a question on libertarianism

[Antonio the Sixth]

Libertarianism is an old and recognized philosophy that makes perfectly sense. I agree with it on some parts, though I have difficulties to understand the most extremist libertarians.

[Scam of God]

lol

Einzige, serious question: What is it about me that actually ruffles your feathers? Obviously there's something else going on here. Answer that and maybe I'll give you a serious reply.

The fact that you pretend to be a libertarian, and so twist that word into something beneficial to the Far Right, whom you serve. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Mint]

Einzige, you've accused me of literally lying about my positions not just my ideology. Obviously there's some other personal issue here.

[Scam of God]

Einzige, you've accused me of literally lying about my positions not just my ideology. Obviously there's some other personal issue here.

Since you've lied about ideology, then, as an inevitable result you lie about your positions every time you post. Or, to put it another way: you conveniently cherrypick from right-libertarian dogma what best suits your allies' ears, and ignore those things you find inconvenient. I'm here to remind you that there's more to it than that.

[Mint]

lol

Okay so I've lied about being pro choice, pro gay rights (and bisexual), pro drug legalization, pro legalized prostitution, anti-obscenity laws/fcc, anti-patriot act, anti-military industrial complex, etc. I'm really an evangelical Republican. Yeah, that's not paranoid.

[Scam of God]

lol

Okay so I've lied about being pro choice, pro gay rights (and bisexual), pro drug legalization, pro legalized prostitution, anti-obscenity laws/fcc, anti-patriot act, anti-military industrial complex, etc. I'm really an evangelical Republican. Yeah, that's not paranoid.

What you lie about, dear sir, is your opposition to the corporate State: you don't denounce in no uncertain terms any private-public "partnering"; your opposition to the military-industrial complex is, at best, tepid; you don't see the idea of using tax-rebate checks as being an inverse form of welfare. Again: you're selective as Hell in what you denounce from a libertarian perspective. If you were more vocal on those issues that put you on the left-wing of the political spectrum, perhaps then I wouldn't feel that trying to believe you is like swallowing a marble.

[fezzyfestoon]

What bothers you is that no one else has the same priorities you do.  That's only narrowmindedness, which is ironically contrary to libertarianism.  It's not that he (or I) don't support the same things you do, it's that we don't let it consume our entire political thought process and life.

[Scam of God]

What bothers you is that no one else has the same priorities you do.  That's only narrowmindedness, which is ironically contrary to libertarianism.  It's not that he (or I) don't support the same things you do, it's that we don't let it consume our entire political thought process and life.

When you're trying to correct a historical mistake - the transformation of libertarianism from a progressive political view to one that bolsters and supports the status-quo - then, yes, you'd let it become the center of your political thought, too.

It has more to do with your lack of balls than my narrow-mindedness. The fascists in this country are too convenient to totally give up on, aren't they?

[Mint]

What you lie about, dear sir, is your opposition to the corporate State: you don't denounce in no uncertain terms any private-public "partnering"

Why should I, if I think it will provide services as less cost and there's actual competition? That's not to say I think that's an effective policy for everything. For example, I've called out the health insurance 'mandates' and subsidies we have now as expensive failures/gifts to political contributors.

Also again, I've attacked the bail outs for months now. Those dwarf any of those other issues in terms of cost and long term impact. To call me 'pro corporate' when I've said that giving out free money to failed/corrupt industries is my biggest issue is just ignorant.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I called out the tax rebates in the stimulus and Bush's use of them before as basically back door welfare, especially when they went to people who didn't even pay income tax. That was actually one of the reasons I gave for why the Reagan and Kennedy tax cuts were more effective than Bush's.. And no I'm not going to dig through several threads to find them again, you should remember it since you were there anyway.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In case you haven't noticed, even liberals are less vocal on social issues here lately... Because we have several different economic crises going on. That's where most of the debate is in this country now, never mind this forum.

[nclib]

Lean option 3. Also it needs to be noted that most Libertarians are more concerned with less goverment than more freedom.

[Хahar 🤔]

I voted for Option 2. Libertarianism is a particularly American form of conservatism, most en vogue among the nouveau-riche, those who have money but not power. It has superficial similarities to liberalism, particularly of the Danish variety, but this is an example of convergent evolution.

[SPC]

I voted for Option 2. Libertarianism is a particularly American form of conservatism, most en vogue among the nouveau-riche, those who have money but not power. It has superficial similarities to liberalism, particularly of the Danish variety, but this is an example of convergent evolution.

Seriously?

[Хahar 🤔]

I voted for Option 2. Libertarianism is a particularly American form of conservatism, most en vogue among the nouveau-riche, those who have money but not power. It has superficial similarities to liberalism, particularly of the Danish variety, but this is an example of convergent evolution.

Seriously?

Yes, seriously. Mainstream libertarianism is an outgrowth of the right, taken to its logical extreme.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I voted for Option 2. Libertarianism is a particularly American form of conservatism, most en vogue among the nouveau-riche, those who have money but not power. It has superficial similarities to liberalism, particularly of the Danish variety, but this is an example of convergent evolution.

Seriously?

Yes, seriously. Mainstream libertarianism is an outgrowth of the right, taken to its logical extreme.

     Well, mainstream libertarianism is a bastardization advanced by the right. it is not to be confused with actual libertarianism.

[Хahar 🤔]

I voted for Option 2. Libertarianism is a particularly American form of conservatism, most en vogue among the nouveau-riche, those who have money but not power. It has superficial similarities to liberalism, particularly of the Danish variety, but this is an example of convergent evolution.

Seriously?

Yes, seriously. Mainstream libertarianism is an outgrowth of the right, taken to its logical extreme.

     Well, mainstream libertarianism is a bastardization advanced by the right. it is not to be confused with actual libertarianism.

Actual libertarianism isn't important enough to be considered "libertarianism" without qualifiers.

[Stranger in a strange land]

It's own philosophy, though more accurately a mix of several distantly related philosophies spanning from far left to far right.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Libertarianism shouldn't be equated with Classical Liberalism really, which was a much more complex movement than most people here understand it (and was effectively in many countries, especially Latin American, basically Pro-British Imperialism).