Only Liberals Are Pro-Liberty

[Dragon]

Among liberals, conservatives, and libertarians, only liberals are consistently pro-liberty across the board. Conservatives are consistently anti-liberty, and libertarians are neither one nor the other.

Liberty is the ability of ordinary people to live their lives without being under the domination of others, whether of government or of any private power.

Government action, w/r/t the issue of liberty, falls into three general categories. The first two categories are direct government infringement of liberty, and government protection of the people against the infringement of liberty by private power.

Liberty may be infringed directly by law or government force, or directly infringed by private non-government force, or indirectly infringed by an economy that denies people the means to the economic success that is a prerequisite for the enjoyment of liberty. (There is no liberty without property.) This brings up the third category: government action to promote economic equality and provide for social welfare.

When government action directly infringes liberty, the pro-liberty position is to oppose this. Thus, a pro-liberty advocate would oppose government action that tries to control people's sexual behavior unreasonably, denies reproductive rights, or violates the due process or other protections of the Bill of Rights, among other things.

Liberals and libertarians, on this sort of government action, adopt pro-liberty positions. Conservatives adopt anti-liberty positions.

When government action restrains private power from infringing liberty, e.g. with regulations on the financial industry, protection of workers' rights, or environmental protection laws, the pro-liberty position is to support this.

Liberals, on this sort of government action, adopt pro-liberty positions. Conservatives and libertarians adopt anti-liberty positions.

When government action attempts to narrow income gaps, raise wages, and provide for social welfare and safety nets, the pro-liberty position is to support this.

Again, liberals adopt pro-liberty positions in this context, while libertarians and conservatives adopt anti-liberty positions.

Liberals are pro-liberty.

Conservatives are anti-liberty.

Libertarians are neither pro-liberty nor anti-liberty, but are, instead, anti-government, which they often seem to think means they are pro-liberty, and in some matters -- when the government really is the major threat to liberty -- they are. But not consistently.

Only liberals consistently defend liberty. And conservatives never do.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's Rdeans trusty, but slightly more insane, sidekick

 

[asaratis]

Among liberals, conservatives, and libertarians, only liberals are consistently pro-liberty across the board. Conservatives are consistently anti-liberty, and libertarians are neither one nor the other.

Liberty is the ability of ordinary people to live their lives without being under the domination of others, whether of government or of any private power.

Government action, w/r/t the issue of liberty, falls into three general categories. The first two categories are direct government infringement of liberty, and government protection of the people against the infringement of liberty by private power.

Liberty may be infringed directly by law or government force, or directly infringed by private non-government force, or indirectly infringed by an economy that denies people the means to the economic success that is a prerequisite for the enjoyment of liberty. (There is no liberty without property.) This brings up the third category: government action to promote economic equality and provide for social welfare.

When government action directly infringes liberty, the pro-liberty position is to oppose this. Thus, a pro-liberty advocate would oppose government action that tries to control people's sexual behavior unreasonably, denies reproductive rights, or violates the due process or other protections of the Bill of Rights, among other things.

Liberals and libertarians, on this sort of government action, adopt pro-liberty positions. Conservatives adopt anti-liberty positions.

When government action restrains private power from infringing liberty, e.g. with regulations on the financial industry, protection of workers' rights, or environmental protection laws, the pro-liberty position is to support this.

Liberals, on this sort of government action, adopt pro-liberty positions. Conservatives and libertarians adopt anti-liberty positions.

When government action attempts to narrow income gaps, raise wages, and provide for social welfare and safety nets, the pro-liberty position is to support this.

Again, liberals adopt pro-liberty positions in this context, while libertarians and conservatives adopt anti-liberty positions.

Liberals are pro-liberty.

Conservatives are anti-liberty.

Libertarians are neither pro-liberty nor anti-liberty, but are, instead, anti-government, which they often seem to think means they are pro-liberty, and in some matters -- when the government really is the major threat to liberty -- they are. But not consistently.

Only liberals consistently defend liberty. And conservatives never do.

Evidently, you skipped Political Science and Reading Comprehension courses throughout your life.

Quite frankly, that is all that needs to be said about you and your errant presumptions.

 

[Toro]

Only liberals aren't pro-liberty.

Conservatives want economic freedom but have no problem with the government interfering in people's social lives.

Liberals want social freedom but have no problem with the government interfering in people's economic lives.

Only libertarians are consistently pro-liberty, even if a disproportionate amount of them are batshit insane.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

only liberals are consistently pro-liberty across the board

OMG! That's funny! You should go on tour.
Let me know when you're at a comedy club in Chicago.
I'll be there!!!

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Among liberals, conservatives, and libertarians, only liberals are consistently pro-liberty across the board. Conservatives are consistently anti-liberty, and libertarians are neither one nor the other.

Liberty is the ability of ordinary people to live their lives without being under the domination of others, whether of government or of any private power.

Newsflash! Anytime you depend on the government for your welfare check, Health Care, Social Security Retirement, whether or not you have employment, etc. . . . . you don't have any liberty. Rather you are "chained" to whatever the Federal Government can afford to give you in the form of entitlements. True liberty is going out and getting your OWN job, providing for your OWN income, and planning for your OWN retirement accounts. I'd rather not have the Government do anything for me that a little hard work, responsibility, and self determination can otherwise do to establish my own lifestyle.

 

[Toro]

BTW, its pretty hard to miss the fact that a tax - any tax - is an infringement on liberty. The OP seems to have missed this small fact.

Any attempt to take assets from one group of people and give those assets to another is an exercise of government power of one group of people over the other, and violates the liberty of those who have their wealth taken from them by government power.

 

[B. Kidd]

OP 'er is a dim bulb.

C3: The Liberal/Democrat Obsession With Tyranny of Pettiness: Anti-Liberty, One Light Bulb At A Time

 

[Dragon]

LOL I knew this one would bring 'em out of the woodwork.

Toro and Shackles reveal themselves as libertarians, confusing anti-government with pro-liberty. That was pretty predictable w/r/t Shackles but Toro's posting history is more confusing.

Conservatives want economic freedom but have no problem with the government interfering in people's social lives.

Liberals want social freedom but have no problem with the government interfering in people's economic lives.

Perfect example. This is of course standard libertarian boiler-plate. Conservatives do NOT want economic freedom -- they want the government to stay out of the way as the economic fat cats do whatever they want, which often involves oppressing those of us who aren't fat cats. They want the government to stay out of the way, in other words, when private agencies can do a better, more efficient job of stomping on liberty, but (as you note) are happy for the government to do that job when private interests either can't do it as well or aren't interested because there's no money to be made.

Liberals DO have a problem with the government -- OR private interests -- interfering in people's economic lives. Maximizing the freedom of corporations to indulge their greed does NOT enhance the economic liberty of those who do not own and control them. In other words, liberals want the government to affirmatively STOP private interests from stomping on liberty, AND they also want the government to refrain from doing so itself.

Anytime you depend on the government for your welfare check, Health Care, Social Security Retirement, whether or not you have employment, etc. . . . . you don't have any liberty.

Not true. When you depend on some outside source, whether it's the government or an employer, for your livelihood, whether that represents a loss of liberty depends on whether that source could arbitrarily take it away. If they can, then you can be blackmailed by the source of your livelihood into obedience. In fact, though, the government CAN'T arbitrarily take away those funds. It must abide by the rule of law, which says among other things when and under what circumstances it MUST pay you these benefits. An employer, on the other hand, CAN arbitrarily take away your paycheck and leave you with no recourse.

Again, we see the basic libertarian fallacy: that government = non-liberty. The reality, however, is that having some power over you that can tell you what to do, and make you serve its interests instead of your own -- THAT is non-liberty. And it doesn't matter whether the power in question is government or a private power. What matters is that you're under it's thumb (and hence unfree) or not (and hence free).

The rest of you have said nothing, and need not be answered.

 

[midcan5]

"Liberals demand that the social order should in principle be capable of explaining itself at the tribunal of each person's understanding." Jeremy Waldron

Please don't confuse conservatives with ideas about their gawds by pointing out freedom requires context. You'll confuse the hell outta them. Conservatism is simply reactionary politics, nothing more as they have no accomplishments, no societies, no real goals.

As for libertarians, they are only a new rendition of the Marxist ideologue, only this time nirvana comes soon after the free market arrives.

David Michael Green's piece sums up conservatives on freedom below. And libertarians are called out by a conservative quoted near bottom. And Treanor sums up Libertarians. See link.

"I wish I had a nickel for every time a conservative told a lie in order to sell an ideology that would otherwise be hopelessly unappealing....But, then, what the hell would I do with ten kazillion, trillion, dollars? I wouldn't know how to spend that much loot..."
The Regressive Antidote - If Conservatism Is The Ideology of Freedom, I'm The Queen of England


"The most fundamental problem with libertarianism is very simple: freedom, though a good thing, is simply not the only good thing in life. Simple physical security, which even a prisoner can possess, is not freedom, but one cannot live without it. Prosperity is connected to freedom, in that it makes us free to consume, but it is not the same thing, in that one can be rich but as unfree as a Victorian tycoon's wife. A family is in fact one of the least free things imaginable, as the emotional satisfactions of it derive from relations that we are either born into without choice or, once they are chosen, entail obligations that we cannot walk away from with ease or justice. But security, prosperity, and family are in fact the bulk of happiness for most real people and the principal issues that concern governments." Robert Locke The American Conservative -- Marxism of the Right

Treanor on Libertarians: Why is libertarianism wrong?



"If history teaches us anything about politics it is this: Given enough time, liberals always win. The US was forged in liberalism, and has become more liberal with each generation. The leftward movement has seldom been smooth or consistent, but it has been unstoppable." Keith A. Pickering
_

 

[dblack]

Among liberals, conservatives, and libertarians, only liberals are consistently pro-liberty across the board. Conservatives are consistently anti-liberty, and libertarians are neither one nor the other....

Dragon, you know you're one of my favorite liberal posters, but I'm hoping your tongue is firmly planted in your cheek on this one.

 

[Photonic]

BTW, its pretty hard to miss the fact that a tax - any tax - is an infringement on liberty. The OP seems to have missed this small fact.

Any attempt to take assets from one group of people and give those assets to another is an exercise of government power of one group of people over the other, and violates the liberty of those who have their wealth taken from them by government power.

So I should be able to benefit from the people of my country for free.

Sounds a bit like taking advantage.

That doesn't seem very patriotic.

 

[Dragon]

Among liberals, conservatives, and libertarians, only liberals are consistently pro-liberty across the board. Conservatives are consistently anti-liberty, and libertarians are neither one nor the other....

Dragon, you know you're one of my favorite liberal posters, but I'm hoping your tongue is firmly planted in your cheek on this one.

Oh, it is, and at the same time -- well, if I were fully serious I would express the same thing in somewhat less inflammatory language, and probably with less in the way of black-and-white absolutes (and recognizing that liberals can have their heads up their asses on occasion).

I do think that the antithesis of liberty and government is a fallacy, and that this defines what I regard as the libertarian mistake. So there's a serious thought underlying this.

But yes, as expressed, it is in cheek.

 

[Photonic]

Among liberals, conservatives, and libertarians, only liberals are consistently pro-liberty across the board. Conservatives are consistently anti-liberty, and libertarians are neither one nor the other.

Liberty is the ability of ordinary people to live their lives without being under the domination of others, whether of government or of any private power.

Government action, w/r/t the issue of liberty, falls into three general categories. The first two categories are direct government infringement of liberty, and government protection of the people against the infringement of liberty by private power.

Liberty may be infringed directly by law or government force, or directly infringed by private non-government force, or indirectly infringed by an economy that denies people the means to the economic success that is a prerequisite for the enjoyment of liberty. (There is no liberty without property.) This brings up the third category: government action to promote economic equality and provide for social welfare.

When government action directly infringes liberty, the pro-liberty position is to oppose this. Thus, a pro-liberty advocate would oppose government action that tries to control people's sexual behavior unreasonably, denies reproductive rights, or violates the due process or other protections of the Bill of Rights, among other things.

Liberals and libertarians, on this sort of government action, adopt pro-liberty positions. Conservatives adopt anti-liberty positions.

When government action restrains private power from infringing liberty, e.g. with regulations on the financial industry, protection of workers' rights, or environmental protection laws, the pro-liberty position is to support this.

Liberals, on this sort of government action, adopt pro-liberty positions. Conservatives and libertarians adopt anti-liberty positions.

When government action attempts to narrow income gaps, raise wages, and provide for social welfare and safety nets, the pro-liberty position is to support this.

Again, liberals adopt pro-liberty positions in this context, while libertarians and conservatives adopt anti-liberty positions.

Liberals are pro-liberty.

Conservatives are anti-liberty.

Libertarians are neither pro-liberty nor anti-liberty, but are, instead, anti-government, which they often seem to think means they are pro-liberty, and in some matters -- when the government really is the major threat to liberty -- they are. But not consistently.

Only liberals consistently defend liberty. And conservatives never do.

Dragon, we tend to agree on things every now and again.

This is not one of those. Liberals are not the only people in the world for liberty. Everyone has their own concept of liberty. Liberals have theirs, conservatives have theirs, libertarians have theirs, and everyone in between all of those things has theirs.

 

[Brutus]

When government action attempts to narrow income gaps, the pro-liberty position is to support this

1) Our Founders understood that all the evil in human history had been caused by big liberal government so they created America to have liberty or freedom from big liberal government. Jefferson knew this without seeing the 20th Century. You have seen it yet still lack the IQ to understand even that. See why we say the liberal will have a low IQ? Now do you understand why the liberal spied for Stalin's big liberal government?


2) If you don't like how much money Bill Gates has you have the right in a free society to persuade people not to cause the income gap by buying his products. You might even recommend that they buy your products or a competitors instead, but you don't have the right to steal money from him at the point of a liberal gun just because other free people are at liberty to buy his products!

Why do liberals always turn to violence when they don't get their way through peaceful means? Its disgusting and very anti-American.


"When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
-- Benjamin Franklin

 

[Fl_FreeBird]

Among liberals, conservatives, and libertarians, only liberals are consistently pro-liberty across the board. Conservatives are consistently anti-liberty, and libertarians are neither one nor the other.

Liberty is the ability of ordinary people to live their lives without being under the domination of others, whether of government or of any private power.

Government action, w/r/t the issue of liberty, falls into three general categories. The first two categories are direct government infringement of liberty, and government protection of the people against the infringement of liberty by private power.

Liberty may be infringed directly by law or government force, or directly infringed by private non-government force, or indirectly infringed by an economy that denies people the means to the economic success that is a prerequisite for the enjoyment of liberty. (There is no liberty without property.) This brings up the third category: government action to promote economic equality and provide for social welfare.

When government action directly infringes liberty, the pro-liberty position is to oppose this. Thus, a pro-liberty advocate would oppose government action that tries to control people's sexual behavior unreasonably, denies reproductive rights, or violates the due process or other protections of the Bill of Rights, among other things.

Liberals and libertarians, on this sort of government action, adopt pro-liberty positions. Conservatives adopt anti-liberty positions.

When government action restrains private power from infringing liberty, e.g. with regulations on the financial industry, protection of workers' rights, or environmental protection laws, the pro-liberty position is to support this.

Liberals, on this sort of government action, adopt pro-liberty positions. Conservatives and libertarians adopt anti-liberty positions.

When government action attempts to narrow income gaps, raise wages, and provide for social welfare and safety nets, the pro-liberty position is to support this.

Again, liberals adopt pro-liberty positions in this context, while libertarians and conservatives adopt anti-liberty positions.

Liberals are pro-liberty.

Conservatives are anti-liberty.

Libertarians are neither pro-liberty nor anti-liberty, but are, instead, anti-government, which they often seem to think means they are pro-liberty, and in some matters -- when the government really is the major threat to liberty -- they are. But not consistently.

Only liberals consistently defend liberty. And conservatives never do.

I haven't quite grasped the liberal concept of liberty yet. Seems if you use the police power of government to go after certain groups in society based on their income that is what is know as liberty to a liberal.

When did it become an enumerated power of the federal government to "narrow income gaps, raise wages, and provide for social welfare and safety nets"?

 

[Photonic]

When government action attempts to narrow income gaps, the pro-liberty position is to support this

1) Our Founders understood that all the evil in human history had been caused by big liberal government so they created America to have liberty or freedom from big liberal government. Jefferson knew this without seeing the 20th Century. You have seen it yet still lack the IQ to understand even that. See why we say the liberal will have a low IQ? Now do you understand why the liberal spied for Stalin's big liberal government?


2) If you don't like how much money Bill Gates has you have the right in a free society to persuade people not to cause the income gap by buying his products. You might even recommend that they buy your products or a competitors instead, but you don't have the right to steal money from him at the point of a liberal gun just because other free people are at liberty to buy his products!

Why do liberals always turn to violence when they don't get their way through peaceful means? Its disgusting and very anti-American.


"When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
-- Benjamin Franklin

I hope you understand that monarchy is actually a form of conservative government by definition.

Just a friendly fact.

 

[Charles_Main]

Among liberals, conservatives, and libertarians, only liberals are consistently pro-liberty across the board. Conservatives are consistently anti-liberty, and libertarians are neither one nor the other.

This is Perhaps the most Ridicules Statement I have ever seen someone make on this board.

First off Both Liberals and Conservatives tend to be Selective in their Application of Liberty.

For example - Liberals don't want you to be free to own a gun, They want to Take things from some people and give them to others. Just 2 examples of Liberals not being for Liberty.

Then you have Conservatives. Mostly Social Cons, who stand in the Way of Gay Rights, and A womans right to choose. ETC

Secondly, Libertarians (which I feel I am Most like) are all about Liberty. Completely. Your claim they are neither Pro or Anti Liberty is incredibly Ignorant. Libertarians Defend Person Liberty to the Extreme. The Party is wholly and Completely about being Pro Liberty. There Platform Includes things like Legalizing all Drugs in the Name of Liberty, and Basically Abolishing almost every way the Government currently has to Intrude on your Liberty. You are so very Clueless.

My gosh, did you study under Rdean and TM or something?

 

[dblack]

I do think that the antithesis of liberty and government is a fallacy, and that this defines what I regard as the libertarian mistake. So there's a serious thought underlying this.

But yes, as expressed, it is in cheek.

Fair enough. And while there's always the question of who or what is a 'true' libertarian/conservative/liberal, I can't help but dispute your classification of libertarians as anti-government. My understanding of the philosophy isn't that that at all - instead it maintains the government is (for the forseeable futre at least) necessary to preserve liberty. Indeed, it's our position that protecting liberty is the purpose of government. We complain when it steps beyond that mission statement.

 

[whitehall]

Ah, it's all about the alleged freedom to hire someone to terminate the life of your unborn baby. Liberals define the stabbing of a full term baby in the back of the head and sucking out it's brain as "reproductive rights" and anybody who is against that type of manslaughter is seen in their minds as being against true liberty.