Calling all Libertarians! I have some questions.

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


I see what you are saying. Thank you for the explanation.

But what constitutes a handout? That is all I hear from the right wing..."Handouts! Handouts! No more handouts". I can understand the frustration over giving people money (i.e. welfare and unemployment even). But to provide for a man who has cancer and cannot work and has no money to pay for his treatments is not a "handout", it is compassion. Paying for a child who's family can barely put food on the table to go to school again is compassion.

The sink or swim mentality of this country is one of the reasons IMO that people have become so cynical. "So Mr. Man you have cancer...hmmm...but you have no health insurance...hmmm...well...how about a payment plan!?"..."So little boy you want to go to school do ya...hmmm...does your family have any money...barely any huh...hmmm...well...how about a payment plan!?" Looks like to me you either die, go uneducated, or go into life long debt. We are raised in the US not to be individuals but to be productive members of society, earn enough for two kids and that nice little two story house with the white picket fence. What about those who cant afford the American dream? Are they just not working hard enough? Or are we willing to admit that the dice does not always roll in favor of some people.

Health care and Education are NOT privileges, neither are food and water. These are human rights, through just those first two things we have a healthy and educated world. What is wrong with that? Nothing...it is only wrong to the greedy.

PS

Sorry if that was a little to rantish




posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ExPostFacto
 





However, the philosophy of libertarianism is not to be found in a political party.


The Libertarian Party begs to differ with you:


Preamble

As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others.

We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized.

Consequently, we defend each person's right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power.

In the following pages we have set forth our basic principles and enumerated various policy stands derived from those principles. These specific policies are not our goal, however. Our goal is nothing more nor less than a world set free in our lifetime, and it is to this end that we take these stands.



Statement of Principles

We, the members of the Libertarian Party, challenge the cult of the omnipotent state and defend the rights of the individual.

We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose.

Governments throughout history have regularly operated on the opposite principle, that the State has the right to dispose of the lives of individuals and the fruits of their labor. Even within the United States, all political parties other than our own grant to government the right to regulate the lives of individuals and seize the fruits of their labor without their consent.

We, on the contrary, deny the right of any government to do these things, and hold that where governments exist, they must not violate the rights of any individual: namely, (1) the right to life -- accordingly we support the prohibition of the initiation of physical force against others; (2) the right to liberty of speech and action -- accordingly we oppose all attempts by government to abridge the freedom of speech and press, as well as government censorship in any form; and (3) the right to property -- accordingly we oppose all government interference with private property, such as confiscation, nationalization, and eminent domain, and support the prohibition of robbery, trespass, fraud, and misrepresentation.

Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.



1.0 Personal Liberty

Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices.



1.1 Expression and Communication

We support full freedom of expression and oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology. We favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others. We oppose government actions which either aid or attack any religion.



1.2 Personal Privacy Libertarians support the rights recognized by the Fourth Amendment to be secure in our persons, homes, and property. Protection from unreasonable search and seizure should include records held by third parties, such as email, medical, and library records. Only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes. We favor the repeal of all laws creating “crimes” without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.



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.



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.



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.


There is much, much more that can be found in that link I provided, but the above is just a smidgeon of that very real and recognizable political party's platform.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   
H.R. 2306 passing would be a huge advantage to Libertarians.

Just thought I would add that. I emailed my congressman the other day and asked him to support it. It would be a godsend for the states.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   
There is no attempt to remove the federal government just downsize it. There will always be a need for a strong federal government to handle foreign policy, national defense, immigration, large infastructure projects that cross state lines and environmental issues. However it should not interfere with domestic issues or any issue that can be handled at the state level. It is about solving problems at the lowest level which is the most efficient place to do so.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
If you own a factory for example and it was making good money, then your equal share of the profits should be enough. There is no reason for anyone to have more than another. If we all have what we need, it should be all we want. The hierarchy that divisions in wealth create is what is wrong, it feeds the ego/fear driven exploitative system.

I am convinced that if American libertarians realized what socialism and capitalism actually are they would embrace socialism as the better economic system.

Let me get this straight, i work as a labourer for 30 years saving every extra penny, and decide to start a widget making company because I would like to buy my child new shoes every 6 months as opposed to every year, I use the money that I worked for and saved to buy the land, the buildings and all the equipment. I go out and get the business requests needed to start manufacturing. I hire and train 30 people in how to make these widgets, I continue to get more business, order supplies and keep the business running day to day, rain or shine. By your logic I am entitled to nothing more then the first day worker going through training.

With that being said, there is no reason to save and start that business as I can stay at my current job, make the same amount of money and have far less stress and exert far less effort.

Socialism makes the whole concept of personal freedom and property ownership invalid. You can own nothing that everyone else doesn't own as its not "fair".



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by NuroSlam
Let me get this straight, i work as a labourer for 30 years saving every extra penny, and decide to start a widget making company because I would like to buy my child new shoes every 6 months as opposed to every year, I use the money that I worked for and saved to buy the land, the buildings and all the equipment. I go out and get the business requests needed to start manufacturing. I hire and train 30 people in how to make these widgets, I continue to get more business, order supplies and keep the business running day to day, rain or shine. By your logic I am entitled to nothing more then the first day worker going through training.


Here's the thing, in a socialist economy you wouldn't have had to be a laborer for 30 years in order to buy the means of production so you can exploit workers and be a part of the problem.

But it's not up to you, it's up to other people who should have a choice whether to work for you, or work in a cooperative company.

The problem is no one is taught that there is an alternative that would work for more people than the capitalists economy does.

In a sense I agree with you but it's not on that level you describe that causes the real problems. It's when companies become corporations, and so big that they have the power to control politics to their advantage.
Wars are not because of government, or terrorists, they are because of capitalists with so much capital they control government to their benefit. They have power over the political system, because they have the monopoly on the economy, and could bring the world to it's knees faster than a nuclear war. No one should have that power, capitalism allows that power, and ultimately that power destroys because it feeds on human ego and fear.


With that being said, there is no reason to save and start that business as I can stay at my current job, make the same amount of money and have far less stress and exert far less effort.


You only want to look at it for what you get out of it, we could have a system where no one goes without. Why do you need more than other people if you have what you need?


Socialism makes the whole concept of personal freedom and property ownership invalid. You can own nothing that everyone else doesn't own as its not "fair".


You seem to think freedom rests on 'property ownership', but freedom should be for all not just those who are privileged. Yes private property is a privilege, and those that do not, and can not own property, who have only their labour to sell are coerced into exploitation. No one is going to take your private property away, but if people had a choice you might find it hard to hire people. Real freedom would be real choice, not coercion into a system we are told is something it's not and lied to about viable alternatives. If capitalism was so great it wouldn't need to hide it's true nature behind walls of lies and propaganda.

edit on 7/29/2011 by ANOK because: typo



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Openeye
reply to post by ANOK
 


I see what you are saying. Thank you for the explanation.


No prob mate.


But what constitutes a handout? That is all I hear from the right wing..."Handouts! Handouts! No more handouts". I can understand the frustration over giving people money (i.e. welfare and unemployment even). But to provide for a man who has cancer and cannot work and has no money to pay for his treatments is not a "handout", it is compassion. Paying for a child who's family can barely put food on the table to go to school again is compassion.


I agree. I get sick of people whining about 'handouts' for people who need them when we bail out corporations and spend billions fighting wars on their behalf. We the people are financing our own exploitation. Handouts is not where all the money is going.


The sink or swim mentality of this country is one of the reasons IMO that people have become so cynical. "So Mr. Man you have cancer...hmmm...but you have no health insurance...hmmm...well...how about a payment plan!?"..."So little boy you want to go to school do ya...hmmm...does your family have any money...barely any huh...hmmm...well...how about a payment plan!?" Looks like to me you either die, go uneducated, or go into life long debt. We are raised in the US not to be individuals but to be productive members of society, earn enough for two kids and that nice little two story house with the white picket fence. What about those who cant afford the American dream? Are they just not working hard enough? Or are we willing to admit that the dice does not always roll in favor of some people.


Capitalism is a hierarchical system, a pyramid scheme, there will always be more on the bottom than the top otherwise it would fail. Those on the bottom are conditioned to believe they could be on the top, and to compete against everyone to get there, it's a false paradigm that keeps us not much better than slaves. We could all have want we need right now.


Health care and Education are NOT privileges, neither are food and water. These are human rights, through just those first two things we have a healthy and educated world. What is wrong with that? Nothing...it is only wrong to the greedy.


In a system that forces us to be a part of it, or sink so to speak, then yes those things are rights. In a system that has taken our ability to survive outside of it, and exploits our labour then we have a right to work, to have healthcare etc.


Sorry if that was a little to rantish


Nope people need to rant a little more, too much apathy in this world.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 01:00 AM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 

All very valid points and can agree with. Where i'm at we call that voluntarism, living in an consensual society. But there are important parts of capitalism that is needed in order to remove the concept of government out of the picture completely. Government must be removed in order for that to actually work. One is a court system, not one that dispenses out justice at the end of a barrel, but one based upon an arbitration system.

Second is a need for defence as there will always be bad apples, especially during the transition. I believe we are all part of the communal defence, but in this day and age, with what is actually going to happen, the need of professional soldiers is of the up most. The idea of capitalism works well here when competition for lack of a better word is the only way that one would voluntarily take a job knowing he could lose it at any time by those who actually employ them to go the extra mile to be of the highest caliber. And I believe that they should be compensated for that choice.

Just about every idea for innovation, requires an active component of capitalism as something that I actually enjoy on a personal level I would not be enjoying today, sorry living like forest folk doesn't interest me.

So while I do identify myself as an anarcho-capitalist, personally I consider myself a voluntarist, its a good way to stoke a fire to see who's actually willing to discuss some issues to start to building of the society I would like to live in. The ones who think its a decent into chaos and madness really have such a long way to go.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 02:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by NuroSlam
reply to post by ANOK
 

All very valid points and can agree with. Where i'm at we call that voluntarism, living in an consensual society.


Hmmm volunteerism? The system is voluntary, but I wouldn't call it volunteerism.

You have to agree the majority of people in the world are 'workers', or people who only have their labour to sell.
The media paints a very unrealistic picture of the world, and who owns what as far as the economy goes.
Very few people will be giving up anything, most people will gain. The world as a whole will gain.

Its not about bleeding heart liberal denying yourself for others. There are enough resources for us all to be comfortable. In this system it's our ego that is feeding the desire to constantly want more, or more than someone else has. The world is a mess because our priorities have been twisted by a exploitative system, our technological advancements are used to make camera phones because camera phones make money, but making money does nothing to advance our ability to feed everyone. We're wasting knowledge so people can make money selling stuff that we really don't need so the can buy more stuff they don't really need. It's a circular system of consumption that only makes money, not sustainable life systems, permaculture.



But there are important parts of capitalism that is needed in order to remove the concept of government out of the picture completely.


The only part of capitalism that matters is capitalism itself, the 'private ownership of the means of production'. Capitalism can not make a claim on anything else as its own. Socialism is a true free market system, where all are free to participate becuase the means of production will be available. It's really hard to compete with capitalists when you don't have the means to produce and compete.



Government must be removed in order for that to actually work.


I agree government does have to be removed. Government is nothing but a tool, and is ran by capitalists to their benefit. Capitalism itself is the real problem, government and state are just symptoms of it along with poverty, alienation, war, exploitation, opression, class, class war lol.



The idea of capitalism works well here when competition for lack of a better word is the only way that one would voluntarily take a job knowing he could lose it at any time by those who actually employ them to go the extra mile to be of the highest caliber. And I believe that they should be compensated for that choice.

Just about every idea for innovation, requires an active component of capitalism as something that I actually enjoy on a personal level I would not be enjoying today, sorry living like forest folk doesn't interest me.

So while I do identify myself as an anarcho-capitalist, personally I consider myself a voluntarist, its a good way to stoke a fire to see who's actually willing to discuss some issues to start to building of the society I would like to live in. The ones who think its a decent into chaos and madness really have such a long way to go.


I disagree, I don't think innovation requires a private owner in the sense that capitalism is private ownership. How many people have started businesses in places they shared with others, but did not own? Or tools borrowed from a central tool shed? Capitalism has nothing to do with Human innovation, in fact as I said above it keeps us creating crap, because crap makes money. It keeps stuff that could advance us in positive ways suppressed in order to not take profit from someone else. It keeps useful plants like Cannabis illegal because it would take profit from someone. It's an artificial system that keeps us from naturally developing our humanity.

Anarcho-capitalism is a contradiction in terms. Capitalism can not be anarchistic because it is itself a hierarchical system. Anarchy means 'no government', but Anarchism means more than simply 'no government'. Anarchism is a political system that also offers a solution for 'no government', and that was a free system where the means of production is available for all to use, socialism.

edit on 7/30/2011 by ANOK because: typo



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 03:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Openeye
 


I just ask the the Constitution be properly applied...That is all.

Regards and Nameste,

-Chung



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 04:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jezus
And there were also people who were not free...

And they didn't get long "just fine".
edit on 29-7-2011 by Jezus because: (no reason given)


And through their own power, over time, they liberated themselves. Not through welfare and affirmative action, but through the strength of their pride in their culture and belief in their future.

MLK did not say "I need a welfare check", he said: "I have a dream".



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by ANOK
Socialism has nothing to do with government.


Then who distributes the goods?



The powerful unions and worker cooperatives do. On their own dime.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by NuroSlam
reply to post by ANOK
 

All very valid points and can agree with. Where i'm at we call that voluntarism, living in an consensual society.


Hmmm volunteerism? The system is voluntary, but I wouldn't call it volunteerism.

You have to agree the majority of people in the world are 'workers', or people who only have their labour to sell.
The media paints a very unrealistic picture of the world, and who owns what as far as the economy goes.
Very few people will be giving up anything, most people will gain. The world as a whole will gain.

Its not about bleeding heart liberal denying yourself for others. There are enough resources for us all to be comfortable. In this system it's our ego that is feeding the desire to constantly want more, or more than someone else has. The world is a mess because our priorities have been twisted by a exploitative system, our technological advancements are used to make camera phones because camera phones make money, but making money does nothing to advance our ability to feed everyone. We're wasting knowledge so people can make money selling stuff that we really don't need so the can buy more stuff they don't really need. It's a circular system of consumption that only makes money, not sustainable life systems, permaculture.



But there are important parts of capitalism that is needed in order to remove the concept of government out of the picture completely.


The only part of capitalism that matters is capitalism itself, the 'private ownership of the means of production'. Capitalism can not make a claim on anything else as its own. Socialism is a true free market system, where all are free to participate becuase the means of production will be available. It's really hard to compete with capitalists when you don't have the means to produce and compete.



Government must be removed in order for that to actually work.


I agree government does have to be removed. Government is nothing but a tool, and is ran by capitalists to their benefit. Capitalism itself is the real problem, government and state are just symptoms of it along with poverty, alienation, war, exploitation, opression, class, class war lol.



The idea of capitalism works well here when competition for lack of a better word is the only way that one would voluntarily take a job knowing he could lose it at any time by those who actually employ them to go the extra mile to be of the highest caliber. And I believe that they should be compensated for that choice.

Just about every idea for innovation, requires an active component of capitalism as something that I actually enjoy on a personal level I would not be enjoying today, sorry living like forest folk doesn't interest me.

So while I do identify myself as an anarcho-capitalist, personally I consider myself a voluntarist, its a good way to stoke a fire to see who's actually willing to discuss some issues to start to building of the society I would like to live in. The ones who think its a decent into chaos and madness really have such a long way to go.


I disagree, I don't think innovation requires a private owner in the sense that capitalism is private ownership. How many people have started businesses in places they shared with others, but did not own? Or tools borrowed from a central tool shed? Capitalism has nothing to do with Human innovation, in fact as I said above it keeps us creating crap, because crap makes money. It keeps stuff that could advance us in positive ways suppressed in order to not take profit from someone else. It keeps useful plants like Cannabis illegal because it would take profit from someone. It's an artificial system that keeps us from naturally developing our humanity.

Anarcho-capitalism is a contradiction in terms. Capitalism can not be anarchistic because it is itself a hierarchical system. Anarchy means 'no government', but Anarchism means more than simply 'no government'. Anarchism is a political system that also offers a solution for 'no government', and that was a free system where the means of production is available for all to use, socialism.

edit on 7/30/2011 by ANOK because: typo


what if you had capitalism with a wealth cap(higher == community tax) or capitalism with banned private ownership(coops or npo only)?

Would that help anarcho-capitalism be more "hands off"?



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by NuroSlam
reply to post by ANOK
 

All very valid points and can agree with. Where i'm at we call that voluntarism, living in an consensual society. But there are important parts of capitalism that is needed in order to remove the concept of government out of the picture completely. Government must be removed in order for that to actually work. One is a court system, not one that dispenses out justice at the end of a barrel, but one based upon an arbitration system.

Second is a need for defence as there will always be bad apples, especially during the transition. I believe we are all part of the communal defence, but in this day and age, with what is actually going to happen, the need of professional soldiers is of the up most. The idea of capitalism works well here when competition for lack of a better word is the only way that one would voluntarily take a job knowing he could lose it at any time by those who actually employ them to go the extra mile to be of the highest caliber. And I believe that they should be compensated for that choice.

Just about every idea for innovation, requires an active component of capitalism as something that I actually enjoy on a personal level I would not be enjoying today, sorry living like forest folk doesn't interest me.

So while I do identify myself as an anarcho-capitalist, personally I consider myself a voluntarist, its a good way to stoke a fire to see who's actually willing to discuss some issues to start to building of the society I would like to live in. The ones who think its a decent into chaos and madness really have such a long way to go.


How can you get a large amount of people to work for free? What if you had a sort of volunteership-to-profit cooperative? They volunteer until they have people purchase their products. Then they get paid.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by Jezus
And there were also people who were not free...

And they didn't get long "just fine".
edit on 29-7-2011 by Jezus because: (no reason given)


And through their own power, over time, they liberated themselves. Not through welfare and affirmative action, but through the strength of their pride in their culture and belief in their future.

MLK did not say "I need a welfare check", he said: "I have a dream".


What?

You're saying slaves freed themselves?



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK


Goods are distributed as they are needed by those who supply them.


Who supplies them?




posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jezus


What?

You're saying slaves freed themselves?



Blacks who were brought over here as slaves, through time, rose above slavery, they freed themselves from the bondage of the past, they fought for their civil rights. This is thanks to their own strength, not thanks to welfare or affirmative action. I`ll repeat: This is thanks to "I have a dream" instead of "I need big Government welfare". Those are two different mentalities. One leads to greatness, the other leads to the utter despondency you see in all anti-libertarian systems.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


...

That's a nice little paragraph and everything...

But what about the part "the government" did.

The organization...the army...the war...and years and years and years of forcing Civil Rights...



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jezus

That's a nice little paragraph and everything...

But what about the part "the government" did.

The organization...the army...the war...and years and years and years of forcing Civil Rights...




Wouldnt have happened without the initiative and change in self-awareness on the part of the blacks.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


Okay, even if I pretend that is true.

That whole "organization...the army...the war...and years and years and years of forcing Civil Rights.."

still had to take place...the slave owners were not going to be convinced.

Right now we are saying all that nice motivational stuff but not allowing the real physical variables to change.





top topics
 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join