How I see it...

[PredFan]

I might be mistaken but when the OP said 150 years ago, he didn't mean we go back to fur trapping, shitting in rivers, or planting vegetables in your Brooklyn back yard. He meant the government of 150 years ago.

Or am I wrong about that?

 

[g5000]

What's changed so much that we can't go by those same laws? Why did we have to add more?

You can have a fur trapper shitting in a river in 1800 with no impact on his closest neighbors a few hundred miles away. You cannot have 8 million people shitting in a river in 2012.

.

Yeah... Was there a law created for that? If there was... Was it necessary?

Yes, and yes.

.

 

[PredFan]

It's not perfect... But this is how the parties are coming across in this day and age from a economics standpoint.

Republicans = Feudalism
Democrats = Socialism
Libertarians = What America was 150 years ago.

Republicans and Democrats each want the rights and freedoms they approve of and they want to deny the rights and freedoms they don't.

I think that is a fair position.

The Libertarians want everyone to have every right and freedom.

For the most part. I mean I think most Libertarians would agree that issuing a gun permit to someone who shot someone for popping their chewing gum as a bad idea.

That idea might be more than 150 years old but it would serve us well for another 150 years if we'd only let it.

Maybe... I'm actually trying to find ways were the laws back then wouldn't apply now. Or couldn't be applied to new problems. So far... I haven't been successful.

150 years ago there would be no need for permits and very few people got shot let alone for stupid reasons. The violent crime per capita back then was a great deal less than today. Probably because people knew you'd get shot. They kind of had to get along and be civil.

 

[OODA_Loop]

The south 150 years ago generally fit the libertarian mode, when states rights meant that they could own human beings.

Exactly. Purely 10th Amendment.

 

[g5000]

I might be mistaken but when the OP said 150 years ago, he didn't mean we go back to fur trapping, shitting in rivers, or planting vegetables in your Brooklyn back yard. He meant the government of 150 years ago.

Or am I wrong about that?

The government of 150 years ago knew that it could not foresee the problems of our modern day, and so they built in flexibility to manage the new and strange problems we have.

The government of 150 years ago would not fit today. The government of 150 years ago did not have to deal with 300 million people's shit.

.

 

[PredFan]

I might be mistaken but when the OP said 150 years ago, he didn't mean we go back to fur trapping, shitting in rivers, or planting vegetables in your Brooklyn back yard. He meant the government of 150 years ago.

Or am I wrong about that?

The government of 150 years ago knew that it could not foresee the problems of our modern day, and so they built in flexibility to manage the new and strange problems we have.

The government of 150 years ago would not fit today. The government of 150 years ago did not have to deal with 300 million people's shit.

.

I submit to you that you have the cause and effect backwards.

 

[g5000]

I might be mistaken but when the OP said 150 years ago, he didn't mean we go back to fur trapping, shitting in rivers, or planting vegetables in your Brooklyn back yard. He meant the government of 150 years ago.

Or am I wrong about that?

The government of 150 years ago knew that it could not foresee the problems of our modern day, and so they built in flexibility to manage the new and strange problems we have.

The government of 150 years ago would not fit today. The government of 150 years ago did not have to deal with 300 million people's shit.

.

I submit to you that you have the cause and effect backwards.

Nope. The entire world population has grown, not just the US. The world has to deal with 7 billion people's shit every day.



.

 

[Shelzin]

You can have a fur trapper shitting in a river in 1800 with no impact on his closest neighbors a few hundred miles away. You cannot have 8 million people shitting in a river in 2012.

.

Yeah... Was there a law created for that? If there was... Was it necessary?

Yes, and yes.

.

Really? Which one was that?

 

[Shelzin]

The south 150 years ago generally fit the libertarian mode, when states rights meant that they could own human beings.

Exactly. Purely 10th Amendment.

*nods* True. And we went to war with them. They don't do that anymore. Do you think they would go back to it?

 

[Shelzin]

The government of 150 years ago knew that it could not foresee the problems of our modern day, and so they built in flexibility to manage the new and strange problems we have.

The government of 150 years ago would not fit today. The government of 150 years ago did not have to deal with 300 million people's shit.

.

I submit to you that you have the cause and effect backwards.

Nope. The entire world population has grown, not just the US. The world has to deal with 7 billion people's shit every day.

That really doesn't change his statement in any way. o.0

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yup, it does. The digital and information revolutions, the global economy, and population growth changes everything.

We are not living with 300 people in Lost Gap, NC anymore.

 

[g5000]

My favorite book of all time is Democracy in America, bar none.

My second favorite book is Snow Crash.

They kind of bookend each other pretty well now that I think of it.


Democracy in America was written in 1832, which is close enough to 1850, I think.

The principles which are delineated so fantastically in that book are still applicable to today. So much so that I have incorporated Alexis de Tocqueville as my username on other forums and my posts under that name have been nothing but quotes from his book with no commentary on my part. Talking about race relations? There's a quote for that. Separation of church and state? There's a quote for that. Upset with media bias? There's a whole chapter for that!

You'd think the book was written yesterday, it is that prescient.

I think where Libertarians go wrong is in their rigidity. We are the opposite of a rigid nation. America was settled by people escaping acerbic dogmatism.

"How I see it" is that all the parties have become sclerotic. It has come to the point that you have to pass eleventy-boing litmus tests to receive the stamp of approval. And since it is impossible to pass every one of them, our politicians have become automatons reciting the comforting verses the mob wants to hear.

We've been here before. There are political cycles just as there are business cycles, so I am not pessimistic. I'm a little pissed that I happen to be living in one of the down cycles, though.

.

 

[Shelzin]

Yup, it does.

No... It doesn't. And you aren't worth arguing with. So... Good day to you.

 

[Shelzin]

I think where Libertarians go wrong is in their rigidity. We are the opposite of a rigid nation. America was settled by people escaping acerbic dogmatism.

Well... that's just it... They are rigid in that acerbic dogmatism should be allowed. So I find it ironic that you say that.

You are free person... Be free so long as you don't infringe on the freedoms of others and all is good to a libertarian.

"The way I see it" all the parties have become sclerotic. It has come to the point that you have to pass eleventy-boing litmus tests to receive the stamp of approval. And since it is impossible to pass every one of them, our politicians have become automatons reciting the comforting verses the mob wants to hear.

Well... Kind of agree with you. But only such as the voters aren't in control of their parties anymore.

We've been here before. There are political cycles just as there are business cycles, so I am not pessimistic. I'm a little pissed that I happen to be living in one of the down cycles, though.

Right now I think that whatever party the president is... I want congress to be opposite or third party. Anything else and the country is fucked. Well.. Fucked worse than it currently is.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It's not perfect... But this is how the parties are coming across in this day and age from a economics standpoint.

Republicans = Feudalism
Democrats = Socialism
Libertarians = What America was 150 years ago.

2012 - 150 = 1862

Q. What was going on in 1862?

A. In 1862, Congress passed and President Lincoln signed the Pacific Railroad Bill, which granted public land and funds to build a transcontinental railroad.

LOL

 

[Darkwind]

It's not perfect... But this is how the parties are coming across in this day and age from a economics standpoint.

Republicans = Feudalism
Democrats = Socialism
Libertarians = What America was 150 years ago.

I for the life of Me, cannot find any instances of any Republican declaring themselves Lords and Kings over all of us.

Perhaps if you ran through a little of your thought process that led you to conclude this?

I also don't think that Libertarians promote what we were 150 years ago. Less government does not equate to regression to an earlier time. Though, I realize that fear-mongering talking point is out there.

 

[Shelzin]

It's not perfect... But this is how the parties are coming across in this day and age from a economics standpoint.

Republicans = Feudalism
Democrats = Socialism
Libertarians = What America was 150 years ago.

2012 - 150 = 1862

Q. What was going on in 1862?

A. In 1862, Congress passed and President Lincoln signed the Pacific Railroad Bill, which granted public land and funds to build a transcontinental railroad.

LOL

Why is that funny?

 

[Shelzin]

It's not perfect... But this is how the parties are coming across in this day and age from a economics standpoint.

Republicans = Feudalism
Democrats = Socialism
Libertarians = What America was 150 years ago.

I for the life of Me, cannot find any instances of any Republican declaring themselves Lords and Kings over all of us.

Perhaps if you ran through a little of your thought process that led you to conclude this?

I also don't think that Libertarians promote what we were 150 years ago. Less government does not equate to regression to an earlier time. Though, I realize that fear-mongering talking point is out there.

+rep

Edit: Do you want me to honestly answer that, or....

 

[Wry Catcher]

It's not perfect... But this is how the parties are coming across in this day and age from a economics standpoint.

Republicans = Feudalism
Democrats = Socialism
Libertarians = What America was 150 years ago.

2012 - 150 = 1862

Q. What was going on in 1862?

A. In 1862, Congress passed and President Lincoln signed the Pacific Railroad Bill, which granted public land and funds to build a transcontinental railroad.

See below for detail


LOL

Why is that funny?

Lincoln was a Republican; his policy was socialistic and anti libertarianism.


Hello?

 

[dblack]

Libertarians = What America never was.

I have to agree with that. I know many, even many Libertarians, might disagree - but I've always seen the Liberty movement as forward looking and not about wanting to go 'back' to anything. Close examination of the conditions of the past show them to be anything but libertarian. Rights were routinely violated by the government, especially at the local and state level. We may have more broad systemic degradation of our rights now, and we are all threatened by the rapid growth of authoritarian corporatism, but the past is nothing to long for.

In any case, the future is our only option.