Debate Now Is Libertarianism UnAmerican?

[Derideo_Te]

I do not see libertarians advocating a complete lack of government.

What they are advocating for is a 100% removal of all social services.

That is not the same thing....

It is effectively the same thing.

 

[Derideo_Te]

"Libertarianiasm" is no more un-American than "Republicanism" or "Democratism".

Neither "Republicanism" or "Democratism" advocates eliminating all social programs.

The Libertarian party does!

Platform Libertarian Party

What is un-American about that.

I don't agree with removing all social services, but I don't see how you can classify libertarians as un-American.

I asked if Libertarianism is un-American. Kindly don't twist my words.

The goals of the Constitution include one that states that We the People want to promote the General Welfare of the people. Libertarianism is the opposite of that. It promotes greed and selfishness instead of a "more perfect union". That is why Libertarianism is un-American IMO.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Now let's use that data to address your question as to why 15% of the population would perish under a Libertarian economy.

In the article above it explains that a lack of access to healthcare is the primary reason for there being a much higher infant mortality rate in the USA. In a purely Libertarian economy the only access to any healthcare would be for those who could afford it since there would only be private healthcare and nothing else for anybody who can't afford it.

So who can't afford healthcare? The poor and the elderly without incomes. There is your 15% who would perish.

.

Your graph shows a cumulative probability of .5%. You are off by a factor of 30.

If your argument was that this carries through...please show how you can make that claim.

Assuming that based on average lifespan of 75 years...about 1.3% of the population dies each year...you should be able to find some kind of dramatic cause and effect.

Unless your timeframe is longer....at which point you'll need to specify it. If it gets to long..you approach 1.3% and the claim has no meaning.

The links were to illustrate the point of what happens to the most vulnerable without any social services. 3rd world nations without social services have high mortality rates for the most vulnerable members of those societies. Scrapping the current government together with all of those services would result in the deaths of 15% of the population who are either elderly or living in poverty. The data proves it.

I don't recall seeing any data on the elderly.

But, it's a straw man anyway.

If you want to call Social Security a Social Service...I'd have to disagree. Those who are getting it (for the most part) have a claim on it.

Now you are using semantics instead of addressing the point. Modern civilized societies take care of their most vulnerable members with social programs of one sort of another. The Romans provided free bread to every citizen. Today we provide social services for the elderly that include both an income and healthcare. Libertarians would eliminate those services and just ignore the elderly starving and dying in abject poverty.

 

[Derideo_Te]

"Libertarianiasm" is no more un-American than "Republicanism" or "Democratism".

Neither "Republicanism" or "Democratism" advocates eliminating all social programs.

The Libertarian party does!

Platform Libertarian Party

So what ?

I am still not seeing how this is un-American.

Let's also get clear that if Social Services were removed....people would not starve to death.

Really?

1 in 7 people worldwide do not have enough to eat each and every day.

More Than 1 Billion People Are Hungry in the World Foreign Policy

Explain exactly how people earning minimum wages are going to provide themselves with food and shelter for themselves and their families without foodstamps and housing subsidies.

 

[Derideo_Te]

When the figured out the first one was not working, they did it again.

Not sure what you are referring to here. Care to elucidate?

They created the Articles of Confederation.....

Then scrapped it.

Hardly the same thing at all.

 

[Derideo_Te]

There was an article written on the Thom Hartmann website in 2011 called "Libertarianism - the Un-American Pipe Dream that Backfires".

It exposed the fundamental paradox of Libertarianism which can be summarized as having the ideal of absolute individual rights will always result in a complete loss of all of those rights.

None of the Libertarian ideals actually work in practice.

Remove all regulations on corporations and the subsequent pollution alone will end up destroying other corporations. For example if one state has a corporation that spews toxins into a river that runs downstream to a state where corporations depend upon fishing and tourism from that same river there is nothing in Libertarianism that prevents that from happening. The rights of the corporate owners to pump toxins into the river is absolute in a Libertarian Utopia. That it kills fish and destroys the livelihoods of others cannot be used to challenge those rights. There is not government regulation allowed to prevent that from happening. Those harmed, if still alive, might try to sue but since they don't have standing in the other state they probably won't even get a hearing from a judge.

Taxation is another Libertarian pipe dream. The refuse to pay for anything that doesn't directly benefit them. So when they refuse to pay taxes to repair roads there are accidents that not only cost lives but impact the efficiency of corporations to receive raw materials and deliver finished goods. There are countless examples along these lines.

Worst of all Libertarians hate democracy. They don't want to have to obey laws passed by a democratically elected majority and signed into law if they don't agree with them. Libertarians don't want any laws that would infringe upon their individual rights, period. (Just read their manifesto, er, platform on the Libertarian Party website.)

There is something fundamentally wrong with Libertarianism to the point of being unAmerican. Personal individual rights only exist because others are willing to stand up for those rights just as it is the duty of every American to stand up for the rights of others. Libertarians don't want to stand up for the right of gays to have wedding cakes baked for them by businesses that bake wedding cakes if it goes against their religious beliefs about gays.

Unfortunately Libertarians just don't understand how the Constitution and their rights actually work. Instead they want to tear it all down in a "constitutional convention" and throw out all of the rules and regulations and start from scratch.

That is why Libertarians are, to all intents and purposes, unAmerican.

The Question to be Debated in this Discussion:

Is Libertarianism unAmerican? ​

RULES FOR THIS DISCUSSION:

1. No ad hominems.
2. Dictionary definitions will prevail.
3. Claiming that you are speaking on behalf of others is forbidden.
4. What you post is de facto your opinion unless substantiated with credible links.
5. When you are asked to provide a credible link to substantiate your position you must do so or you automatically forfeit your position.
6. Links can be contested and if they can be shown to be biased they will be discounted.
7. If you are going to invoke partisan terminology then be prepared to have it called out for what it is.
8. No one is exempt from legitimate criticism including the OP.

Libertarianism is fundamentally American...

Really?

Greed and selfishness is fundamentally American?

Explain why the Founding Fathers didn't include that in the Constitution?

 

[dblack]

I've always been perplexed by the reactionary concept of something being "unAmerican", and I'm not sure what it's supposed to mean - other than something the author doesn't like.

That said, I'll address the salient points of the OP, those that actually apply to libertarian ideology:

...

 

[Derideo_Te]

I've always been perplexed by the reactionary concept of something being "unAmerican", and I'm not sure what it's supposed to mean - other than something the author doesn't like.

As the author I am more than willing to state what being American means to myself.

America is about opportunity. It means that anyone, from anywhere, can come here and do something that is bigger than themselves. That might just be raising a family and providing them with an education and future or it could be going into space or writing a song or software app.

Those opportunities exist because those Americans who preceded us today made that possible by seizing their own opportunities and making sure that those who came after them would also have opportunities. Building roads, schools, libraries, parks and providing social services like police, fire departments, teachers and librarians are all part of the infrastructure of America and it all works together to ensure that those opportunities exist.

But when I look at Libertarianism all I see is greed and selfishness. There is no willingness to provide for the greater good. Instead it is all about grabbing whatever you can take and keeping it for yourself irrespective of who or what gets hurt in the process. Libertarianism means always putting yourself first and screw everyone else. It means no help for those who encounter misfortune through no fault of their own. It means suffering if you can't afford medical care. It means going hungry if you can't work. It means being exposed to the elements if you can't afford shelter. Under Libertarianism you condemn your own children to a life of poverty if you cannot afford to educate them.

So to me what I see in Libertarianism is the opposite of what I see as everything America stands for.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Libertarianiasm" is no more un-American than "Republicanism" or "Democratism".

Neither "Republicanism" or "Democratism" advocates eliminating all social programs.

The Libertarian party does!

Platform Libertarian Party

Progressive Democrats are pushing for the government to be involved in virtually every aspect of your life from birth to death. You think that's any better?

Repubs are trying to control the actions of adults within the confines of their own homes and bedrooms? You think that's any better?

Libertarianism is just another term for a 3rd world nation where only the wealthy have access to healthcare, justice, quality living standards, etc, etc. Even Communism is better than Libertarianism.

That would be the likely outcome.

But libertarians believe that men free from the 'restraints of government' and no longer subject to 'government interference' would create a Utopian society of mutual respect and prosperity free from want, poverty, and violence.

It's nonsense, of course, but this is what they nonetheless believe.

And it's true that libertarians are not 'anarchists,' nor do they seek to 'get rid' of all government – just remove from it virtually all power and authority, the Federal government in particular, where it acts rarely in international affairs and even less rarely concerning domestic issues.

Indeed, it's to the Federal government libertarians are the most hostile, less so to state and local governments.

Of course this is where they run afoul of the original intent of the Framers: that the Federal government, Federal laws, and the Federal courts are supreme and binding on all the states and local jurisdictions – and wisely so.

Every American is a citizen of the United States first and foremost, the states and local jurisdictions subordinate to that, where one does not forfeit his rights merely as a consequence of this state of residence.

Consequently, the Founding Generation sought to have their liberties safeguarded by a Federal government and Federal Constitution that compelled the states to acknowledge those rights, and afford citizens residing in the states recourse via the rule of law to seek relief when government overstepped its mandated authority.

In the libertarian 'Utopia,' therefore, citizens would have no recourse in the courts to defend their inalienable rights from attack by the states and local jurisdictions, acting at the behest of the 'will of the people.' Indeed, this is in direct conflict with our Constitutional Republic, where citizens are solely subject to the rule of law, not men.

It's therefore easy to see just how wrong libertarians have it, they exhibit contempt for the Framers' original intent that the people have a direct and unfettered relationship with their National government – a government they themselves created – absent interference from the states.

 

[Dot Com]

Libertarianism is not only against the Constitution, it is unworkable in the real world. When I think of countries practicing libertarianism, Somalia comes to mind or Honduras where the strong prey on the weak and there is little-to-no gov't.

 

[Derideo_Te]

"Libertarianiasm" is no more un-American than "Republicanism" or "Democratism".

Neither "Republicanism" or "Democratism" advocates eliminating all social programs.

The Libertarian party does!

Platform Libertarian Party

Progressive Democrats are pushing for the government to be involved in virtually every aspect of your life from birth to death. You think that's any better?

Repubs are trying to control the actions of adults within the confines of their own homes and bedrooms? You think that's any better?

Libertarianism is just another term for a 3rd world nation where only the wealthy have access to healthcare, justice, quality living standards, etc, etc. Even Communism is better than Libertarianism.

That would be the likely outcome.

But libertarians believe that men free from the 'restraints of government' and no longer subject to 'government interference' would create a Utopian society of mutual respect and prosperity free from want, poverty, and violence.

It's nonsense, of course, but this is what they nonetheless believe.

And it's true that libertarians are not 'anarchists,' nor do they seek to 'get rid' of all government – just remove from it virtually all power and authority, the Federal government in particular, where it acts rarely in international affairs and even less rarely concerning domestic issues.

Indeed, it's to the Federal government libertarians are the most hostile, less so to state and local governments.

Of course this is where they run afoul of the original intent of the Framers: that the Federal government, Federal laws, and the Federal courts are supreme and binding on all the states and local jurisdictions – and wisely so.

Every American is a citizen of the United States first and foremost, the states and local jurisdictions subordinate to that, where one does not forfeit his rights merely as a consequence of this state of residence.

Consequently, the Founding Generation sought to have their liberties safeguarded by a Federal government and Federal Constitution that compelled the states to acknowledge those rights, and afford citizens residing in the states recourse via the rule of law to seek relief when government overstepped its mandated authority.

In the libertarian 'Utopia,' therefore, citizens would have no recourse in the courts to defend their inalienable rights from attack by the states and local jurisdictions, acting at the behest of the 'will of the people.' Indeed, this is in direct conflict with our Constitutional Republic, where citizens are solely subject to the rule of law, not men.

It's therefore easy to see just how wrong libertarians have it, they exhibit contempt for the Framers' original intent that the people have a direct and unfettered relationship with their National government – a government they themselves created – absent interference from the states.

Thank you.

Perhaps the biggest distinction that I see is the stark difference between the social contract of We the People being equal and the Libertarian Utopian concept of "I, the Individual" being accountable to no one but himself.

We the People have individual rights but each of us has a duty to uphold the rights of everyone else otherwise we lose our own rights. That is a social contract and it doesn't work without one.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Libertarianism is not only against the Constitution, it is unworkable in the real world. When I think of countries practicing libertarianism, Somalia comes to mind or Honduras where the strong prey on the weak and there is little-to-no gov't.

One of our own USMB libertarians once opined that the doctrine of eminent domain was 'wrong,' that a railroad being built pursuant to the public interest should be 'forced' to 'go around' the property of a landowner who refused to sell his land to allow for the railroad's construction.

Can one imagine what America would be like if every railroad, interstate highway, and major roadway were compelled to 'go around' private property – that would indeed render us a third world Nation.

Such is the ridiculous extremism of most libertarians, where the Framers clearly authorized the doctrine of eminent domain in the Fifth Amendment.

 

[dblack]

 

[Two Thumbs]

Remove all regulations on corporations and the subsequent pollution alone will end up destroying other corporations. For example if one state has a corporation that spews toxins into a river that runs downstream to a state where corporations depend upon fishing and tourism from that same river there is nothing in Libertarianism that prevents that from happening. The rights of the corporate owners to pump toxins into the river is absolute in a Libertarian Utopia. That it kills fish and destroys the livelihoods of others cannot be used to challenge those rights. There is not government regulation allowed to prevent that from happening. Those harmed, if still alive, might try to sue but since they don't have standing in the other state they probably won't even get a hearing from a judge.

not sure they support the removal of all regs, especially the ones that prevent death

Taxation is another Libertarian pipe dream. The refuse to pay for anything that doesn't directly benefit them. So when they refuse to pay taxes to repair roads there are accidents that not only cost lives but impact the efficiency of corporations to receive raw materials and deliver finished goods. There are countless examples along these lines.

why should I, and man that lives in PA, pay for a high speed rail in CA?

Worst of all Libertarians hate democracy. They don't want to have to obey laws passed by a democratically elected majority and signed into law if they don't agree with them. Libertarians don't want any laws that would infringe upon their individual rights, period. (Just read their manifesto, er, platform on the Libertarian Party website.)

democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting what's for dinner. Forcing others to live as you want them to is tyranny.

There is something fundamentally wrong with Libertarianism to the point of being unAmerican. Personal individual rights only exist because others are willing to stand up for those rights just as it is the duty of every American to stand up for the rights of others. Libertarians don't want to stand up for the right of gays to have wedding cakes baked for them by businesses that bake wedding cakes if it goes against their religious beliefs about gays.

No one has the right to force me to provide a service, yet lefitst tyrants will force a christian to support a sinful lifestyle while letting muslims gays discriminate.
need I bring up the naacp and BET?

Unfortunately Libertarians just don't understand how the Constitution and their rights actually work. Instead they want to tear it all down in a "constitutional convention" and throw out all of the rules and regulations and start from scratch.

This is an out and out lie, clearly the author is just another leftist pile of shit that supports a single party and not freedom or the country

That is why Libertarians are, to all intents and purposes, unAmerican.

standard of leftist, someone gives you your opinion and you stick to it b/c thinking is hard

 

[dblack]

Watching liberal reactionaries fretting about libertarians is about as funny as watching conservative reactionaries speculating about the 'homosexual agenda'.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Watching liberal reactionaries fretting about libertarians is about as funny as watching conservative reactionaries speculating about the 'homosexual agenda'.

So being concerned about the future being stolen by rapacious Libertarians like the Koch Bros is "funny"?

 

[westwall]

"Libertarianiasm" is no more un-American than "Republicanism" or "Democratism".

Neither "Republicanism" or "Democratism" advocates eliminating all social programs.

The Libertarian party does!

Platform Libertarian Party

Progressive Democrats are pushing for the government to be involved in virtually every aspect of your life from birth to death. You think that's any better?

Repubs are trying to control the actions of adults within the confines of their own homes and bedrooms? You think that's any better?

Libertarianism is just another term for a 3rd world nation where only the wealthy have access to healthcare, justice, quality living standards, etc, etc. Even Communism is better than Libertarianism.

And progressivism is a hell on Earth for the serfs and a wonderful life for the dear leaders. Extremism of any sort is bad. That's the point.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Libertarianiasm" is no more un-American than "Republicanism" or "Democratism".

Neither "Republicanism" or "Democratism" advocates eliminating all social programs.

The Libertarian party does!

Platform Libertarian Party

Progressive Democrats are pushing for the government to be involved in virtually every aspect of your life from birth to death. You think that's any better?

Repubs are trying to control the actions of adults within the confines of their own homes and bedrooms? You think that's any better?

Libertarianism is just another term for a 3rd world nation where only the wealthy have access to healthcare, justice, quality living standards, etc, etc. Even Communism is better than Libertarianism.

And progressivism is a hell on Earth for the serfs and a wonderful life for the dear leaders. Extremism of any sort is bad. That's the point.

This is a lie, nothing more than hyperbolic nonsense.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

DERIDEO_TE SAID:

'Perhaps the biggest distinction that I see is the stark difference between the social contract of We the People being equal and the Libertarian Utopian concept of "I, the Individual" being accountable to no one but himself.[“]'

For libertarians this would result in an 'equilibrium of selfishness,' or 'equality through selfishness' – where everyone focusing solely on himself, doing what's best for himself, will render everyone prosperous and self-sufficient.

Again, this is unfounded nonsense – and even if one were to concede this had some validity during the 18th and 19th Centuries, libertarian dogma has clearly been devoid of merit for well over 100 years.

Indeed, by the second quarter of the 20th Century the courts recognized the radical change in the nature of the American economy, the significant change in the relationship between employer and employee, where the libertarian socioeconomic paradigm had become an unworkable anachronism, as Federal regulatory policy is clearly necessary and proper:

“Congress, having by the present Act adopted the policy of excluding from interstate commerce all goods produced for that commerce which do not conform to the specified labor standards, it may choose the means reasonably adapted to the attainment of the permitted end, even though they involve control of intrastate activities. P. 121.

Independently of the prohibition of shipment or transportation of the proscribed goods, the provision of the Act for the suppression of their production for interstate commerce is within the commerce power. P. 122.

The Tenth Amendment is not a limitation upon the authority of the National Government to resort to all means for the exercise of a granted power which are appropriate and plainly adapted to the permitted end. P. 123.”

United States v. Darby LII Legal Information Institute

 

[gipper]

There was an article written on the Thom Hartmann website in 2011 called "Libertarianism - the Un-American Pipe Dream that Backfires".

It exposed the fundamental paradox of Libertarianism which can be summarized as having the ideal of absolute individual rights will always result in a complete loss of all of those rights.

None of the Libertarian ideals actually work in practice.

Remove all regulations on corporations and the subsequent pollution alone will end up destroying other corporations. For example if one state has a corporation that spews toxins into a river that runs downstream to a state where corporations depend upon fishing and tourism from that same river there is nothing in Libertarianism that prevents that from happening. The rights of the corporate owners to pump toxins into the river is absolute in a Libertarian Utopia. That it kills fish and destroys the livelihoods of others cannot be used to challenge those rights. There is not government regulation allowed to prevent that from happening. Those harmed, if still alive, might try to sue but since they don't have standing in the other state they probably won't even get a hearing from a judge.

Taxation is another Libertarian pipe dream. The refuse to pay for anything that doesn't directly benefit them. So when they refuse to pay taxes to repair roads there are accidents that not only cost lives but impact the efficiency of corporations to receive raw materials and deliver finished goods. There are countless examples along these lines.

Worst of all Libertarians hate democracy. They don't want to have to obey laws passed by a democratically elected majority and signed into law if they don't agree with them. Libertarians don't want any laws that would infringe upon their individual rights, period. (Just read their manifesto, er, platform on the Libertarian Party website.)

There is something fundamentally wrong with Libertarianism to the point of being unAmerican. Personal individual rights only exist because others are willing to stand up for those rights just as it is the duty of every American to stand up for the rights of others. Libertarians don't want to stand up for the right of gays to have wedding cakes baked for them by businesses that bake wedding cakes if it goes against their religious beliefs about gays.

Unfortunately Libertarians just don't understand how the Constitution and their rights actually work. Instead they want to tear it all down in a "constitutional convention" and throw out all of the rules and regulations and start from scratch.

That is why Libertarians are, to all intents and purposes, unAmerican.

The Question to be Debated in this Discussion:

Is Libertarianism unAmerican? ​

RULES FOR THIS DISCUSSION:

1. No ad hominems.
2. Dictionary definitions will prevail.
3. Claiming that you are speaking on behalf of others is forbidden.
4. What you post is de facto your opinion unless substantiated with credible links.
5. When you are asked to provide a credible link to substantiate your position you must do so or you automatically forfeit your position.
6. Links can be contested and if they can be shown to be biased they will be discounted.
7. If you are going to invoke partisan terminology then be prepared to have it called out for what it is.
8. No one is exempt from legitimate criticism including the OP.

Libertarianism is fundamentally American...

Really?

Greed and selfishness is fundamentally American?

Explain why the Founding Fathers didn't include that in the Constitution?

I suppose in your mind the Founding Fathers stood for the welfare/warfare/police state we have today.