Libertarianism on the rise in the last three years

[JakeStarkey]

'Societies of free individuals' is libertarian codetalk for a lack of accountability to their public communities. An example: a society has the duty to protect the young and the weak from those who prey upon them. Pedophilia comes to mind.

 

[Contumacious]

'Societies of free individuals' is libertarian codetalk for a lack of accountability to their public communities. An example: a society has the duty to protect the young and the weak from those who prey upon them. Pedophilia comes to mind.

"Societies that protect the young and the weak" is fascist codetalk for a lack of accountability to the individual. An example: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men. Nazi Germany come to mind.

.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Maybe people don't call themselves libertarian, because they realize it's just another "ism". Who needs that kind of straight jacket after what happened in the 20th century? It's actually the flip side of the Marxist coin, in that they both require a basic shilt in human nature to work. Marxists expect everyone to work for the good of everyone, forgetting that without relatively rapid reward for their labors, many will not work at all. The libertarians, on the other hand, expect most transactions to be on a person-to-person basis with little if any outside influence, forgetting that without oversight some of the powerful will inevitably prey on the weak.

Excellent!

Fair taxes, appropriate regulation.

 

[JakeStarkey]

By your definition, Contumacious, which doesn't hold any water. You want to do what you want to do regardless of how it affects others. Yes, you are part of the social compact of our country, and nothing you do or say or write or whatever will ever change that. Yes, you are accountable.

 

[Contumacious]

. The libertarians, on the other hand, expect most transactions to be on a person-to-person basis with little if any outside influence, forgetting that without oversight some of the powerful will inevitably prey on the weak.

yes. indeed.

In Nazi Germany , paternalism prevailed. Hitler had set up a system to prevent the powers-that-be from preying on the Jews.......oh , wait, who was providing the oversight?

.

 

[dblack]

'Societies of free individuals' is libertarian codetalk for a lack of accountability to their public communities. An example: a society has the duty to protect the young and the weak from those who prey upon them. Pedophilia comes to mind.

Yes, and 'constitutional rights' is codetalk for "meet behind Louie's at 5:30".

Show me recognized libertarian literature that claims we shouldn't protect children from pedophiles. Can you address anything libertarians actually say? OR is it just more fun to make up shit and attack your fantasies?

 

[AVG-JOE]

I agree with you man.

The last narco-libertarian president incinerated 6,000,000 Jews.

Oooooooh, wait, Adolf, was a fascistic nazi, YOUR religion. So they should burn and your ilk at the stake.

Gee, hope you concur.

.

At least you admit the Holocaust actually happened. Unlike your ideological cell mates.

Of course , I believe it.

Government bureaucrats victimising their constituents has been going on for over 2000 years. Its all well documented in the Cato Letters.

I don't know who the **** you are referring to as my "ideological cell mates" since all libertarians agree that government bureaucrats are scumbags who can not be trusted for a second , they can not be trusted as far as we can spit.

You fascists on the other hand are always looking to be dominated by those who wear brownshirts.

.

I never agreed to that.

The bureaucrats are our friends and neighbors tasked with with the unenviable job of figuring out what the **** Congress has come up with, and applying it to the real world.

The bureaucrats, for the most part, would prefer a better system. The bureaucrats are the professional people who make the system work as well as it does in spite of Congress.

When the way congress does business is eventually changed by us, it will be the bureaucrats who make the transition happen without total anarchy.

Deity bless the bureaucrats.

 

[Contumacious]

By your definition, Contumacious, which doesn't hold any water. You want to do what you want to do regardless of how it affects others. Yes, you are part of the social compact of our country, and nothing you do or say or write or whatever will ever change that. Yes, you are accountable.

By your definition, JakeStarkey, which doesn't hold any water. You want to do what you want to do regardless of how it affects others. Yes, you are part of the social compact of our country, and nothing you do or say or write or whatever will ever change that. Yes, you are accountable.

.

 

[midcan5]

You have any of your own thoughts, midcan? Besides the 'spoiled hippie' slur?

Lots but would it make much difference? Check out my many threads sometimes. This is the usual empty criticism I hear from those who sound like automatons. You're not one yet in my mind, please don't become one. Debate don't ad hom.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/educa...higher-education-in-nevada-2.html#post3421216

And this is old.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/general-discussion/93856-and-you-know-that-how.html#post1685325

 

[JakeStarkey]

'Societies of free individuals' is libertarian codetalk for a lack of accountability to their public communities. An example: a society has the duty to protect the young and the weak from those who prey upon them. Pedophilia comes to mind.

Yes, and 'constitutional rights' is codetalk for "meet behind Louie's at 5:30".

Show me recognized libertarian literature that claims we shouldn't protect children from pedophiles. Can you address anything libertarians actually say? OR is it just more fun to make up shit and attack your fantasies?

Thank you for implying there is a difference between "recognized" libertarians and pretend libertarians who code talk they want to do bad things without consequences. You all should be dumping on the bad guys and gals who hide behind your philosophy.

Do understand I still think the weakness of reputable libertarianism is that, as the flip side of marxism, strong individuals will prey on the weak.

 

[JakeStarkey]

By your definition, Contumacious, which doesn't hold any water. You want to do what you want to do regardless of how it affects others. Yes, you are part of the social compact of our country, and nothing you do or say or write or whatever will ever change that. Yes, you are accountable.

By your definition, JakeStarkey, which doesn't hold any water. You want to do what you want to do regardless of how it affects others. Yes, you are part of the social compact of our country, and nothing you do or say or write or whatever will ever change that. Yes, you are accountable..

Put it to the test, Contumacious. Go hang out in the play ground and make a proposition, and you will find yourself held accountable. Go rob a bank, not pay your taxes, fail to register your car ~ and come back and tell us what happens.

We know what your code talk means.

 

[Contumacious]

At least you admit the Holocaust actually happened. Unlike your ideological cell mates.

Of course , I believe it.

Government bureaucrats victimising their constituents has been going on for over 2000 years. Its all well documented in the Cato Letters.

I don't know who the **** you are referring to as my "ideological cell mates" since all libertarians agree that government bureaucrats are scumbags who can not be trusted for a second , they can not be trusted as far as we can spit.

You fascists on the other hand are always looking to be dominated by those who wear brownshirts.

.

I never agreed to that.

The bureaucrats are our friends and neighbors tasked with with the unenviable job of figuring out what the **** Congress has come up with, and applying it to the real world.

The bureaucrats, for the most part, would prefer a better system. The bureaucrats are the professional people who make the system work as well as it does in spite of Congress.

When the way congress does business is eventually changed by us, it will be the bureaucrats who make the transition happen without total anarchy.

Deity bless the bureaucrats.

HUH?

Are you being facetious ?!?!?

.

 

[Contumacious]

By your definition, Contumacious, which doesn't hold any water. You want to do what you want to do regardless of how it affects others. Yes, you are part of the social compact of our country, and nothing you do or say or write or whatever will ever change that. Yes, you are accountable.

By your definition, JakeStarkey, which doesn't hold any water. You want to do what you want to do regardless of how it affects others. Yes, you are part of the social compact of our country, and nothing you do or say or write or whatever will ever change that. Yes, you are accountable..

Put it to the test, Contumacious. Go hang out in the play ground and make a proposition, and you will find yourself held accountable. Go rob a bank, not pay your taxes, fail to register your car ~ and come back and tell us what happens.

We know what your code talk means.

HUH?

Yo Vern, you fascists are the ones who alway propose engaging in criminal behavior. Robbing a bank is not a Libertarian act.

But while YOU advocate engaging in criminal acts you want the punishment to be levied against all the citizens of a particular community.

.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Avg-Joe:

I wish Obama had had the political stones to call on The People to form a human shield between Congress and 'K' Street before the healthcare law was written, but wishes are for little girls and Sunday afternoons. It's Tuesday.... We need to find a candidate who walks the talk.

Here's the interesting dilemma in special influence. When Govt INSISTs that it has the mandate to meddle in lightbulbs, toilets and every other aspect of our lives. Do you really want bureaucrats making ALL these decisions while business is muzzled and neutered? I WANT energy producers INVOLVED in energy policy. I WANT politicians to be informed as to what's in the R&D labs of the companies they're about to dictate to.. By the very definitiion of asserting a regulatory or funding role, the govt CAUSES the collusion. And if they INSIST on meddling -- It STUPID to muzzle the Millions of people who are experts on how stuff works.

So -- libertarians like me have come to conclusion that the proximate cause of corp/govt collusion is that govt is OVER-REACHING in it's ambition to centrally plan every aspect of our economy. And if that sphere of influence was cut back -- Industry would leave a lot of vacant properties on K Street..

Any step heading that general direction is one worth taking.

Personally, I think We, The Peeps should invest in R&D by funding university developments and one-time only direct economic input into various private enterprises for R&D, with no promise of follow up contributions, and no change to the tax obligations of the company. Spending is spending and taxing is taxing.

That being said, I like where you're headed.

 

[Bfgrn]

You have any of your own thoughts, midcan? Besides the 'spoiled hippie' slur?

Lots but would it make much difference? Check out my many threads sometimes. This is the usual empty criticism I hear from those who sound like automatons. You're not one yet in my mind, please don't become one. Debate don't ad hom.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/educa...higher-education-in-nevada-2.html#post3421216

And this is old.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/general-discussion/93856-and-you-know-that-how.html#post1685325

There are libertarians who I greatly admire, like Barry Goldwater, John Dean, Victor Gold and Harry Browne. But none of the 'libertarians' I see on this board talk anything like those people.

 

[dblack]

This is the usual empty criticism I hear from those who sound like automatons. You're not one yet in my mind, please don't become one. Debate don't ad hom.

Your posted consisted of an empty insult and copy and paste quotes, and you want to scold me about ad hom? Seriously?

If this is your idea of productive discourse, I can't say I care how I'm characterized in your 'mind'.

 

[dblack]

You all should be dumping on the bad guys and gals who hide behind your philosophy.

So, would likewise expect to be held accountable for every loonie thing anyone calling themselves a 'liberal' might say?

Do understand I still think the weakness of reputable libertarianism is that, as the flip side of marxism, strong individuals will prey on the weak.

Libertarianism isn't strong individuals preying on the weak.

 

[wolf_22]

A recent CNN poll shows that libertarianism is on the rise in the last three years in the United States, more than at any point in the last two decades.

The poll, which CNN has conducted yearly since 1993, tracks the strength of social and economic libertarianism and reveals that both ideas are gaining popular support.

Sixty-three percent of respondents believe that government is doing too much, up from 52 percent in 2008. Half of all respondents said that government should not promote any set of traditional or moral values, up from 41 percent in 2008.

Libertarianism | CNN Poll | On The Rise | The Daily Caller

This sounds nice but my problem is that while people may look at those two questions and conclude that libertarianism is on the rise nowhere was the word "libertarian" used in the questioning. Just because you think the government is generally doing to much, and you don't think the government should promote any kind of values doesn't mean you're a libertarian. It would be interesting to see what percentage of the people polled would actually consider themselves libertarian.

I don't trust a lot of these polls either.
I read a great libertarian book that nearly converted me - and many of the L party players we have in politics today are different from that book

you get many cons who love the econ side of libertarians (L), but loathe the social part.
you get many libs who fully support the social part (and find little representation by democrats for their views), but find fault with the economic parts
and middle of the road people who have mixed views that lead them to not give a lot of support to libertarians

if only we had more choices.

I like the idea of having a game changer - of voting for a L like Ron Paul just because of his views on war and drugs and showing pro-choice candidates and politians who support social programs that we need more than a bone and empty campaign promise tossed at us.....likewise, it would be nice to see cons vote for his econ policies despite his views on drugs and such

maybe our leaders wouldn't be so complacent if we knew we had other choices besides them

 

[AVG-JOE]

'Societies of free individuals' is libertarian codetalk for a lack of accountability to their public communities. An example: a society has the duty to protect the young and the weak from those who prey upon them. Pedophilia comes to mind.

Yes, and 'constitutional rights' is codetalk for "meet behind Louie's at 5:30".

Show me recognized libertarian literature that claims we shouldn't protect children from pedophiles. Can you address anything libertarians actually say? OR is it just more fun to make up shit and attack your fantasies?

Thank you for implying there is a difference between "recognized" libertarians and pretend libertarians who code talk they want to do bad things without consequences. You all should be dumping on the bad guys and gals who hide behind your philosophy.

Do understand I still think the weakness of reputable libertarianism is that, as the flip side of marxism, strong individuals will prey on the weak.

Howizat?!?

You say we should dump on the assholes who give our label the name 'asshole'..... so you can tell us apart?

How do you tell anyone from an asshole when they ask you to be assholes to the assholes that are giving you the name 'asshole'?

Is that even possible without being a total asshole?
​

 

[AVG-JOE]

'Societies of free individuals' is libertarian codetalk for a lack of accountability to their public communities. An example: a society has the duty to protect the young and the weak from those who prey upon them. Pedophilia comes to mind.

Yes, and 'constitutional rights' is codetalk for "meet behind Louie's at 5:30".

Show me recognized libertarian literature that claims we shouldn't protect children from pedophiles. Can you address anything libertarians actually say? OR is it just more fun to make up shit and attack your fantasies?

Thank you for implying there is a difference between "recognized" libertarians and pretend libertarians who code talk they want to do bad things without consequences. You all should be dumping on the bad guys and gals who hide behind your philosophy.

Do understand I still think the weakness of reputable libertarianism is that, as the flip side of marxism, strong individuals will prey on the weak.

Labels aside, the strong of mind and body will always prey on the weak. It's a beautiful process, when viewed over time.

Strength of heart on the other hand is understanding 'enough' and spending a little strength to serve the community and help the weak. It's also Evolution in the last stages of a 10,000 year old turn towards the stars.

It is so ******* to be alive here and now.




I like The Constitution. We should get back to a federal government that protects the states while they run themselves. We could use a little more variety.

Call me a Constitutional Liberal.