertarianism is like Communism, in the sense they both look good on paper.

I personally believe in a golden mean of government that has practical application. A government can be too limited or too totalitarian. A government can be too democratic or too autocratic.

I believe in a objective middle path and Libertarianism strays too far from that path.

[edit on 12/5/10 by MikeboydUS]

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Libertarianism is directly pointed at the Federal Government. Technically you could live in a Communist State and a Libertarian Union at the same time.. the idea being let the states have more direct control, creating larger differences based on population preference.. so if you don't like California's hyper socialism, you can move to Missouri to live in a more libertarian minded environment..

Libertarianism was the main idea of the Union .. it was never supposed to be this massive, all power ever reaching Federalist system .. hence why we were originally a Confederacy.

reply to post by tigpoppa

I am an american and we dont have this party here.

It's an American political party.

The republicans are the true patriots who are not afraid to go toe to toe against liberals who want to burn our flag in the streets like these libertarians.

You represent the typical, ignorant Republicans.

1. Libertarians are nothing like Liberals .. which I think is what you meant.. you were probably fantasizing about bill oreilly in a thong and lost your concentration.

2. Republicans represent a Fascist doctrine of corporatism, religious fanatics, and socialist government.

Republicans are not patriots.. they are a disgrace.

Anyways..

Why are most people not Libertarians?

Because I'd say 75-80% of the country is solid Socialist... they love the Government, maybe not the people, but the security of the government telling them what to do, what to eat, what to think, how to act .. they love being directed and controlled, monitored and fed. They demand social services, even so called conservative republicans would never get rid of social security and medicare and medicaid.. and once this new health care plan is in effect, the majority will complain about it because their team didn't found it, but they will love it all the same.

People are ignorant, lazy, and pathetic. Democracies by their very nature are destined to tyranny simply because the people vote.. and the people vote for convenience not logic, they support comforts, not virtues. Humans cannot govern themselves... simple as that. You want your freedoms, you have fight for them.. the masses don't see that as worth it. So long as they get their food stamp at the end of the day and a subsidized doctor visit.

reply to post by tothetenthpower

So is libertarianism. You can't have government implying rules and regulations if your allowed to do whatever the hell you want, that's kind of a paradox.

You deeply misunderstand what "libertarianism" means.. as well as Anarchy. Anarchy is the absence of any form of Government. Libertarianism is the smallest fraction of Government needed to operate the UNION.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

So is libertarianism. You can't have government implying rules and regulations if your allowed to do whatever the hell you want, that's kind of a paradox.

You deeply misunderstand what "libertarianism" means.. as well as Anarchy. Anarchy is the absence of any form of Government. Libertarianism is the smallest fraction of Government needed to operate the UNION.

God, I wish people would actually READ the rest of the thread instead of just nit picking the one or two posts where I was clearly mistaken.

I apologized and discussed the issue further on.

~Keeper

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
Libertarianism is like Communism, in the sense they both look good on paper.

I personally believe in a golden mean of government that has practical application. A government can be too limited or too totalitarian. A government can be too democratic or too autocratic.

I believe in a objective middle path and Libertarianism strays too far from that path.

[edit on 12/5/10 by MikeboydUS]

And you ignore a thousand years of history of proven maximum freedom: post by hawkiye

reply to post by hawkiye

libertarian/anarchy society of the Ancient Irish Celts.

Ireland was a Absolute Monarchy and confederacy of 4 kingdoms (Ulster/Lienster/Munster/connacht

Love the Irish and their history, but they were not very "libertarian" .. it was actually more in line with "Enlightened Monarchy" .. based on religious support the citizens could effectively remove the Monarch if he upset "the balance" .. I'd prefer enlightened monarchy over Democracy any day, but in this modern world it's impossible.

PS the system you're talking about was a legal system called "Brehon Law".. Libertarian in value, but not so much when it came to the actual governments.

reply to post by earthdude

I would be a Libertarian but the ranks are full of complete nut cases. I lean left but some of the Libertarians fall over into the extreem right.

Most Libertarian candidates are nutcases.. this is true. And all Libertarians fall to the extreme "Right" ... it's what we are. But then you'd have to question "what's right and left" to a Libertarian.. I consider myself to be on the right wing fringe of things, rather radical. At the same time I support gay marriage, right to choose, legalization of most drugs and the separation of Church and State, and so on .. If I told that to a Republican they'd scream LIBERAL!!! and run.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


My most humble apologies for not reading every single post in the thread to the point in which you apologized on page 3.


[edit on 5/12/2010 by Rockpuck]

Libertarians believe in the free market, and that is nothing but communism dressed up as a market system.

Most libertarians are fans of the people who have created our current military police state, and massive government debt, andI mean Reagan, and both Bushes, and Gingrich and his rot. You listen to Rush and all his imitators, and don't recognize how much of an idiot that guy is.

I would like to find a party that treats everyone fairly, which rules the democrats out, and the republicans.

This party also needs to recognize the legitimate role of our government which is well defined by our constitution. These means regulating commerce between the states and across national borders with evenly enforced fair rules.

Business entities shouldn't be allow to poison our environment, create unsafe working conditions, and we should put export duties on countries that fail to meet our minimum standards.

At the same time government needs to be a lot more friendly to individuals and businesses when it comes to enforcing regulations. People shouldn't be deprived of property because they made a possibly wrong split second decision on a stop light, or maybe should have possibly had a safety cover in place.

End the drug wars, release all non-violent drug defenders, and stop letting criminals out of jail because they have only committed one horrendous crime.

Start up a national system that employers use to identify who works here illegally, and who doesn't, then start fining employers hefty fines for hiring illegal immigrants.

No Amnesty plan, send all illegals home. Let them take the wealth and skills they have gained here, and use them to improve their own countries.

Start taxing short term gains under 45 days as gambling, at a rate of around 50%. Gambling on the market needs to end.

Cut legal immigration down to the bare bones until we start seeing some job recovery.

Develop college education standards and start allowing online courses that are virtually free. Most of the best techs I have ever met are self taught. Our colleges are nothing more than barriers to economic advancement. It is time to end this charade.

End the racism that is being pushed through affirmative action.

Cut the amount of time someone can collect welfare down to a bare minimum. Possibly offer economic rehabilitation plans for those who seem incapable of supporting themselves, kind of like boot camp.

End corporate welfare.

reply to post by Rockpuck


THat's ok, it's just like the 6th post referencing my first fre responses.

Which is probably expected to be honest lol

~Keeper

Bah!

Garden gnomes and their double posts...

~Keeper

[edit on 5/12/2010 by tothetenthpower]

reply to post by hawkiye


That describes a primitive tribal/clan council government. Parts of Somalia, Pakistan and Afghanistan are like that. Their religion also played a major role in their lives. Not my ideal government.

The Celts did not live utopian lives. There are well documented Celtic invasions of Italy and the Balkans in ancient times.

The colonization of Ireland by Celts was the result of multiple invasions and destruction of its aboriginal inhabitants.

Rockpuck in a post above, goes further into Ireland itself. I don't need to repeat it.

Lets stop redefining what is liberal and conservative, and stick to the true meaning.

A true liberal, in the form of John Adams and Patrick Henry, is for the rights of the individual over the state, or any institution, and that includes corporations. At its extreme, the left is anarchy.

True conservative are for conserving the status quo. They believe in the masses being ruled by a privileged class, and at their most extreme are totalitarian. King George would be a good example.

reply to post by blood0fheroes


Essentially, this core belief is the core of Wican morality.

If it harms no one, do what thou will.

And then the three fold law.

"Mind the Threefold Law you should,
Three times bad and three times good."

Not bad concepts.

reply to post by poet1b


Everything except your initial sentence here is spot on for the Libertarian ideal.

Free markets, hmmm. Let me ask you this, if a corporation attempts to become a monopoly, does this break the intent of do no harm to others?

Free market principles does not allow companies and individuals to become detrimental to the free market itself.

How has the super regulation of the markets been working? Please do not say deregulation had anything to do with the current debacle. This was a systemic problem of a regulated, fiat debt currency, cronie capitalist market.

Absolutely NOTHING to do with free markets.

If you guys cant agree upon Definitions its going to be real hard arguing anything.

Personally, I`ll stick to the Encyclopedia Brittanica definitions of what Liberal, Conservative and Libertarian mean. And by those Definitions Libertarianism is for freedom-loving, self-sufficient people.

But just because its good for us does not mean its good for all.

Originally posted by endisnighe
There is one tenet of Libertarianism.

You have the RIGHT to do anything as long as you do not infringe on someone else's rights of Life, Liberty or Property.

I will always be your friend and benefactor.

You have the right to your own world. You have the right to believe in what you want. You have the right to self determination.

Why the HELL are you not a Libertarian?

A charming but simplistic idea.

A Native American tribe comes in and says (with documentation) that the land we own is theirs and was stolen from them. Again, they have documentation showing that the legislature (this is a true case, by the way... in California) met in secret session during the lifetime of the person who is making the claim and made laws to steal his land. I bought the land legally 30 years ago.

Whose rights are you supporting?

A mom (who is known to have alcohol problems) and a dad (in prison for rape and car theft) are fighting over custody of a 6 year old girl. No other relatives want the child because she's autistic. Neither of the parents is infringing on someone else's rights of Life, Liberty or Property.

Whose rights do you support?

A religious group claims that their deity told them that it's okay for the founder to have multiple wives and marry 12 year old girls (another case snatched from the headlines a few years ago) and have sex with 12 year old boys. He isn't imprisoning the children and the girls appear to have married him voluntarily. His community of followers approves of him and say he isn't infringing on someone else's rights of Life, Liberty or Property.

Whose rights do you support?

A group of gays are suing the military to let them live as openly gay and they want spousal recognition and rights.

Whose rights do you support?

What about the rights of the GITMO detainees?

...there's millions of these cases around. I find the Libertarian views to be very simplistic and a lot of them seem to be behind the principles that the government shouldn't interfere with gun ownership. Gun Ownership seems to be the #1 issue for most of them -- not protection of women from rape and abuse (there's not a lot of attention to that in the Libertarians), equal pay for equal work no matter your race or sex or age (not a big issue with them), regulation to shut down computer trading and preventing a stock market panic (which would be against their principles), and on and on and on.

I find very little attractive about them.

After examining it all, I find I'm still a liberal Democrat, and I will stand up for many things, but I'm not going to stand up for your right to turn your property into a private garbage dump (I work at a site where a man did just that with his farm for 20 years) or sit on your front porch with your gun and favorite rottweiler, playing loud music so the Black schoolkids can see you as they head home from school (example of someone I felt is Yet Another Moron.)

reply to post by endisnighe

if a corporation attempts to become a monopoly, does this break the intent of do no harm to others?

Yes, it most certainly does. The monopolist drives competitors out of business typically by any means necessary, most often by bribery and deception.

There may be cases where monopolies have developed purely due to innovation and organizational skills that made them so much better than all the competition, but I do not know of any such case. Maybe you could provide and example.

Free market principles does not allow companies and individuals to become detrimental to the free market itself.

I know the theory sounds nice on paper, but in the real world it does not work. There is no such thing as a free market, it is an idealistic concept like communism, that many people buy into.

Markets operate on the law of supply and demand. The Law of Supply and Demand only sets price, it does not prevent corruption or price manipulation, or any other numerous forms of fraud.

How has the super regulation of the markets been working?

Super regulation, where did you come up with this. Under the GW admin, the only regulation that existed was to rob small businesses in order to give to giant corporations. That is why we are in the mess we are in.

What did work? Clinton's third way economics where government works as a partner with businesses to create competitive market systems which are necessary for efficient market systems.

Everywhere free market ideology is attempted to be implemented, it ends in disaster, and all the free market people say the same thing. It wasn't a true free market, just as all the communists would say, it wasn't a true communist system.

Can you name one modern free market economy?

Do you recognize that without competition, there is no efficiency in markets.

I am going to go get some exercise, but I look forward to your response, as I think this is an important discussion if those of us in the middle are ever going to come together and get rid of the current dysfunctional two party system.