What Is Libertarianism?

Kevin_Kennedy

Defend Liberty
Aug 27, 2008
18,450
1,823
205
There seem to be many misconceptions about what libertarianism is on USMB, so as a libertarian I’ve decided to try to clear some of this up. If I miss something then hopefully the other board libertarians will jump in and add to this.

The Philosophy:
The core of libertarianism as an ideology is the nonaggression axiom, which states that no one may aggress against another. No one may aggress against the property rights, or personal rights of another person. Libertarians make no distinction between private individuals and the state in this regard.

The Libertarian Party:
The Libertarian Party does not represent every libertarian. The Libertarian Party started off in the 1970’s as a radical libertarian political party under the watchful eye of “Mr. Libertarian” Murray N. Rothbard. In recent years, however, the Libertarian Party has tried to make itself more appealing to the masses by toning down its radical platform and moving more towards conservatism, in the opinion of many libertarians including myself. While we may vote for Libertarian Party candidates, we don’t necessarily think the LP is the best representation of libertarianism.

Minarchism vs. Anarchism:
Yes, there are anarchists who are also libertarians. They are anarcho-capitalists, who believe that a government is unnecessary because the free market can supply anything that the government can for less money, more efficiently, and without aggressing against the rights of the citizens.

However, not all libertarians are anarchists, and I don’t believe any of the libertarians present on this board are anarchists. We’re minarchists, or believers in strictly-limited government.

Individualism:
Libertarianism focuses on individualism, or individual rights of every person. Now I’ve seen posts from opponents of libertarianism that try to imply that we think every individual should be forced to do everything for themselves, or drop out of society, or some other nonsensical idea. Libertarians have no problem with individuals acting along with other individuals in a society, or dropping out of society all together if that’s what they choose to do. What we don’t support is the ridiculous notion of collective rights outweighing the rights of the individual. We would not support any action that aggresses against the rights of an individual for some claim that “it’s for the greater good.” Society as a whole benefits when we respect the rights of each individual, not when we aggress against a minority for the “benefit” of the majority.

Ayn Rand:
Ayn Rand, author of Atlas Shrugged, was not a libertarian. Ayn Rand had her own philosophy called “Objectivism,” and despised libertarians. Here are her thoughts on libertarians:

“I’ve read nothing by a Libertarian (when I read them, in the early years) that wasn’t my ideas badly mishandled—i.e., had the teeth pulled out of them—with no credit given. I didn’t know whether I should be glad that no credit was given, or disgusted. I felt both. They are perhaps the worst political group today, because they can do the most harm to capitalism, by making it disreputable.”

You can find more at this link:

The Ayn Rand Institute: Ayn Rand's Q & A on Libertarianism

So these are where some of the common misconceptions about libertarianism arise, and I hope that this is cleared up some of them.
 
I thought that Libertarianism was a disease that caused your growth to be stunted if you believed in too much Liberty. I skipped Civics class a lot in high school.
 
The core of libertarianism as an ideology is the nonaggression axiom

Such is the first agreement in all social contracts. You have said nothing meaningful.
Libertarianism focuses o.n... individual rights of every person.

same as Liberalism and many forms of socialism

Libertarians have no problem with individuals acting along with other individuals in a society

And if those individuals choose to hold something in common- such as books in a library or a public road?
, or dropping out of society all together if that’s what they choose to do.
Then should the Libertarian, instead of decrying society, simply become a hermit or form a commune with like-minded persons?
 
Responsibility is freedom.

Libertarianism is, as the name implies, the belief in liberty. Libertarians strive for a free, peaceful, abundant world where each individual has the maximum opportunity to pursue his or her dreams and to realize his full potential.

The core idea is simply stated, but profound and far-reaching in its implications. Libertarians believe that each person owns his own life and property, and has the right to make his own choices as to how he lives his life – as long as he simply respects the same right of others to do the same.

Another way of saying this is that libertarians believe you should be free to do as you choose with your own life and property, as long as you don't harm the person and property of others.

Libertarianism is thus the combination of liberty (the freedom to live your life in any peaceful way you choose), responsibility (the prohibition against the use of force against others, except in defense), and tolerance (honoring and respecting the peaceful choices of others).
 
Ayn Rand had her own cult and everything. I still don't know why certain Libertarians love her. I'm pretty sure Ron Paul and his son does, I could be wrong though. I know Ryan does, he passes her books out to his entire staff.
 
Responsibility is freedom.

Libertarianism is, as the name implies, the belief in liberty. Libertarians strive for a free, peaceful, abundant world where each individual has the maximum opportunity to pursue his or her dreams and to realize his full potential.

The core idea is simply stated, but profound and far-reaching in its implications. Libertarians believe that each person owns his own life and property, and has the right to make his own choices as to how he lives his life – as long as he simply respects the same right of others to do the same.

Another way of saying this is that libertarians believe you should be free to do as you choose with your own life and property, as long as you don't harm the person and property of others.te

Libertarianism is thus the combination of liberty (the freedom to live your life in any peaceful way you choose), responsibility (the prohibition against the use of force against others, except in defense), and tolerance (honoring and respecting the peaceful choices of others).

The "core idea" is mindful of those who occupied the Haight-Ashbury forty years ago. Of course many who lived here then said they believed these things, as they preyed on those who actually did.
We may label each other with different words at different times and in different places, but human nature never changes.
There are takers and givers, we may call them Republicans or Democrats or Libertarians, but when reduced to their essence, individual human being are one or the other.
 
The core of libertarianism as an ideology is the nonaggression axiom

Such is the first agreement in all social contracts. You have said nothing meaningful.
Libertarianism focuses o.n... individual rights of every person.

same as Liberalism and many forms of socialism

Libertarians have no problem with individuals acting along with other individuals in a society

And if those individuals choose to hold something in common- such as books in a library or a public road?
, or dropping out of society all together if that’s what they choose to do.
Then should the Libertarian, instead of decrying society, simply become a hermit or form a commune with like-minded persons?

Except that under a social contract it is extremely likely that somebody's individual rights will be violated, thus going against the nonaggression axiom.

Socialism deals in the collective, not the individual. And I suppose it depends on what form of liberalism you're referring to, between classical liberalism and modern liberalism.

If those individuals choose to form together to own a library or a public road then there's no issue, but if they try to force others through taxation to subsidize their library and road then we have an issue.

If that's what they want to do.
 
Ayn Rand had her own cult and everything. I still don't know why certain Libertarians love her. I'm pretty sure Ron Paul and his son does, I could be wrong though. I know Ryan does, he passes her books out to his entire staff.

I'm personally not a fan, but you're correct about Ron and Rand Paul.
 
Except that under a social contract it is extremely likely that somebody's individual rights will be violated, thus going against the nonaggression axiom.

So there's no society in a Libertarian fantasy world? There are no written Constitutions or laws?

Anarchists are retards and you advocate anarchy.
Socialism deals in the collective, not the individual.

Socialism advocates collective action and cooperation. Many schools of socialist thought are rooted in the individual when it comes to what constitutes just and unjust law.
And I suppose it depends on what form of liberalism you're referring to, between classical liberalism and modern liberalism.

Many who attempt to coopt the term today are not ideological Liberals.
If those individuals choose to form together to own a library or a public road then there's no issue, but if they try to force others through taxation to subsidize their library and road then we have an issue.

Which according to your own ideology, as you described above, means that they who have desire to participate are free to leave.

The Libertarian you describe is a schizophrenic hermit in the mountains.
 
Except that under a social contract it is extremely likely that somebody's individual rights will be violated, thus going against the nonaggression axiom.

So there's no society in a Libertarian fantasy world? There are no written Constitutions or laws?

Anarchists are retards and you advocate anarchy.
Socialism deals in the collective, not the individual.

Socialism advocates collective action and cooperation. Many schools of socialist thought are rooted in the individual when it comes to what constitutes just and unjust law.
And I suppose it depends on what form of liberalism you're referring to, between classical liberalism and modern liberalism.

Many who attempt to coopt the term today are not ideological Liberals.
If those individuals choose to form together to own a library or a public road then there's no issue, but if they try to force others through taxation to subsidize their library and road then we have an issue.

Which according to your own ideology, as you described above, means that they who have desire to participate are free to leave.

The Libertarian you describe is a schizophrenic hermit in the mountains.

So despite the fact that I plainly say in the first post that I am not an anarchist, I am advocating anarchy? And because the libertarian does not believe in the right of a large group of people to force a smaller group of people to subsidize roads or libraries for them the libertarian is a mentally ill hermit in the mountains?

I'm sorry JB, I'm not interested in playing your game.
 

Forum List

Back
Top