Libertarian Terrorists?

ClaireH

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
704
Reaction score
665
Points
898
Location
Midwest US

The crux of it all: "At issue is where one is able to articulate a position that negative liberties represent individualism , while positive liberties represent collectivism ."

Politically stated, "At issue is where one is able to articulate a position that negative liberties represent individualism if and only when one does not subscribe to the considerable merits of individualism and only values societies that have immense control over the collective masses.

The real issue seems to be that underlying political differences must weigh in a bit differently to be a fair and accurate assessment about "negative versus positive" liberties. As it stands, you have it slanted left in a big way. It reads like an an appeal for mass conformity, where nothing unique is allowed, and the misperception that "group think" means everyone walks around thinking the same things. Group think only works when people are allowed to disagree. Forming a group with a wide variety of experiences and opinions leads to more brain power than any one person can have alone.

With the current rush to go beyond rebwuke and to cancel various aspects of our political culture will turn out badly I'm afraid. Until the citizens within the states decide they've had enough and get busy be contacting their state reps, we're in for a negative type of liberty situation...forced measures upon the populace don't work long-term.
 

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
2,036
Reaction score
451
Points
140
" Appreciating The Challenges Hoping For Benefits Through Response "

* Nuances Of A Dichotomy To Be Discerned *

Politically stated, "At issue is where one is able to articulate a position that negative liberties represent individualism if and only when one does not subscribe to the considerable merits of individualism and only values societies that have immense control over the collective masses.

The real issue seems to be that underlying political differences must weigh in a bit differently to be a fair and accurate assessment about "negative versus positive" liberties. As it stands, you have it slanted left in a big way. It reads like an an appeal for mass conformity, where nothing unique is allowed, and the misperception that "group think" means everyone walks around thinking the same things. Group think only works when people are allowed to disagree. Forming a group with a wide variety of experiences and opinions leads to more brain power than any one person can have alone.

With the current rush to go beyond rebwuke and to cancel various aspects of our political culture will turn out badly I'm afraid. Until the citizens within the states decide they've had enough and get busy be contacting their state reps, we're in for a negative type of liberty situation...forced measures upon the populace don't work long-term.
The meaning of negative liberty is that individuals are free to do as they please without interference from government or from other individuals , while the meaning of positive liberty is that individuals are codependent upon government or upon other individuals .

For example , free roam and free association are negative liberties , whereas forced association through authoritarian aggressive actions of government would clearly establish a positive liberty for some and a positive indemnity for others .

One should not misconstrues and refer to a positive liberty for some as a negative liberty from others by positve wright from government when a positive indemnity to self ownership and self determination elements of individualism are incurred by another .


* Example To Potentially Misconstrue Negative Versus Positive Liberties *

Should private corporations be neutral about the content individuals post , or neutral such as charging only for bandwidth without consideration for the information or revenue of the web site provider , and where justification for censure must include an alert to law enforcement for actual threats or acts of violence ?

Would the forced implementation of net neutrality by government upon private parties create a negative liberty , or a positive liberty , through government ?

The issue of net neutrality is confounding where on one hand one group claims to receive a negative liberty from individuals against the illegitimate aggression of private interests at the ISP , and where on an other hand one group claims that a positive liberty was receieved because it incurred a positive indemnity .

In principle and technically , negative liberties of individualism and positive liberties of collectivism should be perceive and maintained as separate categories with clear deontological indicators .

One should not assert that positive liberties are negative liberties , when positive liberties occur wherever one individual is indemnified in self ownership and self determination to an other individual .

Those individuals promoting authoritarian actions of a collectivist state to establish individualism through positive liberties , while referring to their measures as negative liberties , are exemplifying a technical and fundamental violation against the idealized conditions for negative liberties requisite as individualism .

Do not refer to individuals who promote liberation of the individual through authoritarianism actions of government as liberals , rather refer to them as conservatives of government authority who are promoting collectivism and positive liberties that are opposite with principles of negative liberties specified for individualism .

Those promoting collectivist government as an alternative to self ownership and self determination of individuals for maintaining the general welfare of members of the state must be answered by greater individuals exercising self ownership and self determination of individualism to ensure the collectivism crux of co-dependency is not understood to be the greater ideal than individualism .

 
Last edited:

ClaireH

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
704
Reaction score
665
Points
898
Location
Midwest US
" Appreciating The Challenges Hoping For Benefits Through Response "

* Nuances Of A Dichotomy To Be Discerned *

Politically stated, "At issue is where one is able to articulate a position that negative liberties represent individualism if and only when one does not subscribe to the considerable merits of individualism and only values societies that have immense control over the collective masses.

The real issue seems to be that underlying political differences must weigh in a bit differently to be a fair and accurate assessment about "negative versus positive" liberties. As it stands, you have it slanted left in a big way. It reads like an an appeal for mass conformity, where nothing unique is allowed, and the misperception that "group think" means everyone walks around thinking the same things. Group think only works when people are allowed to disagree. Forming a group with a wide variety of experiences and opinions leads to more brain power than any one person can have alone.

With the current rush to go beyond rebwuke and to cancel various aspects of our political culture will turn out badly I'm afraid. Until the citizens within the states decide they've had enough and get busy be contacting their state reps, we're in for a negative type of liberty situation...forced measures upon the populace don't work long-term.
The meaning of negative liberty is that individuals are free to do as they please without interference from government or from other individuals , while the meaning of positive liberty is that individuals are codependent upon government or upon other individuals .

For example , free roam and free association are negative liberties , whereas forced association through authoritarian aggressive actions of government would clearly establish a positive liberty for some and a positive indemnity for others .

One should not misconstrues and refer to a positive liberty for some as a negative liberty from others by positve wright from government when a positive indemnity to self ownership and self determination elements of individualism are incurred by another .


* Example To Potentially Misconstrue Negative Versus Positive Liberties *

Should private corporations be neutral about the content individuals post , or neutral such as charging only for bandwidth without consideration for the information or revenue of the web site provider , and where justification for censure must include an alert to law enforcement for actual threats or acts of violence ?

Would the forced implementation of net neutrality by government upon private parties create a negative liberty , or a positive liberty , through government ?

The issue of net neutrality is confounding where on one hand one group claims to receive a negative liberty from individuals against the illegitimate aggression of private interests at the ISP , and where on an other hand one group claims that a positive liberty was receieved because it incurred a positive indemnity .

In principle and technically , negative liberties of individualism and positive liberties of collectivism should be perceive and maintained as separate categories with clear deontological indicators .

One should not assert that positive liberties are negative liberties , when positive liberties occur wherever one individual is indemnified in self ownership and self determination to an other individual .

Those individuals promoting authoritarian actions of a collectivist state to establish individualism through positive liberties , while referring to their measures as negative liberties , are exemplifying a technical and fundamental violation against the idealized conditions for negative liberties requisite as individualism .

Do not refer to individuals who promote liberation of the individual through authoritarianism actions of government as liberals , rather refer to them as conservatives of government authority who are promoting collectivism and positive liberties that are opposite with principles of negative liberties specified for individualism .

Those promoting collectivist government as an alternative to self ownership and self determination of individuals for maintaining the general welfare of members of the state must be answered by greater individuals exercising self ownership and self determination of individualism to ensure the collectivism crux of co-dependency is not understood to be the greater ideal than individualism .

Thank you for elaborating regarding your position about negative versus positive liberties. As a mostly right leaning libertarian, even though I support gay marriage, gay adoption, legalization of marijuana, I side mostly with conservatives on other issues. For instance, I oppose all abortions due to births being considered an "inconvenience" for the bio mom, particularly since around 2 million couples in the US await long lists to adopt each year. This should not be occurring in 2021: "Every year there are about 1.3 million abortions. Only 4% of women with unwanted pregnancies place their children through adoption." No female living in the US has a reason to have an abortion considering the "day after" pill is widely available without prescription at chain pharmacies. Minors don't have to obtain parental permission for the OTC pill, and the fact it's not advertised by the hour is bafffling.

In regards to liberties and after reading more about the differences, the state should only concern itself with negative liberty and should never undertake to actively promote positive liberty. This would eliminate much of our obtusive governmental overreach.

Instead of enhanced regulations over the citizens or more governmental agencies over others, there should be non-governmental/non-partisan entities tracking governmental transactions. Although the claim is made that the U.S. Comptroller General is non-partisan, the US needs a pure oversight board untained by government influence. The US runs amuck with allowing corruptive players to carry on without fear...unless caught.

Currently with the left in control, liberal state governors are already biting at the bit to run with it. Governor Newsom in CA is amping things up with his efforts to tweak positive liberties according to your definition with respect to conformity: inflicted current "gas shortage" in northern CA in order to make it harder on people who are continuing to drive gas powered vehicles, no girl/boy signage for toys at stores (clothing will be the next move to force gender neutrality), and many more "for the people" type of measures that are in fact "for the control" over the people. It will backfire, although I'm not sure about CA, but on a federal level. The more the leftists scream and shout for their far-left agenda demands to be met, the farther right the pendulum will swing next time around...perhaps in the 2022 midterms. Time will tell.
 

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
2,036
Reaction score
451
Points
140
" Maintaining A Steady And Even Keel "

* Self Determination Or Self Ownership Violations Versus Civil Or Criminal Liability *

Thank you for elaborating regarding your position about negative versus positive liberties.
With respect to positive wrights regulating the interactions of private individuals , the theory for non violence principles would relate that negative liberties represent equal protections against illegitimate aggression that violates self ownership and self determination elements of individualism between individuals .

With respect to positive wrights regulating the interactions of private individuals , the theory for non violence principles would relate that positive liberties represent non equal endowments where aggression against the self ownership and self determination elements of individualism are legitimized between individuals .

* Aspiring To Assure Safety And Security With A Dictionary *
As a mostly right leaning libertarian, even though I support gay marriage, gay adoption, legalization of marijuana,
...
The self determination element of individualism expects wrights ensuring that individuals may exercise their willful intents through private property with valid contracts .

The self ownership element of individualism expects wrights ensuring that individuals may exercise free roam , free association and progeny .

* Pet Peeve From Carnate Naturalism Versus Legal Positive Institutions Of State *
I side mostly with conservatives on other issues. For instance, I oppose all abortions due to births being considered an "inconvenience" for the bio mom, particularly since around 2 million couples in the US await long lists to adopt each year. This should not be occurring in 2021: "Every year there are about 1.3 million abortions. Only 4% of women with unwanted pregnancies place their children through adoption." No female living in the US has a reason to have an abortion considering the "day after" pill is widely available without prescription at chain pharmacies. Minors don't have to obtain parental permission for the OTC pill, and the fact it's not advertised by the hour is bafffling.
The inclusion of progeny in self ownership , and the accountability for when or if procreation should occur , is the prerogative of the individual .

Prior to an establishment of a greater individual as a state , individuals are subject to natural freedoms from moral relativism within nature ; to improve an opportunity for ensuring life and an opportunity to improve the quality of life , an individual exchanges their natural freedoms for protected wrights as a citizen member according to a social civil contracts of a constitution .

A state is comprised of and for citizens in who a state interests lay ; as citizenship requires birth , policies for equal protection require birth .

The constitutional issue of abortion is not the question , " When does life begin ? " , rather the constitutional issue of abortion is the question , " When do interests of a State begin ? " .

The libertarian position is that a fetus should be entitled to the equal protection of negative liberties , with which this moniker disagrees .

-- non aggression means no aggression - Does Abortion Violate Non Aggression Principles ? ---
--- CDZ - An ' I Am , Therefore I Think Argument ' Supports A Position Allowing Elective Abortion ---
-- Demand Any Nomination For Us Supreme Court Justice Explain Blackmun ' Logically Of Course ' Statement From Roe V Wade ---
--- Congressional Thumpers Demand That Abortion Be Legal For Adultery ---

* Appreciation To Speak The Same Language *
In regards to liberties and after reading more about the differences, the state should only concern itself with negative liberty and should never undertake to actively promote positive liberty. This would eliminate much of our obtusive governmental overreach.
As literacy matters , the means to implement a negative liberty ethic is to ensure that the political science terminology is more commonly understood , by including it as part of a civics curriculum and as part of political discourse .

* Legitimately Worrying About Illegitimate Aggression And A Fiscal Financial Fiasco *
Instead of enhanced regulations over the citizens or more governmental agencies over others, there should be non-governmental/non-partisan entities tracking governmental transactions. Although the claim is made that the U.S. Comptroller General is non-partisan, the US needs a pure oversight board untained by government influence. The US runs amuck with allowing corruptive players to carry on without fear...unless caught.

Currently with the left in control, liberal state governors are already biting at the bit to run with it. Governor Newsom in CA is amping things up with his efforts to tweak positive liberties according to your definition with respect to conformity: inflicted current "gas shortage" in northern CA in order to make it harder on people who are continuing to drive gas powered vehicles, no girl/boy signage for toys at stores (clothing will be the next move to force gender neutrality), and many more "for the people" type of measures that are in fact "for the control" over the people. It will backfire, although I'm not sure about CA, but on a federal level. The more the leftists scream and shout for their far-left agenda demands to be met, the farther right the pendulum will swing next time around...perhaps in the 2022 midterms. Time will tell.
 
Last edited:

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top