- 1,606
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2009
Libertarians tend to have conservative (economic) agenda. I'm more of the opposite, a statist. Those are people who believe in liberal economic policy likethe democrats do and less social freedom to an extent.
NT What Do You Think Of Libertarians?
- 482
- 11
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
Rex -
While you're concise and elegant summation of contemporary Libertarianism is laudable (truly), my first take upon reading the quote in question iss thatthe unknown author is summarizing the impressions of Libertarianism held by said spoiled kids. Perhaps the quote could be clarified:
While you're concise and elegant summation of contemporary Libertarianism is laudable (truly), my first take upon reading the quote in question iss thatthe unknown author is summarizing the impressions of Libertarianism held by said spoiled kids. Perhaps the quote could be clarified:
- 783
- 10
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2004
What's funny? Did he make a joke? Is he here to amuse you? Of all the democrats/liberals here I'll concede that you're the mostprincipled and smartest of the bunch and I like you for that but your interpretation of the word 'liberal' has been twisted and turned to meansomething its not. (if this directed to los yankees forget I typed it, if not I still stand by my comments.)Originally Posted by Essential1
. Oh boy.
Los Yankees good point about the old right, but seriously whose left? Today's Republicans mostly consist of neo-cons. When I made that comment I wasthinking more of today's right rather than conservatives of today. On the violent front, abortion is the one issue I struggle with trying to reconcile mybelief that a woman is free to chose and my belief of life.
A lot of you have a skewed perception of what Libertarianism entails and believes in. We are nothing like Republicans, though they espouse similar ideals. Weare nothing like Democrats. Both parties believe in a strong interventionist government regardless of size large verse small. The former to enforce it;stheocratic social agenda the latter a welfare social agenda, Libertarians tend to be more skeptical of those who seek or are in power.
Just because somebody claims to be a libertarian does not mean that they are one. Mostly the clowns you see on TV. Not sure if he is one but I really JohnStossel and his show on Fox Business (not to be confused with Fox News.
I'd love to add more but Rex and Los Yankee more or less shut it down
- 1,683
- 39
- Joined
- May 25, 2008
I would recommend that the majority of you read some literature on the subject before posting in this thread.
- 36,210
- 11,030
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Originally Posted by da703trailblaza
What's funny? Did he make a joke? Is he here to amuse you? Of all the democrats/liberals here I'll concede that you're the most principled and smartest of the bunch and I like you for that but your interpretation of the word 'liberal' has been twisted and turned to mean something its not. (if this directed to los yankees forget I typed it, if not I still stand by my comments.)Originally Posted by Essential1
. Oh boy.
Los Yankees good point about the old right, but seriously whose left? Today's Republicans mostly consist of neo-cons. When I made that comment I was thinking more of today's right rather than conservatives of today. On the violent front, abortion is the one issue I struggle with trying to reconcile my belief that a woman is free to chose and my belief of life.
A lot of you have a skewed perception of what Libertarianism entails and believes in. We are nothing like Republicans, though they espouse similar ideals. We are nothing like Democrats. Both parties believe in a strong interventionist government regardless of size large verse small. The former to enforce it;s theocratic social agenda the latter a welfare social agenda, Libertarians tend to be more skeptical of those who seek or are in power.
Just because somebody claims to be a libertarian does not mean that they are one. Mostly the clowns you see on TV. Not sure if he is one but I really John Stossel and his show on Fox Business (not to be confused with Fox News.
I'd love to add more but Rex and Los Yankee more or less shut it down
This is why the view is like that. I'll help you understand. And of course not everyone claiming to be liberal is liberal (Liebermann) and not everyLibertarian is Libertarian (Glenn Beck is a @$%+%*+ fool. That should be his ideology).. When there is a debate the libertarian ends up holding theconservative view point over 3/4 of the time(it's not 100% and more than 50% so Im taking the middle). And since I am not a purist and don't believethat being 1% off means you are not that, It makes you conservative. I hold different viewpoints from the liberal prospective from time to time. And I am muchmore in the center when it comes to war, does that make me no longer a liberal? Hell no. It makes me more so.
And you say Libertarians are skeptical of the government. Obviously.. But Conservatives are not?
That's where the Libertarian = over glorified conservative = over glorified republican... Because you all agree on a large majority of things all the waydown.. A libertarian may not agree with a republican... But he does with the conservative.. And the conservative agrees with the Republican a large majority..So it is a chain that makes that statement. Los agrees with Conservative ideology 100% of the time when he posts.. SO why call him anything different?
I understand where he is coming from with the classical liberal statement. But it is not liberalism anymore, and really wasn't liberalism to begin with. Itis conservatism. Just like Republicans were the liberals in 1800's the Democrats are today. Things change. That is why in essence I am a liberal. Becausethings change. So political landscape and policy need to change with it. Liberal when John Locke proposed it means Conservatism today. So why call himselfanything else but a Conservative or in his case a "Libertarian".
- 18,737
- 1,626
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2005
Posting to read later. No way i can read all that on this iPhone screen.
king beef
Banned
- 2,078
- 14
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
He is though.Originally Posted by Essential1
. Oh boy.
- 6,407
- 15,492
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2004
Essential1 wrote:
This is why the view is like that. I'll help you understand. And of course not everyone claiming to be liberal is liberal (Liebermann) and not every Libertarian is Libertarian (Glenn Beck is a @$%+%*+ fool. That should be his ideology).. When there is a debate the libertarian ends up holding the conservative view point over 3/4 of the time(it's not 100% and more than 50% so Im taking the middle). And since I am not a purist and don't believe that being 1% off means you are not that, It makes you conservative. I hold different viewpoints from the liberal prospective from time to time. And I am much more in the center when it comes to war, does that make me no longer a liberal? Hell no. It makes me more so.
BY your own admission (you said that you started following politics in 200, your sample size would be too small. Most of the debates of the last two yearshave been abnormally weighted on economics and the role of government and the rule of law in our lives. Over the last year and a half, economic issue aftereconomic issue has been at the forefront so it your time following politics, most visible issue have been points in which libertarians and many Conservativeswould agree. If you had been watching politics during a different set of years, when things like abortion, prayer in school, the drug war, gay marriage andother "social issues" were at the top of the public agenda, you would have seen libertarians siding frequently with people like you.
- 36,210
- 11,030
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
BY your own admission (you said that you started following politics in 200
, your sample size would be too small. Most of the debates of the last two years have been abnormally weighted on economics and the role of government and the rule of law in our lives. Over the last year and a half, economic issue after economic issue has been at the forefront so it your time following politics, most visible issue have been points in which libertarians and many Conservatives would agree. If you had been watching politics during a different set of years, when things like abortion, prayer in school, the drug war, gay marriage and other "social issues" were at the top of the public agenda, you would have seen libertarians siding frequently with people like you. possibly. But libertariaism comes in all forms. So are there some who are left leaning? Yes.. Right leaning? Yes.. Centrist? Yes.. I debate peoplewho call themselves "libertarians" on a wide variety of subjects. Not just economic debate and the majority of them have had not 1 liberal bone intheir body. Is it every libertarian? No.. even on non economic news the core libertarians are taking the right's viewpoint today. So let's just saythat libertarianism as a view point is something you can just call yourself whenever you don't want to embrace a party. Because if my dealings withlibertarians on a day to day basis either 1. Don't know what libertarians really means, or 2. embarrassed to call themselves conservative.
So if you guys really are centrists and your fellow Libertarian friend Los Yankees is not.. Then you have the wrong representation and should start waging waron these "hipster libertarians" because your viewpoint is going out of the window.
Also stop with this %%$$!%+! of "I by my own admission have started following politics closely since 2008". This is the second time you have said it.Yeah I haven't been live and breathe politics at 13. I started at 18. But at 13 I knew the players and could give you the round abouts of each viewpointand the implication. So this because I started following politics like it was Sportscenter in 2008 is not a valid statement because I been known politics as alittle guy without being interested in it. And in this 2 years I know more about politics today, in the past 300 years and before that than a lot of people whohave followed politics for decades. So keep that 1 statement to yourself.
edit: by the way the protection of life, liberty & happiness. Is not even the correct basis for an ideology to begin with.. Because really every mainideology in the US tries to make sure you can have the most possible of the 3..
- 6,407
- 15,492
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2004
Essential, what a real Libertarian believes is that humans are imperfect but by arranging our institutions, we can greatly improve our lot in life. We knowthat in order to have physical security, it is best to have a police force and a defense force and that those are best provisioned by government. We also knowthat government performs a few vital functions but we also know that because government is the institution with the ability to wield coercive force and becauseit is the sum of human actions, government needs to be tightly constrained by rule of law.
We also believe that the human condition improves in two ways. One of those ways is through innovation and creativity, things like great art, cures fordiseases new ways of heating and lighting our homes and providing transportation. These things are the fruits of a a single or a small collection of fewbrilliant minds and many of these forms of progress have happened in both the private sector as well as in government sponsored projects or through non profitsand other non commercial setting.
The other way that humanity's lot in life is improved is through humanity being able to coordinate its production and consumption. We believe that that isbest done through a system of prices, which aggregates massive amounts of data and communicates them to the relevant economic actors. Second, The promise ofprofits and the threat of losses motivates everyone involved to follow those prices and try to, as Walt E. Williams said, "serve his fellow man" sothat he can get wealthier and make larger "claim on the services of his fellow man." Third, property rights are also needed to under grid this and toensure that this activity of watching a responding to prices means that this person will be able to keep profits that he or she makes (and if they are taxed toknow in advance what percentage will be taken). Finally, we, unlike people on the left and some on the right, know that while patriotism and altruism andgovernment funding can do a lot to propel the innovative and creative method of improving life, this second and more mundane means of improving humanity'slot is optimally done with minimal government intervention.
We believe that government cannot change the moral fabric or the virtue of a society. Instead it is ultimately government that is affected by the morality ofthe times, not the inverse which is what is often times the assumption made today in politics. The fact that you believe some Libertarians are really justconservatives might come from the fact that people like Thomas Sowell, Walt E. Williams, Larry Elder and George Will (though the last two men are hybridconservative and libertarian) will lament the prevalence of things like teenage moms, drug abuse, absentee parents and other things they deem as social ills.Given the fact that it politics when someone laments something, that lamentation is almost always followed by calls for some law to be made to hopefully combatwhatever has just been identified as a problem. Those aforementioned writers and other libertarian and libertarian leaning commentators are not usually callingfor new laws, they are simply pointing out that social ills damage a society and.or that those social ills are being encouraged usually as a result ofgovernment programs having the unintended consequence of incentivizing a deviant behavior.
Within this frame work you can get a wide variety of view points and while belief in the primacy of the constitution, support for free markets and anadmiration sounds very conservative, when you look into the details you see that we libertarians are very different from conservatives and obviously fromleftists and democrats.
On the constitution, we really believe in it while the other two mainstream political parties (MSPP) use the constitution when it suites their arguments andwhen they want to prevent the other party from getting something. The Democrats used the constitution to go after President Bush and now they use it go afterthose who attempted to gather intelligence for the government. Republicans recently rediscovered the Constitution as a new prop to go long with their tricorner hats when they protest. The reality is that neither party wants government to always be constrained and constrained in a variety of ways. Libertariansactually do and we believe that the constitution matters whether it helps or hurts GOP or Democratic Party interests.
When it comes to free markets, many Republicans have the same mindset as big business, they are capitalists on the way up and socialists on the way down andconsidering who lobbies whom that makes sense. That makes sense politically, it is terrible in terms of policy. Republicans (and most Dems) are pro businesswhich is very difefrent from being market oreiented or pro free enterprize. A pro business person beleives that the prosperity of the country is one and thesame with the bottom line of existing firms and as result they will give them special tax breaks, subsidies, shield that firm from competition (by usingtariffs on foreign competitors and barriers to entry for domestic and potential domestic competition, with the consumers losing out) and when things go wrongFederal tax dollar financed bailouts. A pro market person beleives that no one firm deserves special favors and we would never support giving subidizes toprofitable firms or bailouts for insolvent firms.
Finally, when it comes to morality, LIbertarians can have their own personal views. Some of use are quite libertine or hedonists or epicurians (those whodislike libertarians would probably use this as an example of how libertarians are all just rich soiled kids who like to party and do not understand that theless fortunate cannot afford so many drugs and such much drink and that their privilege alows them the leisure time to use recreational drugs). Otherlibertarians are personally very seober, morally uprigh tand self disciplined (those who dislike libertarians would say that those people do not understandthat the less privileged need drugs and drink to ease the pain of not being privileged and that morallity is only for the wealthy and that these morallibertarians are only moral because their white privilege allows them that choice). What we agree upon is that morality is not something that can not really belegislated and that aside from a few situations where immoral acts are also malum in se, acts that would be criminal even without any laws againstthem, (child pornography or human trafficking) or instances where externalities are involved (A billboard with a naked women on it could be taken down by lawbecause it ceases to be private) there should not be any law pertaining to social issues. That is a huge break with conservatives.
When you take all of these things into consideration, Libertarians are the most progressive people on the planet. We want to move into the future and reach newlevels of prosperity, human happiness, peace, understanding, communication, sharing of cultures and a cleaner world. No other political ideology can claim thesame thing. Every other ideology wants control for its own sake. War is the most commo nway for the state to acheive this, war has been called the health ofthe state since the state began as an instution for waging war and that is what it does best. However, since we live in a much more pacific World than incenturies past there has been a desire to give a martial quality to whatever cause the mainstream parties want.
Republicnas wage their war on drugs, full of martial rhetoic and methods and it believes that this is a war and therefore a conflict against an existentialthreat, which then justifies the usurping of individual rights. In this decade we have seen the global war on terror and while terrorism has not been stopped,the right has another means to justify various invasions of privacy and the ability to arbitrarily and indefinitely hold some as a prisoner More recently, theDems are trying to recreate WWII and instead of fighting the axis powers we are fighting the evils of global climate change. While climate change is anexitential threat, the many cheaper and more simple solutions have been rarely discussed, all of the attention is on reducing carbo emisssions, an activitythat is costly, that will lower standards of living and will give a tremendous amount of power to the state.
The fact that The GOP and the Dems look to recreate wars of survival like the Civil War and the Second World war, conflicts that justified the suspension ofhabeas corpus and rationing and bureaucratic fiat in the economym shows me that they are not just conservatives, whih by the traditional definitions meansdefedners of the status quo. Both parties, by trying to militarize our domestic policy show themselves to be reactionaries, those who want to revert to thepast and who want restore old powers. Not only are they trying to recreate conditions that allowed the State a greatdeal of power and control, they want foeswho are ohantoms or whose defeat cannot never be certain, thus giving both parties a potentially unlimited time period of these war related, emergency powers.
We Libertarians oppose that, we oppose the gluttonous and ravenous state, which wants to eat you and your property and the fruits of your labors in the futureand your freedom to express dissent and the freedoms and the prosperity of your children not yet born and their children's children. When you and citizensof the world tire of the burdens of taxation and the yoke of your bloated and parasitic and self serving political classes, there is a solution and we havepresented it now. I hope that more people will embrace it that solution, true Libertarianism, classical liberalism, sooner rather then later because one day itmay be too late.
BTW, as a side note, essential, I was not try t put you down by mentioning that you had not been closely following politics since 2008. You said at the end of2008 that one of the things you liked most about 2008 was starting college and really getting into politics. When you mention, that your sample size wherepeople with whom you spoke or new stores that you have seen, I pointed out that your civic life (even if we include since you were 13) has been short and hascovered an abnormal period in which the major policy questions of the day have have largely been issues in which Libertarians and conservatives can find commonground.
I am not saying that because you are young, that you are wrong or that your opinions should be ignored.I only pointed it out because you said that off all ofthe things that you have seen and when someone who has very little experience uses the first person then that person's relative lack of experience doesbegin to matter. If you had said that over the last 30 or 40 years the Libertarian Party and Republicans Party have been in agreement on X% of the items intheir platforms, that would be a stronger argument and I would not have mentioned your relative youth as something to discount that argument.
I hope and assume (because you are smart) that you now understand why I mentioned your age as something that might weaken that particular line of argument.
We also believe that the human condition improves in two ways. One of those ways is through innovation and creativity, things like great art, cures fordiseases new ways of heating and lighting our homes and providing transportation. These things are the fruits of a a single or a small collection of fewbrilliant minds and many of these forms of progress have happened in both the private sector as well as in government sponsored projects or through non profitsand other non commercial setting.
The other way that humanity's lot in life is improved is through humanity being able to coordinate its production and consumption. We believe that that isbest done through a system of prices, which aggregates massive amounts of data and communicates them to the relevant economic actors. Second, The promise ofprofits and the threat of losses motivates everyone involved to follow those prices and try to, as Walt E. Williams said, "serve his fellow man" sothat he can get wealthier and make larger "claim on the services of his fellow man." Third, property rights are also needed to under grid this and toensure that this activity of watching a responding to prices means that this person will be able to keep profits that he or she makes (and if they are taxed toknow in advance what percentage will be taken). Finally, we, unlike people on the left and some on the right, know that while patriotism and altruism andgovernment funding can do a lot to propel the innovative and creative method of improving life, this second and more mundane means of improving humanity'slot is optimally done with minimal government intervention.
We believe that government cannot change the moral fabric or the virtue of a society. Instead it is ultimately government that is affected by the morality ofthe times, not the inverse which is what is often times the assumption made today in politics. The fact that you believe some Libertarians are really justconservatives might come from the fact that people like Thomas Sowell, Walt E. Williams, Larry Elder and George Will (though the last two men are hybridconservative and libertarian) will lament the prevalence of things like teenage moms, drug abuse, absentee parents and other things they deem as social ills.Given the fact that it politics when someone laments something, that lamentation is almost always followed by calls for some law to be made to hopefully combatwhatever has just been identified as a problem. Those aforementioned writers and other libertarian and libertarian leaning commentators are not usually callingfor new laws, they are simply pointing out that social ills damage a society and.or that those social ills are being encouraged usually as a result ofgovernment programs having the unintended consequence of incentivizing a deviant behavior.
Within this frame work you can get a wide variety of view points and while belief in the primacy of the constitution, support for free markets and anadmiration sounds very conservative, when you look into the details you see that we libertarians are very different from conservatives and obviously fromleftists and democrats.
On the constitution, we really believe in it while the other two mainstream political parties (MSPP) use the constitution when it suites their arguments andwhen they want to prevent the other party from getting something. The Democrats used the constitution to go after President Bush and now they use it go afterthose who attempted to gather intelligence for the government. Republicans recently rediscovered the Constitution as a new prop to go long with their tricorner hats when they protest. The reality is that neither party wants government to always be constrained and constrained in a variety of ways. Libertariansactually do and we believe that the constitution matters whether it helps or hurts GOP or Democratic Party interests.
When it comes to free markets, many Republicans have the same mindset as big business, they are capitalists on the way up and socialists on the way down andconsidering who lobbies whom that makes sense. That makes sense politically, it is terrible in terms of policy. Republicans (and most Dems) are pro businesswhich is very difefrent from being market oreiented or pro free enterprize. A pro business person beleives that the prosperity of the country is one and thesame with the bottom line of existing firms and as result they will give them special tax breaks, subsidies, shield that firm from competition (by usingtariffs on foreign competitors and barriers to entry for domestic and potential domestic competition, with the consumers losing out) and when things go wrongFederal tax dollar financed bailouts. A pro market person beleives that no one firm deserves special favors and we would never support giving subidizes toprofitable firms or bailouts for insolvent firms.
Finally, when it comes to morality, LIbertarians can have their own personal views. Some of use are quite libertine or hedonists or epicurians (those whodislike libertarians would probably use this as an example of how libertarians are all just rich soiled kids who like to party and do not understand that theless fortunate cannot afford so many drugs and such much drink and that their privilege alows them the leisure time to use recreational drugs). Otherlibertarians are personally very seober, morally uprigh tand self disciplined (those who dislike libertarians would say that those people do not understandthat the less privileged need drugs and drink to ease the pain of not being privileged and that morallity is only for the wealthy and that these morallibertarians are only moral because their white privilege allows them that choice). What we agree upon is that morality is not something that can not really belegislated and that aside from a few situations where immoral acts are also malum in se, acts that would be criminal even without any laws againstthem, (child pornography or human trafficking) or instances where externalities are involved (A billboard with a naked women on it could be taken down by lawbecause it ceases to be private) there should not be any law pertaining to social issues. That is a huge break with conservatives.
When you take all of these things into consideration, Libertarians are the most progressive people on the planet. We want to move into the future and reach newlevels of prosperity, human happiness, peace, understanding, communication, sharing of cultures and a cleaner world. No other political ideology can claim thesame thing. Every other ideology wants control for its own sake. War is the most commo nway for the state to acheive this, war has been called the health ofthe state since the state began as an instution for waging war and that is what it does best. However, since we live in a much more pacific World than incenturies past there has been a desire to give a martial quality to whatever cause the mainstream parties want.
Republicnas wage their war on drugs, full of martial rhetoic and methods and it believes that this is a war and therefore a conflict against an existentialthreat, which then justifies the usurping of individual rights. In this decade we have seen the global war on terror and while terrorism has not been stopped,the right has another means to justify various invasions of privacy and the ability to arbitrarily and indefinitely hold some as a prisoner More recently, theDems are trying to recreate WWII and instead of fighting the axis powers we are fighting the evils of global climate change. While climate change is anexitential threat, the many cheaper and more simple solutions have been rarely discussed, all of the attention is on reducing carbo emisssions, an activitythat is costly, that will lower standards of living and will give a tremendous amount of power to the state.
The fact that The GOP and the Dems look to recreate wars of survival like the Civil War and the Second World war, conflicts that justified the suspension ofhabeas corpus and rationing and bureaucratic fiat in the economym shows me that they are not just conservatives, whih by the traditional definitions meansdefedners of the status quo. Both parties, by trying to militarize our domestic policy show themselves to be reactionaries, those who want to revert to thepast and who want restore old powers. Not only are they trying to recreate conditions that allowed the State a greatdeal of power and control, they want foeswho are ohantoms or whose defeat cannot never be certain, thus giving both parties a potentially unlimited time period of these war related, emergency powers.
We Libertarians oppose that, we oppose the gluttonous and ravenous state, which wants to eat you and your property and the fruits of your labors in the futureand your freedom to express dissent and the freedoms and the prosperity of your children not yet born and their children's children. When you and citizensof the world tire of the burdens of taxation and the yoke of your bloated and parasitic and self serving political classes, there is a solution and we havepresented it now. I hope that more people will embrace it that solution, true Libertarianism, classical liberalism, sooner rather then later because one day itmay be too late.
BTW, as a side note, essential, I was not try t put you down by mentioning that you had not been closely following politics since 2008. You said at the end of2008 that one of the things you liked most about 2008 was starting college and really getting into politics. When you mention, that your sample size wherepeople with whom you spoke or new stores that you have seen, I pointed out that your civic life (even if we include since you were 13) has been short and hascovered an abnormal period in which the major policy questions of the day have have largely been issues in which Libertarians and conservatives can find commonground.
I am not saying that because you are young, that you are wrong or that your opinions should be ignored.I only pointed it out because you said that off all ofthe things that you have seen and when someone who has very little experience uses the first person then that person's relative lack of experience doesbegin to matter. If you had said that over the last 30 or 40 years the Libertarian Party and Republicans Party have been in agreement on X% of the items intheir platforms, that would be a stronger argument and I would not have mentioned your relative youth as something to discount that argument.
I hope and assume (because you are smart) that you now understand why I mentioned your age as something that might weaken that particular line of argument.
- 36,210
- 11,030
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
1st paragraph is a tightly held conservative viewpoint
2nd paragraph is a more liberal viewpoint
3rd paragraph is conservative
4th paragraph is the same conservative +*!!++%% talk told by people who have no clue what is best for people
6th paragraph you said "Libertarians actually do and we believe that the constitution matters whether it helps or hurts GOP or Democratic Partyinterests." Yeah because no one else cares what the constitution says at all. And by the way the constitution is not the most specific document ever. Sofollowing it to the T is almost impossible, and dangerous. Because while the founding fathers foresaw a lot they also couldn't have foreseen theextenuating factors. Which make something simple much more complicated.
7th paragraph now you are just arguing a difference that is small.. You throw the money at them (libertarians) they will bend too. But that's irrelevant.Point taken
8th paragraph I would not even bother for this paragraph if it was not for the ridiculous things you believe critics of libertarians said. It is deeplyoffensive, but whatever.
9th paragraph.. It is where it all became clear to me. In the first paragraph you talked about government power. But what you neglect to realize is since weare so free how much power the people have. So ok here's the difference libertarians are so principled, it overall allows them to sit on their @$+ andpromote the most "progressive" agenda despite what reality dictates. That being that humans are just as powerful as the government they empower, sothere should be protection from one another. And without that protection the under equip has no chance to be free because we are actually living in a Darwiniststate. Sounds principled enough
10th paragraph I actually agree with this whole statement.
11th paragraph it seems what you are suggesting is a system of government where everything works itself out over time. Where action is almost non-existent andwe just let things mature and bad things take w/e time it needs to become irrelevant.
So what we basically are saying is in the reading of the constitution, way of running the government is different (one is an opportunist while the other doesgod knows what),and how to handle their viewpoint are different.. But the viewpoint is largely of the same fabric. May happen to be a little different but youguys wish for a similar outcome more often than not.. You are basically like saying the same things as the difference between a liberal and a democrat. Theywant the same things (when they talk) or one is more left than the other. They have a different set of instructions to get there but largely sit on the hopethey end up in the same position.
But you know what I will still forget my prior paragraph and give you the kudos.. Libertarians don't agree with Conservatives 75% of the time, it is morelike 55%, 5% with liberals, and the other 40% is some principled stance that leads to nothing.
2nd paragraph is a more liberal viewpoint
3rd paragraph is conservative
4th paragraph is the same conservative +*!!++%% talk told by people who have no clue what is best for people
6th paragraph you said "Libertarians actually do and we believe that the constitution matters whether it helps or hurts GOP or Democratic Partyinterests." Yeah because no one else cares what the constitution says at all. And by the way the constitution is not the most specific document ever. Sofollowing it to the T is almost impossible, and dangerous. Because while the founding fathers foresaw a lot they also couldn't have foreseen theextenuating factors. Which make something simple much more complicated.
7th paragraph now you are just arguing a difference that is small.. You throw the money at them (libertarians) they will bend too. But that's irrelevant.Point taken
8th paragraph I would not even bother for this paragraph if it was not for the ridiculous things you believe critics of libertarians said. It is deeplyoffensive, but whatever.
9th paragraph.. It is where it all became clear to me. In the first paragraph you talked about government power. But what you neglect to realize is since weare so free how much power the people have. So ok here's the difference libertarians are so principled, it overall allows them to sit on their @$+ andpromote the most "progressive" agenda despite what reality dictates. That being that humans are just as powerful as the government they empower, sothere should be protection from one another. And without that protection the under equip has no chance to be free because we are actually living in a Darwiniststate. Sounds principled enough
10th paragraph I actually agree with this whole statement.
11th paragraph it seems what you are suggesting is a system of government where everything works itself out over time. Where action is almost non-existent andwe just let things mature and bad things take w/e time it needs to become irrelevant.
So what we basically are saying is in the reading of the constitution, way of running the government is different (one is an opportunist while the other doesgod knows what),and how to handle their viewpoint are different.. But the viewpoint is largely of the same fabric. May happen to be a little different but youguys wish for a similar outcome more often than not.. You are basically like saying the same things as the difference between a liberal and a democrat. Theywant the same things (when they talk) or one is more left than the other. They have a different set of instructions to get there but largely sit on the hopethey end up in the same position.
But you know what I will still forget my prior paragraph and give you the kudos.. Libertarians don't agree with Conservatives 75% of the time, it is morelike 55%, 5% with liberals, and the other 40% is some principled stance that leads to nothing.
- 1,357
- 10
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2009
all i see here is essential throwing around straw men like its his state-appointed job
