Libertarianism on the rise in the last three years

[Bfgrn]

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.

If we follow their Austrian School 'hands off' policy, that is exactly what will happen.

 

[AVG-JOE]

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 ?!?!?

.

Absolutely not.

I've known many government employees from federal to city and they'll be the first to tell you government is poorly managed.

Besides, who better to explain the traffic flow if ever a 'New and Improved' Congress is seated?

 

[midcan5]

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'.

Why is that an empty insult? Seems to me it sums up libertarians well. Please realize I have been over this ground lots, and it is old and boring. They are quotes from articles others may find interesting and hopefully useful. If you can't debate the comparison or care not to challenge yourself with a bit of reading, move on. For those of us a bit older comparison fits well. This board holds more people than you - stop living in typical self centered libertarian universe.

Libertarianism in a Nutshell - slightly revised from here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/50564-libertarianism-in-a-nutshell-ii.html

Rand's mother receives excellent care during her pregnancy
rand is born in a public education university hospital
he is well cared for in corporate day care
his parents have health insurance through work
he lives in a neighborhood in which the tax code provides excellent schools
he attends private school and his parents can easily afford tutors when needed
his grandparents provide the funds for college
he attends a state college and graduates with a business degree
in college he joins a libertarian group
libertarianism fits well with his political ideas
a friend of his father recommends him to a colleague for a job interview
he lands a job through these connections
he marries a woman of similar background and class
they have two children
he repeats much of the life of his parents and finally enters politics
he runs as a libertarian candidate in the republican party
his campaign stresses libertarian principles of individual freedom
free markets are the force that matter
the election is close
rand wins by a small fraction of available voters
he enters congress during a time of heavy budget deficits
an enormous budget package proposal includes reduced corporate taxes and a reduction in entitlements
rand true to his libertarian creed votes yes
his vote is among the deciding votes
many protesters hold signs of disagreement in the streets
breakfast and lunch services are stopped for many poor children
loans are limited for education funds
early child care is reduced dramatically
health care for the elderly also receives a large cutback
rand ponders these consequences but is true to his libertarian creed
after all he made it on his own didn't he?

Note: Assumptions of impossibility or fictional aspect are not counter arguments. The pretense of future possibilities is not a counter argument.


"Something is profoundly wrong with the way we live today. For thirty years we have made a virtue out of the pursuit of material self-interest: indeed, this very pursuit now constitutes whatever remains of our sense of collective purpose. We know what things cost but have no idea what they are worth. We no longer ask of a judicial ruling or a legislative act: is it good? Is it fair? Is it just? Is it right? Will it help bring about a better society or a better world? Those used to be the political questions, even if they invited no easy answers. We must learn once again to pose them." Tony Judt 'Ill Fares the Land'

 

[Mr.Nick]

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.

Well, people are getting tired of the authoritarian ideas of both the progressive communists, er "liberals" and the uber minority neo-cons.

 

[Lars]

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

Ironic you mentions cell mates and holocaust in the same post, because in many countries you can be put in a prison cell for questioning the Holocaust.

The nation you are most likely to be incarcerated in has 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prison population...

That nation; America, land of the 'free'...the city upon the hill

The irony is delicious

 

[Lars]

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

Ironic you mentions cell mates and holocaust in the same post, because in many countries you can be put in a prison cell for questioning the Holocaust.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Can't say it is objectively bad, but if you believe in free speech and free thought it is most certainly a bad thing. In that sense, I don't think Europe has changed much since the Middle Ages. Minus a small progression during the Enlightenment Era, Europe has regressed back towards repressive laws on individuals freedom in the form of speech codes. They simply replaced what kind of speech is now illegal. Where as in the old days you could not criticize the established Church or the Monarchy, now you cannot engage in "hate speech" or "seditious speech" or "holocaust denial".

 

[newpolitics]

You' re just another tax-and-spend libtard. You hate labels because you're on the wrong end of a lot of them.

It's not about the label of her shirt, it's about how she carries the fabric into negotiations and it's not about the car he drives it's the game he brings. I'm so ******* tired of labels...

Fiscally, I'm looking for candidates to support who shun lobbyists and show me they understand the concept of fair taxes and appropriate regulation rather than low taxes and no regulation. I'm also looking for candidates who support a strict return to PAYGO

On social issues I'm looking for candidates of character. If taxes are fair, spending is limited to what is collected and professional lobbying is relegated to the history books, maybe the states will have some money left over to keep things tidy for the tourists.

Why do you say that, because he want a responsible government? I don't see what idea was so offensive. You WANT lobysists? You really want NO regulation after the financial crisis? Have you been watching the news over the past three years?????

 

[Steelplate]

The weird offshoot of ultra-right individualist anarchism that is called "libertarian" here happens to amount to advocacy of perhaps the worst kind of imaginable tyranny, namely unaccountable private tyranny.

HUH?

WTF?

Ohhhhhhhh, you be using Orwellian doublespeak........"unaccountable private tyranny".

I gather that you prefer ."unaccountable public tyranny"....right?

.

In a Democratic Society, there is always Accountability in the Public Sector... it's called an election.

 

[Lars]

You' re just another tax-and-spend libtard. You hate labels because you're on the wrong end of a lot of them.

It's not about the label of her shirt, it's about how she carries the fabric into negotiations and it's not about the car he drives it's the game he brings. I'm so ******* tired of labels...

Fiscally, I'm looking for candidates to support who shun lobbyists and show me they understand the concept of fair taxes and appropriate regulation rather than low taxes and no regulation. I'm also looking for candidates who support a strict return to PAYGO

On social issues I'm looking for candidates of character. If taxes are fair, spending is limited to what is collected and professional lobbying is relegated to the history books, maybe the states will have some money left over to keep things tidy for the tourists.

You really want NO regulation after the financial crisis? Have you been watching the news over the past three years?????

I have been following the crisis rather extensively, and am of the opinion that yes, there should be massive financial deregulation and that state intervention created the financial crisis we are in today. Now since you are such a staunch advocate of regulation, maybe you can cite one regulation that was removed, and explain how the elimination this regulation led to the subprime market and subsequent default that resulted in our current situation today. Your notion that George W Bush presided over a period of massive deregulation is simply false. In fact, with every financial bubble, there has come a new series of regulations which have lead to more severe bubbles than the last.

 

[idb]

God I hate Libertarians!!

Wait...which ones are they again???

 

[editec]

TEAM players fleeing from their former parties are seeking some ideological base that they can sign onto.

Who can blame folks for that?

Libertarianism, (which actually doesn't have a clear platform) sounds appealing.

After all, it has at its root the word LIBERTY in it so that must be good, right?

 

[The Rabbi]

Ironic you mentions cell mates and holocaust in the same post, because in many countries you can be put in a prison cell for questioning the Holocaust.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Can't say it is objectively bad, but if you believe in free speech and free thought it is most certainly a bad thing. In that sense, I don't think Europe has changed much since the Middle Ages. Minus a small progression during the Enlightenment Era, Europe has regressed back towards repressive laws on individuals freedom in the form of speech codes. They simply replaced what kind of speech is now illegal. Where as in the old days you could not criticize the established Church or the Monarchy, now you cannot engage in "hate speech" or "seditious speech" or "holocaust denial".

If you think Europe is about the same as it was in the Middle Ages you are one of the biggest loons on this site. And that's saying somehting.
Equating "hate speech" with Holocaust denial is simply wrong.

 

[dblack]

Libertarianism, (which actually doesn't have a clear platform) sounds appealing.

??? I usually see libertarians getting criticized for being too consistent and ideological rather than lacking clarity. But here you're saying libertarianism doesn't have 'clear platform'? Compared to what? The Democrats and Republicans?

 

[Dr.Drock]

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.

Usually when people talk about the strong preying on the weak it's codetalk for "I hate capitalism."

 

[dblack]

Usually when people talk about the strong preying on the weak it's codetalk for "I hate capitalism."

This 'codetalk' tactic is a rather interested development. It kind of like the ultimate, general purpose strawman. For instance, I might say 'social justice' is codetalk for beating baby seals over the head with a club. Is that how it works?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Usually when people talk about the strong preying on the weak it's codetalk for "I hate capitalism."

This 'codetalk' tactic is a rather interested development. It kind of like the ultimate, general purpose strawman. For instance, I might say 'social justice' is codetalk for beating baby seals over the head with a club. Is that how it works?

I'm talking about the person who told you libertarianism would allow the strong to prey on the weak.

Which is just a bland talking point, that's happened throughout humanity, happens now, and will happen forever.

If anyone wants to see a group of people taking advantage of those of less means, take a look at what our status quo reps and dems have been doing to the middle class for decades.

 

[dblack]

I'm talking about the person who told you libertarianism would allow the strong to prey on the weak.

Which is just a bland talking point, that's happened throughout humanity, happens now, and will happen forever.

If anyone wants to see a group of people taking advantage of those of less means, take a look at what our status quo reps and dems have been doing to the middle class for decades.

I hear ya. And I agree. I was just commenting on this 'codetalk' thing, as I find it rather a rather annoying debate tactic. Sort of the 'mini-me' of the classic strawman.

 

[uscitizen]

The weird offshoot of ultra-right individualist anarchism that is called "libertarian" here happens to amount to advocacy of perhaps the worst kind of imaginable tyranny, namely unaccountable private tyranny.

HUH?

WTF?

Ohhhhhhhh, you be using Orwellian doublespeak........"unaccountable private tyranny".

I gather that you prefer ."unaccountable public tyranny"....right?

.

In a Democratic Society, there is always Accountability in the Public Sector... it's called an election.

Elections are merely popularity contests.

 

[Bill Angel]

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.

Usually when people talk about the strong preying on the weak it's codetalk for "I hate capitalism."

Libertarianism can appear appear to endorse strong individuals ignoring the needs of the sick and the weak. To quote from the Libertarian Party literature:

"The words "health care" and "medicine" are not found anywhere in the Constitution. Accordingly, the Libertarian Party asserts that Congress has no authority to regulate or appropriate money for health care."

See Libertarian Party opposes health care plan

So what are sick people with no heath insurance supposed to do? Simply kill themselves?
I've read that Libertarians consider euthanasia to be morally acceptable:

Libertarian argument
This is a variation of the individual rights argument.
* If an action promotes the best interests of everyone concerned and violates no one's rights then that action is morally acceptable
* In some cases, euthanasia promotes the best interests of everyone involved and violates no one's rights
* It is therefore morally acceptable
See the section titled "Libertarian argument" in Overview of pro-euthanasia arguments

 

[Dr.Drock]

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



Libertarianism isn't strong individuals preying on the weak.

Usually when people talk about the strong preying on the weak it's codetalk for "I hate capitalism."

Libertarianism can appear appear to endorse strong individuals ignoring the needs of the sick and the weak. To quote from the Libertarian Party literature:

"The words "health care" and "medicine" are not found anywhere in the Constitution. Accordingly, the Libertarian Party asserts that Congress has no authority to regulate or appropriate money for health care."

See Libertarian Party opposes health care plan

So what are sick people with no heath insurance supposed to do? Simply kill themselves?
I've read that Libertarians consider euthanasia to be morally acceptable:

Libertarian argument
This is a variation of the individual rights argument.
* If an action promotes the best interests of everyone concerned and violates no one's rights then that action is morally acceptable
* In some cases, euthanasia promotes the best interests of everyone involved and violates no one's rights
* It is therefore morally acceptable
See the section titled "Libertarian argument" in Overview of pro-euthanasia arguments

Ahhh, the old "if you don't support Obamacare you don't care about the sick or weak" line.

Ron Paul is the face of modern libertarianism, this is a man who worked for charitable hospitals for decades and saw first hand Americas ability to help those in need when they have expendable income (i.e. when taxes and spending are low).