The essence of collectivism is force. The essence of libertarianism is choice.

xsited1

Agent P
Sep 15, 2008
17,745
5,779
198
Little Rock, AR
With so many hyperventilating over Rand Paul's recent Private Property/Civil Rights comments, I thought I'd ask everyone what they think about what's in the subject line. I got it from this story:

Rand Paul's Principled Stumble | Robert A. Levy | Cato Institute: Commentary

Then I found this:


In it, the author claims: "Collectivism isn’t about force. Collectivism is about cooperation – choice constrained by social contract for the net benefit of society."

Discuss.
 
Collectivism puts the power of the government construct over the rights of the individual. It is about power and control. The only "cooperative" aspect to it is "cooperate OR ELSE". It's Orwellian for coercion.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: blu
Choice constrained is force. Taking away my choices before I get a chance to make them is no different than telling me what to do.

Queue Bfgrn to come in and tell you that laws against murder restrain your choice too, as if that's somehow a valid point in context. :rofl:
 
With so many hyperventilating over Rand Paul's recent Private Property/Civil Rights comments, I thought I'd ask everyone what they think about what's in the subject line. I got it from this story:

Rand Paul's Principled Stumble | Robert A. Levy | Cato Institute: Commentary

Then I found this:


In it, the author claims: "Collectivism isn’t about force. Collectivism is about cooperation – choice constrained by social contract for the net benefit of society."

Discuss.

Putting the rights of "society" over the rights of individuals essentially means that one group of people is going to get screwed for the benefit of another. Society is simply a collection of individuals, and if you consistently protect individual rights then everybody in that society is better off.
 
Communism is a specific form of collectivism, but there are other flavors as well such as fascism and socialism (and The BORG) for example. The key distinction is the subservience of the individual in relationship to the collective.
 
Communism is a specific form of collectivism, but there are other flavors as well such as fascism and socialism (and The BORG) for example. The key distinction is the subservience of the individual in relationship to the collective.

Seems to work pretty well for ants, bees and some other insects.

Of course that's scarcely an endorsement, unless perhaps you're rdean or geauxtohell.
 
Indeed. It's illuminating to consider those who advocate a Hive Mind existence.
 
Morons who bitch about limiting liberty for the common good should move to Somalia and leave the civilized world the fuck alone with their idiotic bullshit.

Anarchy doesn't work and people like having laws, educational systems, and a government capable of enforcing such laws as mandatory transparency in economic systems, food and work environment safety regulations, and laws outlawing rape and murder. You want total liberty? Go to Somalia see just how great the libertarian pipedream really is.
 
Morons who bitch about limiting liberty for the common good should move to Somalia and leave the civilized world the fuck alone with their idiotic bullshit.

Anarchy doesn't work and people like having laws, educational systems, and a government capable of enforcing such laws as mandatory transparency in economic systems, food and work environment safety regulations, and laws outlawing rape and murder. You want total liberty? Go to Somalia see just how great the libertarian pipedream really is.

Nice red herring. :thup:


I don't know anyone advocating anarchy. It's simply a question of determining the appropriate balance between liberty and the common good.
 
With so many hyperventilating over Rand Paul's recent Private Property/Civil Rights comments, I thought I'd ask everyone what they think about what's in the subject line. I got it from this story:

Rand Paul's Principled Stumble | Robert A. Levy | Cato Institute: Commentary

Then I found this:


In it, the author claims: "Collectivism isn’t about force. Collectivism is about cooperation – choice constrained by social contract for the net benefit of society."

Discuss.

Collectivism/Progressivism, in the current atmosphere in the United States, is about forcing the ideals upon everyone at the expense of their individual liberty.
 
Last edited:
Morons who bitch about limiting liberty for the common good should move to Somalia and leave the civilized world the fuck alone with their idiotic bullshit.

Anarchy doesn't work and people like having laws, educational systems, and a government capable of enforcing such laws as mandatory transparency in economic systems, food and work environment safety regulations, and laws outlawing rape and murder. You want total liberty? Go to Somalia see just how great the libertarian pipedream really is.

If you think the common good is more important than liberty why don't you move to China?
 
With so many hyperventilating over Rand Paul's recent Private Property/Civil Rights comments, I thought I'd ask everyone what they think about what's in the subject line. I got it from this story:

Rand Paul's Principled Stumble | Robert A. Levy | Cato Institute: Commentary

Then I found this:


In it, the author claims: "Collectivism isn’t about force. Collectivism is about cooperation – choice constrained by social contract for the net benefit of society."

Discuss.

Collectivism/Progressivism, in the current atmosphere in the United States, is about forcing the ideal upon everyone at the expense of their individual liberty.

Yeah but, if I'm to believe the wise old sage known as JBeukema, the only alternative is Somalianesque anarchy. :lol:
 
Morons who bitch about limiting liberty for the common good should move to Somalia and leave the civilized world the fuck alone with their idiotic bullshit.

Anarchy doesn't work and people like having laws, educational systems, and a government capable of enforcing such laws as mandatory transparency in economic systems, food and work environment safety regulations, and laws outlawing rape and murder. You want total liberty? Go to Somalia see just how great the libertarian pipedream really is.

Who was advocating anarchy?
 
Morons who bitch about limiting liberty for the common good should move to Somalia and leave the civilized world the fuck alone with their idiotic bullshit.

Anarchy doesn't work and people like having laws, educational systems, and a government capable of enforcing such laws as mandatory transparency in economic systems, food and work environment safety regulations, and laws outlawing rape and murder. You want total liberty? Go to Somalia see just how great the libertarian pipedream really is.

Nice red herring. :thup:


I don't know anyone advocating anarchy.


The OP and this entire thread- and a number of posts in other threads- is all about attacking all cooperation as tyranny
 
Morons who bitch about limiting liberty for the common good should move to Somalia and leave the civilized world the fuck alone with their idiotic bullshit.

Anarchy doesn't work and people like having laws, educational systems, and a government capable of enforcing such laws as mandatory transparency in economic systems, food and work environment safety regulations, and laws outlawing rape and murder. You want total liberty? Go to Somalia see just how great the libertarian pipedream really is.

If you think the common good is more important than liberty why don't you move to China?


Because China is about oligarchy and the supremacy of the Party in power while the common People suffer... any more stupid questions? :eusa_eh:
 
Morons who bitch about limiting liberty for the common good should move to Somalia and leave the civilized world the fuck alone with their idiotic bullshit.

Anarchy doesn't work and people like having laws, educational systems, and a government capable of enforcing such laws as mandatory transparency in economic systems, food and work environment safety regulations, and laws outlawing rape and murder. You want total liberty? Go to Somalia see just how great the libertarian pipedream really is.

Nice red herring. :thup:


I don't know anyone advocating anarchy.


The OP and this entire thread- and a number of posts in other threads- is all about attacking all cooperation as tyranny

Who was advocating anarcy....try quoting the moment they advocated it if you dont mind.
 
Excellent find, especially the second link.

Ideas have consequences, and if there is one idea that is contrary to America's political and religious heritage, it is the cold hearted ideology called libertarianism. Libertarianism is much of the reason the economy nearly collapsed, it is the reason for Enron, Worldcom, Bernie Madoff, and the greed and selfishness that uses the social infrastructure but does not feel it owes anything in return. Treanor nails it.

"The values of libertarianism can not be rationally grounded. It is a system of belief, a 'worldview'. If you are a libertarian, then there is no point in reading any further. There is no attempt here to convert you: your belief is simply rejected. The rejection is comprehensive, meaning that all the starting points of libertarian argument (premises) are also rejected. There is no shared ground from which to conduct an argument.

The libertarian belief system includes the values listed in this section, which are affirmed by most libertarians. Certainly, no libertarian rejects them all..." : Why is libertarianism wrong?


=============

"... Collectivism isn’t about force. Collectivism is about cooperation – choice constrained by social contract for the net benefit of society. Unrestrained choice has, time and time again, shown itself to be an inefficient way of life. Besides the actual-historical examples, which the Newsweek piece accepted, it can be mathematically and theoretically demonstrated.

About midway through the above-linked presentation is the proof: there exists a class of situations where increased choice yields worse outcomes. It carries over quite nicely to reality; the simple fact is that a whole society full of actors making unrestricted choices can be less efficient than one which has some measure of centralized regulation.

This is not “force.” It is true that the laws are underwritten and legitimized by the military/police power of the state, but these implements are a part of the social contract that allows a coherent society to maintain order against those who would disregard the rules in a selfish pursuit. A law is not a gun to your head – it is a legal agreement among citizens. The more important piece of the logical puzzle is the very idea of representative government: the bills and votes of our Senators and Congressmen represent our own implied agreement to the social contracts at issue."

above from second link.



"Ideas rule the world and its events. A revolution is the passage of an idea from theory to practice. Whatever men say, material interests never have caused, and never will cause a revolution." Giuseppe Mazzini
 
Nice red herring. :thup:


I don't know anyone advocating anarchy.


The OP and this entire thread- and a number of posts in other threads- is all about attacking all cooperation as tyranny

Who was advocating anarcy....try quoting the moment they advocated it if you dont mind.

That one of the problems people have with Libertarianism. Many think it's anarchy, which of course is wrong. The whole idea of collectivism sounds great and maybe one day we'll all march in lock-step with one-another and like it, but the loss of individuality that comes with it is just too high a price to pay IMO.
 

Forum List

Back
Top