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.

 

The Truth about Libertarians

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 01:06 AM
link   
I thought ron paul was with the tea party. Are you guys with the tea party or what?




posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Reptius
 


Ron paul supports the tea party, but is not the tea party.. the tea party isn't really anything, and when speaking generally, most refer to the Tea Party Express.. which was created by republican lawyers and sara palin.

The original tax day protestors and tea party organization were libertarian.. the ones now, are a joke.

Though the Tea Party still does hold a few libertarian ideas.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Reptius
 


Though the Tea Party still does hold a few libertarian ideas.


Thank you! And am enjoying the thread.
S+F



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Lets have a serious discussion about this: If the pro-Ayn Rand anarchist Libertarians became ensconsed in US government policy-establishing, what would you expect from those born in this country who cannot pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, for a variety of legitimate reasons having nothing to do with "lazy"ness? Would you say, "That is what the strong family unit is for" and is that not the same and as unrealistic as saying "All teenagers --will-- remain celibate until they marry" ? Then would you say, "Well that is what religious charity is for"? When I was homeless for a long time ( I have PTSD and Asperger Autism along with a few other overlaping Disorders and illnesses, and I NEVER was into drugs, criminality, or alcoholism) two well known religious based charities blew me off when I approched them for help. Granted, diverse Churches provide temporary night shelter called PADS. My parents were minimaly educated people who raised my siblings and I up in poverty without health care, (As was common for people who were born in the early 1930's my surviving parent is age 72) and myself and them did not think, for decades, I should be diagnosed. I even went on to serve in the military with an honerable discharge. (And that time was --frought-- with problems for me, I barely made it out honerable). Finally, I recieved help which permanently got me off the street and back with my family from the federal governmment run healthcare system called The Veteran's Administration and their VA Hospitals, and I recieved for the most part, --excellent-- professional care.
edit on 25-1-2011 by simone50m because: spell correct



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Reptius
I thought ron paul was with the tea party. Are you guys with the tea party or what?


I don't join "parties". I don't vote for anyone in a party. I am against political parties, as they represent a loyalty that gets placed in front of America.

If you want to call me "libertarian", my ideals dovetail nicely. But i will not associate with people under any label other than "human" or "American", or maybe "Texan". My loyalties involve only family and country.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by simone50m
 


Firstly, Libertarianism has more to do with Federalism than "Government" in general.. libertarians are for states rights, to choose how they govern each population without the power of the feds dictating in absolute power.

That's meaning, while the Federal Government would be prevented from stealing money from some states and pouring it into others, in the form of "social programs" states would be permitted to act as they wish. California can be the commie utpoia it strives to be, Montanna can be a hands off deal with it your self, so on and so on.. as long as no state treds on the basic rights protected under the constitution.

Secondly.. private individuals and churches provide the majority of actual benefits to the people. Fact. Government spends much, much more. But its effects are less direct, more wasteful, and wholey inefficient.

Helping people is good.. people deserve to be protected, cared for, educated and given health care.. these are basic rights. The conundrum is that while they are rights, they differ from others because they rely on the government actually giving us something, and ANYTHING the government does is inherently evil and corrupted. They give us health care and its poor, substandard, expensive, inefficient and nonbeneficial.. JUST LIKE PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

So remove government, just have them protect us from fraud, like all forms of insurance and dangerous proceedures, and we would have cheap affordable and good health care.

Also if we removed social programs we would be individually more wealthy and would be more inclined to donate to private charity.

Government is bad because everything it touches is destroyed and rendered useless.. and its main priority is to pay its pimps and financiers over the people, to expand its own power and above all ensure its own survivability.

Libertarianism is not anarchy. Its returning power to the people.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Unlike other political movements, libertarianism is a philosophy of law, crime and justice.

It's definitely not monolithic, a good thing imo, but the uniting principle of all libertarians is that when they get together and talk about what is lawful, criminal and just they do so by correctly ascribing immutable liberties to the individual, the foundation of a free society. And that's why libertarians esteem the U.S. Constitution and other founding documents so highly: they espouse libertarian principles.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


That is kind of what i tell people: it isn't anarchy, it is just closer to what anarchy would represent. Like Jefferson said, we require government to guarantee our rights, else mob rule dictates. Even if 299 million people disagree with 1, that 1 has a right to his viewpoint.

Incremental encroachment of tyranny is what is happening:

"When they took the 4th amendment away, I was quiet because I didn't deal drugs. When they took the 6th amendment away, I was quiet because I had never been arrested. When they took the 2nd amendment away, I was quiet because I didn't own a gun. Now they've taken away the 1st amendment, and all I can do is be quiet." -- Fred Albury



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   
This one is for the poster on another thread that claimed we were against gays

1.3 Personal Relationships

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the
government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption,
immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or
restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices
and personal relationships.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   
Our stance on abortion...........

1.4 Abortion

Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
And considering all the videos of police brutality and the insane numbers in prision or parloe........7.7 MILLION this should be interesting to a lot of you..........our stance on crime and punishment....................

1.5 Crime and Justice

Government exists to protect the rights of every individual including life, liberty and property. Criminal laws should be limited to violation of the rights of others through force or fraud, or deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of harm. Individuals retain the right to voluntarily assume risk of harm to themselves. We support restitution of the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or the negligent wrongdoer. We oppose reduction of constitutional safeguards of the rights of the criminally accused. The rights of due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must not be denied. We assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:39 PM
link   
I have no problem with 3rd party's.....any of them would be better then the great puppet show we have going with the Demonrats and Republican'ts. I myself am the member of a 3rd party (although I refuse to identify it). For the longest time I was Republican, but I couldn't be one anymore after George W. Bush.....and I despise politically correct Leftists. Then the republicans had the gawl to put up an a** clown like McCain....the biggest political FLIP-FLOPPER in the GOP!! Tell me this whole thing wasn't a set-up to get Obummer in office!!! Anyhow I digress. Get out the word people!! Republicans and Democrats are just puppets controlled by the bilderburg group, support 3rd party candidates and help take back our Country

www.youtube.com...



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Heres one the Gun Haters will love.................


1.6 Self-Defense

The only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights — life, liberty, and justly acquired
property — against aggression. This right inheres in the individual, who may agree to be aided by
any other individual or group. We affirm the individual right recognized by the Second Amendment
to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense.
We oppose all laws at any level of government requiring registration of, or restricting, the
ownership, manufacture, or transfer or sale of firearms or ammunition.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   
I used to be a Libertarian, but found it impossible to reconcile one aspect of it. Libertarians claim to oppose forceful coersion in all forms, but also support the idea of at least some forceful coersion (i.e., government).

ALL government, no matter how small or limited, is a form of forceful coersion. How do you reconcile this fact with the core Libertarian principle rejecting the initiation of force? If there is law, there must needs be enFORCEment of said law. Law, or government in general, seems to me contrary to the fundamental Libertarian argument.

Thoughts, Libertarians?



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   
What is happening with the Libertarian party experiment in NH? My location is now in another state so I have lost track of what is happening in NH. I was originally excited and really pushed for the acceptance of the libertarian families who were moving into NH. Having been born and brought up in NH I felt that the libertarian party was a good fit and would keep many of the newer ideas from taking over NH government.

Mahree



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by NthOther
 


I think I understand the question

We only believe in using force when attacked by another country or in our personal lives by another person, our laws would reflect this. Not only would a person be allowed to protect himself and his property to the full extent......deadly force...........but the police would be used ONLY for a crime that harmed someone.....theft, rape, assualt, robbery, murder, etc.

No more revenue thefts from tickets, no more drug laws, gambling laws, prostitute laws.............in other words no more victimless crimes

I hope that answered your question



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Mahree
 


Try looking at the link provided I am sure you can find the information there............as far as I know its an ongoing project



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by lastrebel
reply to post by mayabong
 


You would have to define "Lean"

We believe in the smallest amount of government possible while realising government to an extent is a necessary "evil"


Authoritarian centralized governments are broken. They can be hijacked and restructured by the elites... easily.


Why can't the public be the government? We are the police,firefighters and politicians. Normal people. Everyone is actively involved with running thier community. We control our own commnities.NOT PRIVATE ELITE INTERESTS.

Do we need to be herded like animals?



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:33 PM
link   
Ok, here's some problems with libertarians.

2.6 Monopolies and Corporations

Basically according to libertarians, it's ok to have a huge monopoly strangling any competition out and thus creating a corporate state.

2.8 Education

Libertarians believe in education only if you can afford it. Thus creating a serf class for the aforementioned corporate state.

2.9 Health Care

Libertarians believe in health care only if you can afford it. Thus giving more power to the corporate state.

2.10 Retirement and Income Security

Libertarians want to steal your social security and give it to people like Bernie Madoff.

So, from what I gathered from the OP's link is that libertarians want a corporate state, where the poor become serfs and either succumb to the demands of the corporate overlords who would have absolutely zero regulations, or they die.

To boil it down, the Constitution according to the Libertarian party would probably look something like this:

We the Businesses of the United Corporations, in Order to gain a more perfect market share, establish Total Financial Control, insure domestic Trade domination, provide for the Shareholders, promote the Profits of our Corporations, and secure the Blessings of the financial institutions to ourselves and our Prosperity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United Corporations of America.

Basically the motto for libertarians should be "Me First and [snip] YOU!"



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
Ok, here's some problems with libertarians.

2.6 Monopolies and Corporations

Basically according to libertarians, it's ok to have a huge monopoly strangling any competition out and thus creating a corporate state.

2.8 Education

Libertarians believe in education only if you can afford it. Thus creating a serf class for the aforementioned corporate state.

2.9 Health Care

Libertarians believe in health care only if you can afford it. Thus giving more power to the corporate state.

2.10 Retirement and Income Security

Libertarians want to steal your social security and give it to people like Bernie Madoff.

So, from what I gathered from the OP's link is that libertarians want a corporate state, where the poor become serfs and either succumb to the demands of the corporate overlords who would have absolutely zero regulations, or they die.

To boil it down, the Constitution according to the Libertarian party would probably look something like this:

We the Businesses of the United Corporations, in Order to gain a more perfect market share, establish Total Financial Control, insure domestic Trade domination, provide for the Shareholders, promote the Profits of our Corporations, and secure the Blessings of the financial institutions to ourselves and our Prosperity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United Corporations of America.

Basically the motto for libertarians should be "Me First and [snip] YOU!"


Nahh... I think you just described the current US government.

Phail.

Nice try disinfo agent.

Libertarians and anarchists want the public to run the infrastructure in their communities/states. Not elite private interests.

Why is it so hard to want to live free? Why are you so afraid of not being lead?



new topics




 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join