Libertarianism

[FA_Q2]

Yes, this is the CDZ. I have violated no rules here.

It is relevant because you are attacking libertarian thought when you stand in the same pool. There is nothing wrong with libertarians having a range of political worldviews as that is actually preferable to complete agreement without real debate. That does not make libertarianism a ‘muddled’ as you claim. That is a silly argument. ALL political persuasions have a varied degree of views and libertarianism is no different in that respect.

So far, you have been given several examples of views already, some held by large majorities of libertarians. Just because you choose not to understand where we are coming for does not mean that the libertarian philosophy is devoid of any positions any more than conservatives are devoid of any positions.

 

[The Rabbi]

There are varied degrees of views and there are different interpretations. And then there are outright howlers and contradictions. Libertarianism is filled with the last. as you yourself demonstrated.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So there we have it. Libertarianism believes that business should be free from regulation and coercion. But they cannot pollute at all. So they will have to be subject to strict regulation to prevent them from infringing on others' rights not to have pollution (which part of the Constitution specifies the right of non pollution?).

This is the problem with libertarianism: everything is based on perceived "rights" that exist nowhere and therefore can be constantly invented. Eventually all these rights contradict each other and it becomes a free for all with each one claiming the msot right to whatever.

That is a problem with thinking that libertarians don't understand the issues. There is a lot of debate about the non aggression principle, and how to apply it.

translation: Libertarianism is a muddle.

Pretty much what I maintained at the outset.

No more of a muddle than the debate between conservatives is.

 

[PaulS1950]

The libertarian party does not take any stand on issues that are outside the constitutional powers of the federal government. Those issues are best decided by the people in their respective states or by the individuals residing in those states. Look closely at the body of the constitution and the 10th amendment.

The people who belong to the Libertarian Party have the individual freedom, rights and responsibility to make those choices both for themselves and the states. The party defends the rights and freedoms of the individual and of the states.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The libertarian party does not take any stand on issues that are outside the constitutional powers of the federal government. Those issues are best decided by the people in their respective states or by the individuals residing in those states. Look closely at the body of the constitution and the 10th amendment.

The people who belong to the Libertarian Party have the individual freedom, rights and responsibility to make those choices both for themselves and the states. The party defends the rights and freedoms of the individual and of the states.

So is the Libertarian Party "defending" the "individual freedom and rights" of women to "make those choices" regarding issues like abortion "for themselves"?

 

[PaulS1950]

It is not a power granted to the federal government.
The Libertarians will fight for the rights and freedoms of all citizens

 

[Derideo_Te]

It is not a power granted to the federal government.
The Libertarians will fight for the rights and freedoms of all citizens

Can you please provide examples where the Libertarians are fighting for the "rights and freedoms" of women to have access to abortions where these rights are being threatened in states like ND, LA and TX?

 

[The Rabbi]

It is not a power granted to the federal government.
The Libertarians will fight for the rights and freedoms of all citizens

Does that include the unborn? Do Libertarians support euthanasia, which is certainly outside the fedgov's power?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

It is not a power granted to the federal government.
The Libertarians will fight for the rights and freedoms of all citizens

Can you please provide examples where the Libertarians are fighting for the "rights and freedoms" of women to have access to abortions where these rights are being threatened in states like ND, LA and TX?

Libertarians have differing views upon abortions as that's a moral issue. As it is; what you consider 'rights' are not what libertarians consider 'rights.' If someone was paying your house payments, all of the sudden, you'd call that a right.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Excuse me, but are libertarians screwing up the system? Oh, that'd be Dems and Republicans. Libertarians follow the Constitution first and foremost. Dems and Republicans do not. Libertarians believe in freedom while Republicans and Democrats think it's perfectly okay to trounce every amendment.

You're just bitter because the moral wings of your GOP party are migrating to libertarianism. Be bitter, but the migration is on and your party is dying. And all the lies and politics you throw at it, won't change that reality.

For instance, calling libertarianism, Obamaism is as grand of a lie as you can throw out there. This is why Republicans and Democrats are all becoming Repulicrats. Two party system? Try a one party system mascarading as a two party system.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

but I can speak for myself and about the majority of libertarians that I know (discounting the anarcho-capitalist ones as I am not clear on the ability for that reality to work)

Anarcho-Capitalism has been proven to work between nations for centuries, because there didn't exist any global government to interfere with the policies between nations, including protective tariffs. Notice that I am personalizing entire nations, I'm not referring to individuals.

The question is whether or not this could work on a local government level or an individual level.

 

[The Rabbi]

Libertarians arent screwing up the system because they exist mostly as an internet phenomenon. It's easy to sit off away from power and make grand declarations of principles. Governing is much harder. WIth a confused system based on "rights" that are nowhere enumerated and lacking answers to basic questions libertarians have bought themselves a place in the gallery of poltical obscurity forever. Get used to it.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I guess you've convinced yourself that you're all that. Too bad, there's about as much truth to your belief as libertarianism equaling Obamanism. Republicanism equalling Obamanism is much closer to the truth. Despite their rhetoric, they walk lock step with him on almost everything.

Regarding, these issues that are allegedly not enumerated; actually they're very finitely enumerated. The Constitution very clearly states what powers the federal government has and that the rest are states issues. You just willfully allow yourself to be big brother's puppet in the name of your allegedly small government party that is anything but a small government party.

And libertarians don't just talk and do what they want. They walk the walk. That's why NM governor, Gary Johnson cut taxes 14 times and raised them never.

You can be mad about libertarians, who actually have values based on something. Or you can continue with your childish us vs. them Republicrat crap while the festering problems perpetuate. And that's all it'll ever be at best for a Republican. But, some of us believe in something and we're not willing to make any more excuses for where we're at. We believe that the Constitution is magnificent when properly adhered to. But, you enjoy your crony government in lieu of that.

 

[midcan5]

The trouble with 'freedom' is one never knows what it means for libertarians? I have never heard of any libertarian fighting for freedom for all people. Libertarianism often sounds like an apology for the status quo, 'I got mine...' My views on libertarianism are well known on the board. The article quoted at bottom, while a bit OT, is worth a read.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean...od-books-on-libertarianism-3.html#post7425296

Libertarian Flame: http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/189696-libertarian-flame.html

"Egalitarians thus differ from libertarians in advocating a more expansive understanding of the social conditions of freedom. Importantly, they view private relations of domination, even those entered into by consent or contract, as violations of individual freedom. Libertarians tend to identify freedom with formal, negative freedom: enjoying the legal right to do what one wants without having to ask anyone else's permission and without interference from others. This definition of freedom neglects the importance of having the means to do what one wants. In addition, the definition implicitly assumes that, given the material means and internal capacity to do what one wants, the absence of interference from others is all one needs to do what one wants. This ignores the fact that most of the things people want to do require participation in social activities, and hence communication and interaction with others. One cannot do these things if others make one an outcast. A libertarian might argue that freedom of association entails the right of people to refuse to associate with others on any grounds. Yet, a society embodying such an unconditional right hardly needs physical coercion to force others to obey the wishes of those with the power to exclude others from participation in social life. The same point applies to a society in which property is so unequally distributed that some adults live in abject dependence on others, and so live at the mercy of others. Societies that permit the creation of outcasts and subordinate classes can be as repressive as any despotic regime." 'What Is the Point of Equality?' Elizabeth S. Anderson What Is the Point of Equality?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

The trouble with 'freedom' is one never knows what it means for libertarians? I have never heard of any libertarian fighting for freedom for all people. Libertarianism often sounds like an apology for the status quo, 'I got mine...' My views on libertarianism are well known on the board. The article quoted at bottom, while a bit OT, is worth a read.

[

Less Government, More Freedom. How hard is that to understand? And libertarians are consistent. For you to assume otherwise is just you playing politics.

And not 'I Got Mine'; more like 'I don't need you taking mine.' Ninety-nine percent of government is a sham. Libertarians get that a Constitutional framework allowed us the ability to prosper. Everybody else tramples it and then whines that they're being oppressed.

 

[The Rabbi]

It is the only part that speaks of rights, as I said earlier.
I don't "believe in the Constitution." The COnstitution is not a religion. I think the Constitution represents the best form of gov't available (or used to anyway). But it is not based on "rights" of individuals. It is based on a limited national government answerable to either the people directly or the states as sovereign entities. It is a political document, not a philosophical one.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I guess the part in big letters - WE THE PEOPLE in an earlier document, The Declaration of Independence, just went right over your head. Our country was founded on the rights of the individual. We're not a collective. We never were meant to be a collective.

The Constitution is the backbone of the system. And yes, that includes the Bill of Rights. If you're unwilling to adhere to it, then you don't deserve your rights. The Constitution is literally the people's document.

 

[SayMyName]

In case you missed it...

All you have to do is go to the Libertarian party website and compare their platform to the other political platform. To summarize the Libertarian Point of View:

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.



2.0 Economic Liberty

Libertarians want all members of society to have abundant opportunities to achieve economic success. A free and competitive market allocates resources in the most efficient manner. Each person has the right to offer goods and services to others on the free market. The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society.



3.0 Securing Liberty

The protection of individual rights is the only proper purpose of government. Government is constitutionally limited so as to prevent the infringement of individual rights by the government itself. The principle of non-initiation of force should guide the relationships between governments.



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

 

[FA_Q2]

but I can speak for myself and about the majority of libertarians that I know (discounting the anarcho-capitalist ones as I am not clear on the ability for that reality to work)

Anarcho-Capitalism has been proven to work between nations for centuries, because there didn't exist any global government to interfere with the policies between nations, including protective tariffs. Notice that I am personalizing entire nations, I'm not referring to individuals.

The question is whether or not this could work on a local government level or an individual level.

And that is central to that position. I don’t think it can because the power scale is totally different when you start going to the national scale. People and nations do not resemble each other in any respect at all.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

As long as the federal government operates within the bounds of the Constitution then the sky is the limit. The reality is we are a very corrupt nation now. And the Constitution is written for a nation with enlightened masses; not self glazed morons.