Why is the porcupine used to represent the libertarian party?

"Libertarians are the only party with a practically undilutable Statement of Principles based on the non-aggression principle."

Although the Statue of Liberty is the official symbol of the Libertarian Party, the porcupine is used to represent libertarianism because it is a defensive animal that doesn't harm anyone who leaves it alone.

en.m.wikipedia.org...:Libertarian_porcupine_version_2.svg

Here is a video discussing the party:

www.youtube.com...



"There ain't no such thing as a free lunch."

a reply to: JBurns
Why is the porcupine used to represent the libertarian party?


Maybe they want to make some specific "points".

😎🔑

jeeeez.

Libertarians are anarchist with morals.

I have more respect for them then most of the other choices.

All those quills on the critter represent logic.

Because its just a loads of pricks.....


I'll get my coat.

a reply to: JBurns

I'm absolutely libertarian-minded in personal philosophy, and have voted Libertarian in the past two presidential elections (I'm even registered as a Libertarian).

I definitely have some issues with some of their platform/principles, but overall, I embrace the philosophy of laissez-faire government, personal liberty to do as one wills while not negating others' rights, non-aggression, etc.

Since I'm feeling froggy, I'll just note that my biggest beefs lie with the two following principles of the platform: 1.5 (Abortion), 3.4 (Open-border preference). Overall, though, I'm on-board with all other principles.

And the porcupine is a fine animal...and tasty, from what I've heard.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I’ve always liked the principle of the party but every person they have as a front runner just sucks.

At least that is how it has been since I was able to vote.

As for the Porcupine being a symbol is new to me. I never knew that.

So you and a friend are standing on the side of the road watchin cars go by. He tells you he is done with life and will walk in front of the next truck that passes by. What do you do?

Stop him from harming himself by removing his freewill cause it seems right?

Do you stand and watch him do it?

Do you stop him because of the damage he will do to the truck and driver?

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: JBurns
Why is the porcupine used to represent the libertarian party?


Maybe they want to make some specific "points".

😎🔑

Thank you for this, I needed a good laugh

😊

originally posted by: howtonhawky
Libertarians are anarchist with morals.

I have more respect for them then most of the other choices.

All those quills on the critter represent logic.

I appreciate that

Libertarians are anarchist with morals.

That is a very astute summary howtonhawky Non-aggression principle is all about freedom to make your own choices provided they don't infringe on the rights of anybody else.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
Because its just a loads of pricks.....


I'll get my coat.

Pretty good one 😋

Credit where credit is due....

Just out of curiosity, do you oppose the non-aggression principle or just the party itself?

originally posted by: Allaroundyou

I’ve always liked the principle of the party but every person they have as a front runner just sucks.

I voted for Johnson simply because he wasn't Trump or Clinton, and I want other parties to stay getting some of the spotlight.

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: Allaroundyou

I’ve always liked the principle of the party but every person they have as a front runner just sucks.

I voted for Johnson simply because he wasn't Trump or Clinton, and I want other parties to start getting some of the spotlight.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Thanks for sharing SM

Agreed that the platform is pretty decent, but there are several key points I am not entirely on board with myself. My biggest applause regarding the platform goes to 4.0 though

4.0 OMISSIONS
Our silence about any other particular government law, regulation, ordinance, directive, edict, control, regulatory agency, activity, or machination should not be construed to imply approval.

...I never got to try porcupine yet, probably one of the very few I haven't had!

originally posted by: howtonhawky
So you and a friend are standing on the side of the road watchin cars go by. He tells you he is done with life and will walk in front of the next truck that passes by. What do you do?

Stop him from harming himself by removing his freewill cause it seems right?

Do you stand and watch him do it?

Do you stop him because of the damage he will do to the truck and driver?

That is a tough question, as no matter how one answers someone is being aggrieved. A libertarian "purist" would probably answer that they would do nothing, simply allowing free will to take its course.

As a practical matter, I am not a libertarian "purist." In that example, I would most certainly stop him from harming himself. Although I do believe individuals have the right to end their life, I would stop him from jumping in front of traffic because it may be a hasty/emotionally driven decision/drug induced/etc and I certainly do not want to see someone take their own life in front of me or in such a violent manner

Hopefully I can elaborate on that a bit

Terminally ill individuals, for example, I feel should have the right to medication/physician assisted death. I do not believe in attempts to criminalize suicide either, but only because it implies someone other than the individual owns said individual person. But again as a practical matter I'm not going to just stand there and watch somebody kill themselves, even though I believe they ultimately have the right to make that choice for themselves

What would you do in that situation?

a reply to: JBurns

I would likely agress toward him and stop him because it saves his life and stops the aggression against the truck driver but hard core libertarians have their ears smoking when they try to answer that one.

and with that answer you and i gave democracy is born out of libertarianism.

That is why i now see the whole left right debate necessary for the survival of the country but the time has indeed come to lean further toward liberty cause we let the aggression get out of hand. Sadly the only way to clean up the mess is to reboot. That is always met with resistance and anarchy comes into play in order to facilitate the adjustment of democracy.

The current capitalist system is like a sporting event where the winners just keep on playing the losers even though they have the winning trophy in a case all to themselves and all the benefits of having won a game that continues to go on forever.

We have to address the mega corps in some manner that reflects our current system of governance. A mega corp that is completely right wing or left wing is a poison to us. IMO Either cap em or regulate division in them so that right and left is represented. Left unchecked and they will control the government to a point of extreme right or left.

a reply to: howtonhawky

I would stop the person because of the damage their action would cause the driver who hit them. Physical emotional and mental damage. Same with those who jump in front of trains and buses.

I have no problem with someone taking themselves out of the game. Don't want to be here? Feel free to leave anytime you want. But do it in a way that doesn't impact the general public. Your act will still impact people in the emergency response field, but those people have willingly placed themselves in that position.

It's just common courtesy.

a reply to: Montana

That is how democracy was born.

a reply to: JBurns

hard to believe you didnt try it. it is awesome. it is more awesome now. i like politics. i ll go jump into mud pit actually.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: SlapMonkey

I’ve always liked the principle of the party but every person they have as a front runner just sucks.

At least that is how it has been since I was able to vote.

I don't think that every person sucks, I just think that they try to play too loose with their public persona, and America isn't ready for that, yet--voters expect rather polished people on stage.

When Gary Johnson came to the University of Cincinnati back during the 2012 election, I went to see him there. The other Libertarian speakers (some candidates for local or smaller offices) came across as massive jokes of people, let alone as candidates for public office. I actually felt sorry for some of them--but the college crowd ate it up. Too bad that's a small minority of active voters--I think that "seasoned" voters reject the extreme "legalize everything" rhetoric and overly laid-back attitudes.

Gary Johnson himself wasn't too bad, though, but he's still a bit goofy in his own right. Ron Paul's voice is so whiny that it screams "beta male," which doesn't instill confidence in people. But there are some good ones out there, and it seems that every election cycle that passes, we get more and more "polished" candidates. Keep hope alive.

As for the Porcupine being a symbol is new to me. I never knew that.

Yeah, most people only see the Statue of Liberty. It's a branding problem (that's coming from a guy who used to work at a marketing firm).