Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Well, as I said before, we've got Liberty candidates running for office all over the nation. They're, hopefully, going to try to fix the government from within. If you're waiting for me to say that a militia is forming to overthrow the government, I'm afraid you're going to be disappointed.
That disappointment I can put up with. Overthrowing governments by force from within, unless it's extremely necessary, is usually a bad idea.
But your Liberty candidates have a lot to get over. The current collapse around the world of the global financial system was caused by unregulated capitalism. Now, in terms of economic systems, what will the Liberty candidates be arguing for?
Well, you're wrong. It wasn't "unregulated capitalism" that caused this, because we don't have "unregulated capitalism." I think you're simply ignoring the Austrian economists and I on this fact, though I'll once again give you a link that will allow you to look into this for yourself.
Ludwig von Mises Institute - Homepage
As you've yet to explain how this system of "unregulated capitalism" caused the problem, I can only assume you're spouting the same nonsense you heard on the television. I would strongly recommend that you use the resources on the Mises website, and there are many, to look into the situation yourself.
As for what each individual liberty candidates stances are on economics, I obviously couldn't tell you. Many will, I'm sure, be advocates of free market economics, but possibly not all of them.
Letting as many people know as possible about limited government, and there are many liberty minded people running for Congress. B.J Lawson from North Carolina's 4th district for example. I'm also a member of Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty.
Campaign For Liberty — Home
I think he would absolutely see things the same way today. What's changed in the world that would change his mind? The American people are now under a more oppressive government than the one we broke away from in 1776, because we became complacent and let the federal government decide that it was very nearly all powerful.
And if you don't feel the need, or don't have the time, to peruse the Mises site, here's one article that gives reasons for why it's government regulation that actually caused this crisis.
The Myth that Laissez Faire Is Responsible for Our Present Crisis - George Reisman - Mises Institute
Greenspan is standing there with his mouth open doing a WTF? That's the reality of unregulated capitalism. The idea of laissez-faire capitalism just went down the toilet, reality flushed it away. Good luck with your ideologues, no-one is listening. Keynes just rode back into town.
So how do you appeal to people with that idea?
I need to make a point. I disagree with libertarianism as a philosophy because I really do think it atomises but I admit I'm pretty ignorant of the finer points so I'm sceptical but not blindly cynical. In other words I'm not being a prick about this as I will be to the McCain boosters.
Thanks Kevin but I'm not going to read that either. Make of that what you will but right now I'm thinking about the central issue, not side issues.
So you refuse to even listen to the other side of the argument? Despite the fact that Austrian economists predicted this crisis, when all those now screaming that the sky is falling were laughing at them telling them the fundamentals of the economy are strong? You also still give no reasons as to why "unregulated capitalism" is at fault for this crisis, which tells me, once again, that you're just repeating what you may have heard on tv. If you refuse to believe that perhaps those news casters are simply spreading the propaganda, then there really is nothing I can say to change your mind.
I would recommend this article, since you seem to have such a great opinion of Keynes. I know you won't read it, but maybe some other people will find it interesting. It basically shows how those that follow Keynesian economics differ from Austrian economics.
Austrian Economics vs. Bernanke's Economics - Gary Danelishen - Mises Institute
I'm not sure exactly what you're asking me. If you want my definition of Libertarianism then I've pretty much given that in this thread already. If you want to know more I would recommend the Libertarian Party website, but I doubt you'll go there.
Libertarian Party | Smaller Government | Lower Taxes | More Freedom
This is not a side issue, this is the issue. If a doctor gives a wrong diagnosis then the patient will not get better, and will probably get worse. This is what has happened in the case of this crisis. It's your choice to ignore facts, but please don't go around spreading nonsense with nothing to back it up on.
The idea of "Libertopia" that you're giving off there sounds a lot like complete anarchy, which I do not advocate. Many anarchists may consider themselves Libertarians, but not all Libertarians are anarchists.
The core of my beliefs are that the federal government must begin to work within it's Constitutional restraints, which are, as you know, a matter of debate themselves.
In my opinion, this means that the Constitution must be taken as it is. Absolutely no trying to squeeze out what meanings may be found to fit any politician's needs, but exactly what was meant by the founders when it was written.
I agree with Ron Paul when he says that the Constitution is not perfect, but it's still very good. If we find that the Constitution is lacking in a certain area, then we are always free to amend it.
Here are a few other ideas that I agree with.
Non-Interventionism:
Many on this board have followed John McCain's lead, and called this philosophy "isolationism." This is ridiculous. Non-Interventionism promotes free trade with all, and diplomacy with all. George W. Bush ran on this policy in 2000, but foolishly abandoned it after 9/11. He criticized the Clinton administration for nation building and policing the world, and he now does it on a much larger scale. We have to immediately end the "War on Terror." It's an endless and un-winnable war against ill defined enemies. This war is bankrupting our nation, and we're losing our soldiers. It's time to pull out of Iraq, pull out of Afghanistan, and bring our troops home from the rest of the world as well. It's also time to stop our hostility towards Iran, stop our economic and military aid towards Israel, and begin to foster diplomacy between the two of them.
Economics:
You know where I stand on sound money and abolishing the Fed, and I doubt we'll come to an agreement on that anytime soon.
But for starters, the Fed must stop inflating our money and they need to realize that the free market is better suited to handle our economic woes than they are.
Civil Liberties:
Repeal the Patriot Act and FISA Amendments immediately.
Yes I do refuse to listen and read. Why should I read rationalisations? I can see what's happening as a result of laissez-faire capitalism. I neither want to hear nor read apologia.
As for Keynes, yes, from what I know of him (a bit) and from what I've read of his work (a little) I think he has the answers now. But I reserve my great opinion for Marx and Engels. They have the answers for the future.
I haven't linked you to any rationalizations, I've linked you to facts. You can see what's happening, but you incorrectly label laissez-faire as the culprit. You also can't tell any of us how laissez-faire led to this crisis.
You believe Keynes has the answer, despite those who follow his theory not being able to predict this crisis long beforehand? The Austrian's saw this coming.
Since you have a high opinion of Marx and Engels, are you a socialist?
I haven't linked you to any rationalizations, I've linked you to facts. You can see what's happening, but you incorrectly label laissez-faire as the culprit. You also can't tell any of us how laissez-faire led to this crisis.
You believe Keynes has the answer, despite those who follow his theory not being able to predict this crisis long beforehand? The Austrian's saw this coming.
I bet you wouldn't if you sat and thought about it. I think you have an idea of the past that isn't congruent with reality. I don't mean that to sound snarky. Let me put it this way. If someone from US 1876 could swap places with someone in US 2008 (equal social status) then I think there would be two people fighting to say in US 2008.
Okay, I agree.
We could easily become more libertarian.
Where do we start?
At times he probably was, but do you think he would see things the same way today? I mean the young nation had just wrested its freedom from the most powerful empire the world has known, so I suppose he was very wary of the power of government (but you also have to see his view of government as being naturally oppressive, given the times). But I think even Jefferson, as erudite a man as he was, would see government differently now - but that is a totally hypothetical position by me.
