Libertarianism in America
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 12:35:19 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  Libertarianism in America
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Libertarianism in America  (Read 2025 times)
segwaystyle2012
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,366


Political Matrix
E: 9.68, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: December 16, 2009, 07:43:21 PM »

I became a libertarian because the Bush administrations policies absolutely appalled me. I'm dedicatedly pro-life but have lost all trust in government to stay within its Constitutional limits. War crimes, privacy violations, etc. are all very important to me and I don't think I'm alone. Libertarianism is something I believe many Americans can agree with. It's our fault we fail- the radical anarchists have been portrayed as the stereotypical libertarian; I find that detrimental to our cause. We can scale back the intrusions of the government and protect our rights without absolutely destroying the framework of America. Agree or disagree?

Can we make 2010/2012 ours?
Logged
President Mitt
Giovanni
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,347
Samoa


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: December 16, 2009, 07:44:20 PM »

I became a libertarian because the Bush administrations policies absolutely appalled me. I'm dedicatedly pro-life but have lost all trust in government to stay within its Constitutional limits. War crimes, privacy violations, etc. are all very important to me and I don't think I'm alone. Libertarianism is something I believe many Americans can agree with. It's our fault we fail- the radical anarchists have been portrayed as the stereotypical libertarian; I find that detrimental to our cause. We can scale back the intrusions of the government and protect our rights without absolutely destroying the framework of America. Agree or disagree?

Agree, but wrong board.
Logged
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: December 16, 2009, 07:45:29 PM »

It's our fault we fail- the radical anarchists have been portrayed as the stereotypical libertarian; I find that detrimental to our cause.
What? On the contrary, its Republican neocons like Bob Barr and Glenn Beck who have been portrayed as the "stereotypical libertarian."
Logged
Scam of God
Einzige
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,159
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.19, S: -9.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: December 16, 2009, 08:16:35 PM »
« Edited: December 16, 2009, 08:18:47 PM by Scam of God »

It's our fault we fail- the radical anarchists have been portrayed as the stereotypical libertarian; I find that detrimental to our cause.
What? On the contrary, its Republican neocons like Bob Barr and Glenn Beck who have been portrayed as the "stereotypical libertarian."

Correct. Moreover, there has been far, far too much intermarriage in recent years between libertarians and the Religious Right/authoritarian populists.

On economics, we need a positive plan that doesn't stop at deregulating businesses. I want to encourage distributivist policies in libertarian thought - I want a plan to eliminate taxes on certain goods that are useful for manufacturing items in the home, to make it far easier for the poor and workers to start their own business. We also need to put our money where our mouths are when it comes to free-market principles - it's not enough to be pro-market when it helps large corporations; we need to use those principles to level the playing field between established industries and their competitors.

On social issues, I absolutely refuse to work with authoritarians. Too much has been surrendered to them already.
Logged
Free Palestine
FallenMorgan
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,022
United States
Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -10.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: December 16, 2009, 09:03:16 PM »

Libertarians have the wrong strategy.  We need to unite as one party, and begin a grassroots campaign to get libertarians in office.  Big government will remain as long as we continue voting for our respective "lesser of two evils."  Libertarians have tried to work "through" their respective parties, with very minimal success.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,021


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: December 16, 2009, 10:36:34 PM »

The problem is that the large majority of Americans are lazy, and would rather be told what to do rather than have the freedom to do as they please. They "say" they'd prefer to have smaller government, but they always go to the voting booth and vote for who will give them more.
Logged
Scam of God
Einzige
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,159
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.19, S: -9.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: December 16, 2009, 10:43:50 PM »

The problem is that the large majority of Americans are lazy, and would rather be told what to do rather than have the freedom to do as they please. They "say" they'd prefer to have smaller government, but they always go to the voting booth and vote for who will give them more.

Which is why we must tie in some economic benefits to the lower classes - as long as libertarianism is seen as being purely an upper class phenomenon (erroneously, as the great leaders of industry have no desire to cede space to competition that a free-market would create) or a purely reactionary economic policy, we will get nowhere.
Logged
sentinel
sirnick
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,733
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -6.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: December 16, 2009, 11:54:33 PM »

Libertarianism is completely incapable of being practical. Libertarianism idealizes the right to property, but the government in libertarian political thought lacks the tools neccessary to secure that right.

I like the "idea" that people have of libertarianism, but that is not what libertarianism is, and this idea is not what Hayek and Milton Friedman had in mind when they outlined their own libertarian political theory --which by the way, was incoherent. Hayek's "worst fear" was right when people it to the test --way to much government intervention, full control over the economy led to the sh**tter, but they also prove during these tests (I think the economist who tested these theories was Poliyani but I'm probably spelling that wrong) that significant government intervention could help the economy.
Logged
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: December 16, 2009, 11:57:36 PM »

Libertarianism is completely incapable of being practical. Libertarianism idealizes the right to property, but the government in libertarian political thought lacks the tools neccessary to secure that right.

I like the "idea" that people have of libertarianism, but that is not what libertarianism is, and this idea is not what Hayek and Milton Friedman had in mind when they outlined their own libertarian political theory --which by the way, was incoherent. Hayek's "worst fear" was right when people it to the test --way to much government intervention, full control over the economy led to the sh**tter, but they also prove during these tests (I think the economist who tested these theories was Poliyani but I'm probably spelling that wrong) that significant government intervention could help the economy.

Sorry, nothing you've said in this post at all backs up your attack on libertarianism.
Logged
sentinel
sirnick
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,733
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -6.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: December 17, 2009, 12:00:32 AM »

Libertarianism is completely incapable of being practical. Libertarianism idealizes the right to property, but the government in libertarian political thought lacks the tools neccessary to secure that right.

I like the "idea" that people have of libertarianism, but that is not what libertarianism is, and this idea is not what Hayek and Milton Friedman had in mind when they outlined their own libertarian political theory --which by the way, was incoherent. Hayek's "worst fear" was right when people it to the test --way to much government intervention, full control over the economy led to the sh**tter, but they also prove during these tests (I think the economist who tested these theories was Poliyani but I'm probably spelling that wrong) that significant government intervention could help the economy.

Sorry, nothing you've said in this post at all backs up your attack on libertarianism.

Sorry, didn't cite my source. Would you like MLA format?

Go read Redefining American Liberalism by James Young. See the chapter on the rise of conservatism in America.
Logged
sentinel
sirnick
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,733
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -6.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: December 17, 2009, 12:01:37 AM »

Libertarianism is completely incapable of being practical. Libertarianism idealizes the right to property, but the government in libertarian political thought lacks the tools neccessary to secure that right.

I like the "idea" that people have of libertarianism, but that is not what libertarianism is, and this idea is not what Hayek and Milton Friedman had in mind when they outlined their own libertarian political theory --which by the way, was incoherent. Hayek's "worst fear" was right when people it to the test --way to much government intervention, full control over the economy led to the sh**tter, but they also prove during these tests (I think the economist who tested these theories was Poliyani but I'm probably spelling that wrong) that significant government intervention could help the economy.

Sorry, nothing you've said in this post at all backs up your attack on libertarianism.

Sorry, didn't cite my source. Would you like MLA format?

Go read Redefining American Liberalism by James Young. See the chapter on the rise of conservatism in America.

or go read Milton Friedman's work or Hayek's work and then Poliyani's work.

I'm probably spelling the last guys name wrong.
Logged
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: December 17, 2009, 12:05:30 AM »

Libertarianism is completely incapable of being practical. Libertarianism idealizes the right to property, but the government in libertarian political thought lacks the tools neccessary to secure that right.

I like the "idea" that people have of libertarianism, but that is not what libertarianism is, and this idea is not what Hayek and Milton Friedman had in mind when they outlined their own libertarian political theory --which by the way, was incoherent. Hayek's "worst fear" was right when people it to the test --way to much government intervention, full control over the economy led to the sh**tter, but they also prove during these tests (I think the economist who tested these theories was Poliyani but I'm probably spelling that wrong) that significant government intervention could help the economy.

Sorry, nothing you've said in this post at all backs up your attack on libertarianism.

Sorry, didn't cite my source. Would you like MLA format?

Go read Redefining American Liberalism by James Young. See the chapter on the rise of conservatism in America.
This thread is about libertarianism, not conservatism or liberalism.
Logged
sentinel
sirnick
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,733
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -6.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 17, 2009, 12:18:13 AM »

Libertarianism is completely incapable of being practical. Libertarianism idealizes the right to property, but the government in libertarian political thought lacks the tools neccessary to secure that right.

I like the "idea" that people have of libertarianism, but that is not what libertarianism is, and this idea is not what Hayek and Milton Friedman had in mind when they outlined their own libertarian political theory --which by the way, was incoherent. Hayek's "worst fear" was right when people it to the test --way to much government intervention, full control over the economy led to the sh**tter, but they also prove during these tests (I think the economist who tested these theories was Poliyani but I'm probably spelling that wrong) that significant government intervention could help the economy.

Sorry, nothing you've said in this post at all backs up your attack on libertarianism.

Sorry, didn't cite my source. Would you like MLA format?

Go read Redefining American Liberalism by James Young. See the chapter on the rise of conservatism in America.
This thread is about libertarianism, not conservatism or liberalism.

I'm not a dumb sh**t. Do you think I'm pulling this out of my ass? I know what the thread is about thats why I'm discussing it. Clearly, if I'm referencing something it must talk about whatever I mentioned.

Young doesn't just talk about liberalism in the book, although it is based mostly around Lockean, laissez-faire and reform liberalism, he does give the other side including going into depth about conservatism, neoconservatives, libertarianism and other topics.
Logged
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 17, 2009, 12:20:31 AM »

Libertarianism is completely incapable of being practical. Libertarianism idealizes the right to property, but the government in libertarian political thought lacks the tools neccessary to secure that right.

I like the "idea" that people have of libertarianism, but that is not what libertarianism is, and this idea is not what Hayek and Milton Friedman had in mind when they outlined their own libertarian political theory --which by the way, was incoherent. Hayek's "worst fear" was right when people it to the test --way to much government intervention, full control over the economy led to the sh**tter, but they also prove during these tests (I think the economist who tested these theories was Poliyani but I'm probably spelling that wrong) that significant government intervention could help the economy.

Sorry, nothing you've said in this post at all backs up your attack on libertarianism.

Sorry, didn't cite my source. Would you like MLA format?

Go read Redefining American Liberalism by James Young. See the chapter on the rise of conservatism in America.
This thread is about libertarianism, not conservatism or liberalism.

I'm not a dumb sh**t. Do you think I'm pulling this out of my ass? I know what the thread is about thats why I'm discussing it. Clearly, if I'm referencing something it must talk about whatever I mentioned.

Young doesn't just talk about liberalism in the book, although it is based mostly around Lockean, laissez-faire and reform liberalism, he does give the other side including going into depth about conservatism, neoconservatives, libertarianism and other topics.

This is a discussion forum. I'm asking you to discuss why you think libertarianism is wrong and "incapable of being practical." I don't care what author so-and-so said.
Logged
sentinel
sirnick
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,733
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -6.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 17, 2009, 12:28:44 AM »

Libertarianism is completely incapable of being practical. Libertarianism idealizes the right to property, but the government in libertarian political thought lacks the tools neccessary to secure that right.

I like the "idea" that people have of libertarianism, but that is not what libertarianism is, and this idea is not what Hayek and Milton Friedman had in mind when they outlined their own libertarian political theory --which by the way, was incoherent. Hayek's "worst fear" was right when people it to the test --way to much government intervention, full control over the economy led to the sh**tter, but they also prove during these tests (I think the economist who tested these theories was Poliyani but I'm probably spelling that wrong) that significant government intervention could help the economy.

Sorry, nothing you've said in this post at all backs up your attack on libertarianism.

Sorry, didn't cite my source. Would you like MLA format?

Go read Redefining American Liberalism by James Young. See the chapter on the rise of conservatism in America.
This thread is about libertarianism, not conservatism or liberalism.

I'm not a dumb sh**t. Do you think I'm pulling this out of my ass? I know what the thread is about thats why I'm discussing it. Clearly, if I'm referencing something it must talk about whatever I mentioned.

Young doesn't just talk about liberalism in the book, although it is based mostly around Lockean, laissez-faire and reform liberalism, he does give the other side including going into depth about conservatism, neoconservatives, libertarianism and other topics.

This is a discussion forum. I'm asking you to discuss why you think libertarianism is wrong and "incapable of being practical." I don't care what author so-and-so said.

I mentioned it in my earlier post, but honestly, I hate political theory --its boring. Having thought I backed myself up enough for a brief comment, your asking me to back myself up more led me to believe that you wanted some nicely cited sources.

It's mainly incapable of being practical because the government fails to have the power to secure basic rights such as property. If the government had extensive rights to protect property then it would be going against libertarian ideas. On top of that libertarianism pushes for laissez-faire liberalism (in the form of unrestricted capitalism) which creates a huge incentive for socialism --which emerges from a desire to control the creative destructiveness that is capitalism.  It's creating its own worst enemy.
Logged
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: December 17, 2009, 12:29:59 AM »

Libertarianism is completely incapable of being practical. Libertarianism idealizes the right to property, but the government in libertarian political thought lacks the tools neccessary to secure that right.

I like the "idea" that people have of libertarianism, but that is not what libertarianism is, and this idea is not what Hayek and Milton Friedman had in mind when they outlined their own libertarian political theory --which by the way, was incoherent. Hayek's "worst fear" was right when people it to the test --way to much government intervention, full control over the economy led to the sh**tter, but they also prove during these tests (I think the economist who tested these theories was Poliyani but I'm probably spelling that wrong) that significant government intervention could help the economy.

Sorry, nothing you've said in this post at all backs up your attack on libertarianism.

Sorry, didn't cite my source. Would you like MLA format?

Go read Redefining American Liberalism by James Young. See the chapter on the rise of conservatism in America.
This thread is about libertarianism, not conservatism or liberalism.

I'm not a dumb sh**t. Do you think I'm pulling this out of my ass? I know what the thread is about thats why I'm discussing it. Clearly, if I'm referencing something it must talk about whatever I mentioned.

Young doesn't just talk about liberalism in the book, although it is based mostly around Lockean, laissez-faire and reform liberalism, he does give the other side including going into depth about conservatism, neoconservatives, libertarianism and other topics.

This is a discussion forum. I'm asking you to discuss why you think libertarianism is wrong and "incapable of being practical." I don't care what author so-and-so said.

I mentioned it in my earlier post, but honestly, I hate political theory --its boring. Having thought I backed myself up enough for a brief comment, your asking me to back myself up more led me to believe that you wanted some nicely cited sources.

It's mainly incapable of being practical because the government fails to have the power to secure basic rights such as property. If the government had extensive rights to protect property then it would be going against libertarian ideas. On top of that libertarianism pushes for laissez-faire liberalism (in the form of unrestricted capitalism) which creates a huge incentive for socialism --which emerges from a desire to control the creative destructiveness that is capitalism.  It's creating its own worst enemy.

The mere existence of government as it exists today is a violation of property rights.
Logged
Free Palestine
FallenMorgan
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,022
United States
Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -10.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: December 17, 2009, 12:43:43 AM »

Libertarianism is completely incapable of being practical. Libertarianism idealizes the right to property, but the government in libertarian political thought lacks the tools neccessary to secure that right.

I like the "idea" that people have of libertarianism, but that is not what libertarianism is, and this idea is not what Hayek and Milton Friedman had in mind when they outlined their own libertarian political theory --which by the way, was incoherent. Hayek's "worst fear" was right when people it to the test --way to much government intervention, full control over the economy led to the sh**tter, but they also prove during these tests (I think the economist who tested these theories was Poliyani but I'm probably spelling that wrong) that significant government intervention could help the economy.

Libertarianism:
1.   a person who advocates liberty, esp. with regard to thought or conduct.
2.   a person who maintains the doctrine of free will.

What you said is a narrow view of what libertarianism is.  You say that in libertarian thought, government lacks the tools to ensure oh-so-idealized property ownership.  That is not the case.  Most libertarians believe that there needs to be government - just not a government that demands part of your paycheck and tells you what you can and cannot do in your own home.
Logged
sentinel
sirnick
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,733
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -6.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: December 17, 2009, 12:53:04 AM »

Libertarianism is completely incapable of being practical. Libertarianism idealizes the right to property, but the government in libertarian political thought lacks the tools neccessary to secure that right.

I like the "idea" that people have of libertarianism, but that is not what libertarianism is, and this idea is not what Hayek and Milton Friedman had in mind when they outlined their own libertarian political theory --which by the way, was incoherent. Hayek's "worst fear" was right when people it to the test --way to much government intervention, full control over the economy led to the sh**tter, but they also prove during these tests (I think the economist who tested these theories was Poliyani but I'm probably spelling that wrong) that significant government intervention could help the economy.

Sorry, nothing you've said in this post at all backs up your attack on libertarianism.

Sorry, didn't cite my source. Would you like MLA format?

Go read Redefining American Liberalism by James Young. See the chapter on the rise of conservatism in America.
This thread is about libertarianism, not conservatism or liberalism.

I'm not a dumb sh**t. Do you think I'm pulling this out of my ass? I know what the thread is about thats why I'm discussing it. Clearly, if I'm referencing something it must talk about whatever I mentioned.

Young doesn't just talk about liberalism in the book, although it is based mostly around Lockean, laissez-faire and reform liberalism, he does give the other side including going into depth about conservatism, neoconservatives, libertarianism and other topics.

This is a discussion forum. I'm asking you to discuss why you think libertarianism is wrong and "incapable of being practical." I don't care what author so-and-so said.

I mentioned it in my earlier post, but honestly, I hate political theory --its boring. Having thought I backed myself up enough for a brief comment, your asking me to back myself up more led me to believe that you wanted some nicely cited sources.

It's mainly incapable of being practical because the government fails to have the power to secure basic rights such as property. If the government had extensive rights to protect property then it would be going against libertarian ideas. On top of that libertarianism pushes for laissez-faire liberalism (in the form of unrestricted capitalism) which creates a huge incentive for socialism --which emerges from a desire to control the creative destructiveness that is capitalism.  It's creating its own worst enemy.

The mere existence of government as it exists today is a violation of property rights.

So are you advocating for the elimination of government all together?

Libertarianism is completely incapable of being practical. Libertarianism idealizes the right to property, but the government in libertarian political thought lacks the tools neccessary to secure that right.

I like the "idea" that people have of libertarianism, but that is not what libertarianism is, and this idea is not what Hayek and Milton Friedman had in mind when they outlined their own libertarian political theory --which by the way, was incoherent. Hayek's "worst fear" was right when people it to the test --way to much government intervention, full control over the economy led to the sh**tter, but they also prove during these tests (I think the economist who tested these theories was Poliyani but I'm probably spelling that wrong) that significant government intervention could help the economy.

Libertarianism:
1.   a person who advocates liberty, esp. with regard to thought or conduct.
2.   a person who maintains the doctrine of free will.

What you said is a narrow view of what libertarianism is.  You say that in libertarian thought, government lacks the tools to ensure oh-so-idealized property ownership.  That is not the case.  Most libertarians believe that there needs to be government - just not a government that demands part of your paycheck and tells you what you can and cannot do in your own home.

The definition you just posted is a narrow view of what libertarianism is, hell, it looks like you pulled it off dictionary.com which isn't a great center for political thought.

I never said libertarians were anarchists, but the libertarian government lacks the tools neccessary to get the job done --if it does, then its going against the very idea of libertarianism.

 Everyone would prefer the government not to demand part of your paycheck and for the government to not tell them what to do in their own home. Does that make everyone a libertarian? I'm not a libertarian and I'd prefer that.
Logged
Free Palestine
FallenMorgan
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,022
United States
Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -10.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: December 17, 2009, 01:33:30 AM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh...no it doesn't.
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,678


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: December 17, 2009, 05:11:02 PM »

In regards to the specific question put forward by the original poster, whether Libertarians will be able to make 2010 or 2012 their year, the answer is clearly no, and I suspect many Libertarians know that I'm right about that. It simply isn't an ideology with widespread popular support.

That's not a post about the merits/demerits of Libertarianism, just a statement about its lack of mainstream adherents and fringe position.
Logged
Scam of God
Einzige
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,159
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.19, S: -9.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: December 17, 2009, 05:18:57 PM »

As I've said before: libertarianism is, in fact, compatible with class-war -- it represents the small business owner, the small co-operative, the man who favors distributivism and equality-through-decentralization, as against the large industry that uses the force of the State to support its policy of monopolization.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: December 19, 2009, 06:38:37 AM »

Economic libertarianism likely peaked a few years ago.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.253 seconds with 13 queries.