Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The closest example I can find is ancient Athens, which was a Greek city state, and, but for its architecture, did not stand the test of time. I don't think the Libertarian principles are practicable for governance of any nation today.
The closest example I can find is ancient Athens, which was a Greek city state, and, but for its architecture, did not stand the test of time. I don't think the Libertarian principles are practicable for governance of any nation today.
I don't really know about your actual example. I was always under the impression that ancient Athens was more a direct democracy than a libertarian state.
But regardless. We need to focus on the important questions in regards to libertarianism. Basically, what is it that actually causes the failure of a libertarian nation?
I would argue that, libertarian nations don't fail in any real sense. Libertarian states are highly successful. But they can never maintain themselves as a libertarian state over any length of time.
I would argue that it is a combination of greed, jealousy, and fear. Those are what always destroys nations. And those will be the downfall of America as well.
I'll leave you with a quote by Benjamin Franklin, at the constitutional convention....
I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other.
I don't really know about your actual example. I was always under the impression that ancient Athens was more a direct democracy than a libertarian state.
But regardless. We need to focus on the important questions in regards to libertarianism. Basically, what is it that actually causes the failure of a libertarian nation?
I would argue that, libertarian nations don't fail in any real sense. Libertarian states are highly successful. But they can never maintain themselves as a libertarian state over any length of time.
I would argue that it is a combination of greed, jealousy, and fear. Those are what always destroys nations. And those will be the downfall of America as well.
I don't really think this is so much a critique of libertarianism. As it is a critique of humanity.
The United States for instance was one of the most libertarian nations in history. Are you saying that had the United States been full libertarian from the beginning, that it would have collapsed? Or was it simply impossible for those with money and influence, to not use the government for their own purposes?
The real question should really be. Does liberalizing a market tend to produce good results or bad results?
The truth is, the markets in most parts of the world are becoming more free. And in those places with freer markets, you have seen the best results.
Libertarianism isn't an economic problem. It is a political problem.
For instance, free immigration would be incredibly beneficial from an economic perspective. Allowing labor to go to wherever it is needed would create all kinds of benefits. But free immigration is simply not politically possible(for obvious reasons).
Free trade is also incredibly beneficial from an economic perspective(no economist would ever say otherwise). But free trade tends to totally upend the labor market. And when people are losing their jobs, they get pretty pissed off. Thus free trade is not an economic problem, it is a political problem. The people will vote for security over prosperity. Even though, many times, voting for security doesn't actually provide security.
Basically, humans will want things that they think will benefit them. Rather than what actually benefits them. And most people would a rather a powerful government that promises them "benefits". Than a government which they feel they have no control over.
Basically, people are "tribal collectivists". And libertarianism goes completely against human nature.
To support libertarianism. You have to let go of that desire to control other people. And that is usually only accomplished by realizing that, using force to control other people. Is both immoral. And almost always does more harm than good.
Basically, libertarians say. Lets have the government do only those things which are proven to be absolutely necessary(national defense, stopping murderers, rapists, thieves, etc). Not because the government can do those things well. But rather because those things simply cannot realistically be done by anyone but government.
Ergo, it's a fantasy that cannot work in the real world.
Furthermore, libertarians only pay lip service to letting go of "that desire to control other people" as they think they know what is best for other people and attempt to force people to behave in ways they approve of by making exploitation of the weak easier for the strong.
The closest example I can find is ancient Athens, which was a Greek city state, and, but for its architecture, did not stand the test of time. I don't think the Libertarian principles are practicable for governance of any nation today.
I stand corrected. Since most of Athens' population was enslaved and women were categorically denied any rights, I think Athens might indeed be a possible model of what a libertarian state might be like.
I suppose I meant "more libertarian". As in, the United States was far more libertarian in the past than it is today.
Why did America become "less libertarian"? Because of jealousy, greed, and fear.
In my mind, what libertarianism looks like in practice. Would be something similar to the "Amish" communities in America. Which is basically what America more looked like in the past, under a more limited government.
Are the Amish an example of a failed state? I mean, which will collapse first, the Amish communities of this country, or the US government?
With that said. I don't particularly like to use the Amish as an example of what libertarian society would look like in particular. Because they have an aversion to technology. But rather, libertarianism tends to favor "tight-knit" voluntary communities, of "like-minded" people. Libertarianism doesn't necessarily have an aversion to technology. But libertarianism probably isn't very capable of supporting "large cities".
A libertarian nation, would generally favor small towns, independent farmers/producers, and religion(regardless of what Penn Jillette thinks). It would look a lot more like what Thomas Jefferson wanted for America. Than New York City.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
