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.

 

Why the HELL are you NOT a REAL Libertarian?

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Libertarian socialism

Overview


Libertarian socialism is a philosophy with diverse interpretations, though some general commonalities can be found in its many incarnations. Its proponents generally advocate a worker-oriented system of distribution that in some aspects radically departs from conventional capitalist economics (socialism). They propose that this economic system be executed in a manner that attempts to maximize the liberty of individuals and minimize concentration of power or authority (libertarianism). Libertarian socialists are strongly critical of coercive institutions, which often leads them to reject the legitimacy of the state in favor of anarchism. Adherents propose achieving this through decentralization of political and economic power, usually involving the socialization of most large-scale property and enterprise. Libertarian socialism tends to deny the legitimacy of most forms of economically significant private property, viewing capitalist property relations as forms of domination that are antagonistic to individual freedom.

The first person to describe himself as a libertarian was Joseph Déjacque, an early French anarchist communist. The word stems from the French word libertaire, and was used to evade the French ban on anarchist publications. In the context of the European socialist movement, libertarian has conventionally been used to describe those who opposed state socialism, such as Mikhail Bakunin. In the United States, the movement most commonly called libertarianism follows a capitalist philosophy; the term libertarian socialism therefore strikes many Americans as a contradiction in terms. However, the association of socialism with libertarianism predates that of capitalism, and many anti-authoritarians still decry what they see as a mistaken association of capitalism with libertarianism in the United States. As Noam Chomsky put it, a consistent libertarian "must oppose private ownership of the means of production and the wage slavery which is a component of this system, as incompatible with the principle that labor must be freely undertaken and under the control of the producer."

In a chapter recounting the history of libertarian socialism, economist Robin Hahnel relates that thus far the period where libertarian socialism has had its greatest impact was at the end of the 19th century through the first four decades of the twentieth century.

"Early in the twentieth century, libertarian socialism was as powerful a force as social democracy and communism. The Libertarian International– founded at the Congress of Saint Imier a few days after the split between Marxist and libertarians at the congress of the Socialist International held in The Hague in 1872– competed successfully against social democrats and communists alike for the loyalty of anticapitalist activists, revolutionaries, workers, unions and political parties for over fifty years. Libertarian socialists played a major role in the Russian revolutions of 1905 and 1917. Libertarian socialists played a dominant role in the Mexican Revolution of 1911. Twenty years after World War I was over, libertarian socialists were still strong enough to spearhead the social revolution that swept across Republican Spain in 1936 and 1937."


Economics


Libertarian socialists believe that all social bonds should be developed by individuals who have an equal amount of bargaining power, that an accumulation of economic power in the hands of a few and the centralization of political power both reduce the bargaining power—and thus the liberty of the other individuals in society. To put it another way, capitalist (and right-libertarian) principles concentrate economic power in the hands of those who own the most capital. Libertarian socialism aims to distribute power, and thus freedom, more equally amongst members of society. A key difference between libertarian socialism and free-market libertarianism is that advocates of the former generally believe that one's degree of freedom is affected by one's economic and social status, whereas advocates of the latter focus on freedom of choice. This is sometimes characterized as a desire to maximize "free creativity" in a society in preference to "free enterprise."





The original intent of Libertarianism was equallity and freedom. It comes from Anarchism but does not demand the abolition of the state, it just calls for the concentration of power to be seperated to its lowest possible levels.

[edit on 5/19/10 by Misoir]




posted on May, 19 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   
I guess there are no ATS members who call themselves Libertarian. HUH, imagine that.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Very good to read on some history. I didn't know it was originally socialist in nature. More hijacking of the original words I guess. Kind of like how communism turned in the opposite direction is modern day communism. Still a libertarian, just not a socialist libertarian. Thanks for the read.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ventian
reply to post by Misoir
 


Very good to read on some history. I didn't know it was originally socialist in nature. More hijacking of the original words I guess. Kind of like how communism turned in the opposite direction is modern day communism. Still a libertarian, just not a socialist libertarian. Thanks for the read.


So basically you are a Right-libertarian. That is why Europeans only know Libertarianism from an American point of view because in Europe Libertarianism is almost the same as Anarchism.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 02:55 PM
link   
Well the last political survey I did, can't remember which one exactly (it's on one of the threads here), stated I was a Liberal Libertarian...which makes sense at least in my eyes.

Though those words look to be contradictory...even those they are damn near the same word!



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


If you can find which thread it was and U2U it to me or post it on this thread so I could take the test I would be thankfull.



Political Compass Test

[edit on 5/19/10 by Misoir]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Misoir
I guess there are no ATS members who call themselves Libertarian. HUH, imagine that.


I could not really give a hoot, i think the world deserves every bit of sh1t it has. The uk government have in effect tortured me for 18 years, and i could not give a feck about the society we live in, while the people who in effect murdered my life walk the streets.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


I've taken that one before...it was a long time ago and some views have changed since then.

My "dot" was for squares down from the center...smack dab between left/right.

Have no idea where it would be now however. I'll try to see if I can find that other thread.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Here it is Misoir:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
Well the last political survey I did, can't remember which one exactly (it's on one of the threads here), stated I was a Liberal Libertarian...which makes sense at least in my eyes.

Though those words look to be contradictory...even those they are damn near the same word!


AKA: Social Libertarian.

Same here.


There has been a long-term disinformation campaign by the elite to redefine the term Libertarian so that it reflects pro-corporate interests. It has largely succeeded.

There is nothing wrong with corporations as long as they are afforded the same power as the people. In this, we have failed terribly.

[edit on 5/19/2010 by clay2 baraka]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Good thread, I've been trying to tell people on ATS for years now the Libertarianism everywhere but America, is based on anarchism and Libertarian Socialism is Anarchism. But then most people don't know what Socialism is anymore, it's 'the workers ownership of the means of production and distribution of resources'.

It was a working class movement in Europe that formed as an alternative to Capitalism (The private ownership of the means of production...)

It's NOT health care, welfare, government control, free-stuff, or any of the other BS attributed to it.

It's a system whereby the producers (workers) have the power, as apposed to 'private owners' who exploit the workers by paying the minimum they can get away with while making the least quality products they can get away with to make the maximum profit that goes into private bank accounts while the workers live on the bread line.

The Socialist system of cooperative/collective workplaces are far more motivating to workers because your earnings are directly related to your labour. Your effort has a direct effect on what you make. The present system does not motivate workers to work harder, or to make quality products. Wage slaves are not motivated workers.



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   
This thread seems to have died, but I wanted to add that I think a lot of people, who support 'capitalism', are under the illusion that money is really actually 'made'. That when a corporation declares millions in profits it's new money added to the economy?

That is a myth.

The economic system is a 'zero-sum' system, when one person 'makes' money then someone else has to loose money. That is why the wealth is always accumulated in smaller and smaller groups of people, the rich get richer the poor...you know the saying.

Money is not made, it's redistributed, mostly upwards. Money can't be created, it's a closed system where money is simply moved around.

[edit on 5/23/2010 by ANOK]



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Hey, you could of come up with your own frelling thread title instead of stealing MINE.

Why the HELL are you NOT a Libertarian?

You know, in some circles they would call that plagiarism!



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


It's purpose was as a rebuttal of your thread. And it is not plagarism because I did not use the exact same name, ATS does not allow that.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


Oh your limited pie bull#.

Tell me, let us say I create a piece of art did that come from the pie?

Or if I create labor to accomplish anything? Did that come from the pie?

The most valuable resource there is-LABOR

You limited pie folk REALLY need to get a clue. This is how the people you rail against use your very ignorance to control you.

There is no damn limited pie. What happens when human society reaches to other worlds. Are you still going to say their is a limited pie then? How do you think we are going to reach the stars? By finding a resource that will get us there?

Grow the hell up and examine the reality that has been created for your very control. It is a frelling delusion!



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 01:54 AM
link   
I think a focus on liberty is more important now in the so-called "free world" than it has been in some time. However, I take issue with libertarians who focus exclusively on government power and ignore the intrusion of corporate power into our lives. As government and big business become increasingly intertwined, effective liberty is going to have to resist corporate control as much as (or in some cases even more than) government control.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 02:02 AM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


Agreed.

The courts and executive branches must be a strong and uncorrupted in a Libertarian society. Just as we see in our system now, where the banksters and corporate whores get away with almost anything, how can people think that giving government anymore power is going to stop the partners in crime from anything?

The more power the government has through differing regulations, protects the very corporations and banks from prosecutorial powers. Look at Chicago for instance, one of the most corrupt political machines anywhere, how is it working out for the people there?

If you ask me, citizen Grand Juries should be brought back to reign in the corruption in government and their corporate lapdogs the banks and multi nationals.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by endisnighe
reply to post by ANOK
 


Oh your limited pie bull#.

Tell me, let us say I create a piece of art did that come from the pie?

Or if I create labor to accomplish anything? Did that come from the pie?


Yes. When someone gives you cash for something you did it's their loss. When you give someone money for something it's your loss.

When did any money get made?



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 02:19 AM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


Money? What does a currency have to do with resources?

I created a piece of art and traded it for say a cow, where does the currency come into play? Currency is a basis of barter. It has nothing to do with anything.

Unless of course you are using the debt currency created by the federal reserve which is an abhorrent form of currency.

You are bringing a completely different argument into the pie. Barter with the use of a debt based currency. Fallacious use of a red herring.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


Who was talking about resources?

Resources are kept artificially scarce by the capitalists system in order to maintain profits.

But that wasn't what I was talking about, I was simply talking about money, cash, mullah, filthy lucre. The fact that money is not 'made' it's redistributed. The world as a whole is no better off now than it was hundreds of years ago, it's just the wealth has been concentrated in smaller and smaller groups of people. Why should I work to make that group wealthy?

There is enough resources for us all to be comfortable.

If it wasn't for capitalism, and it's control of those resources, then there could be an abundance for everyone to live comfortably, but we have very few people monopolizing all the resources, which they control the distribution of to maintain their profit levels.

I just want a more fair system, where our labour is not exploited to make someone else 'wealthy' at the expense of the rest of us (when the capitalist gets rich then someone else is made poor, money is a zero-sum system).



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join