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.
I don't agree with most of what you are saying, but I will state that I'm glad to see a level-headed and rational critic of libertarianism as opposed to the shrill fear mongers that make up the majority and I gave you a rep for an earlier post in this thread.
I will state that the majority of libertarians believe the emergency relief is one of the few legitimate roles of government. I haven't seen too many libertarians say that the military (which is generally agreed to have a humanitarian role in disaster relief as well as engaging in war) shouldn't be called in a city needs to be evacuated.
I will also add something else. The biggest benefactors of regulation (and lax requirements to lodge a lawsuit) are petty jackasses. I (unfortunately) known people who seemed to have made it there lives' ambition to make sure every law and workplace policy is rigorously enforced. Most people have met this type. The type of person who complains to the HOA if someone's lawn is a quarter inch too long. The type of person who checks to see if lack of mouse pads violates any OSHA guidelines. The person at work who is a fixture at HR because they are self-appointed guardians of the work dress code. The type of person who if they thought this post was about them would probably lodge a lawsuit against me for slander. Those are the people who benefit the most from extensive regulation. It gives them an official outlet to be a miserable pain in the ass. I should also add that these people are disproportionately drawn to politics, law, and the civil service. I know because most of the ones I've known were trying to get careers in those fields. So when some overzealous civil servant appears to relish telling you that because you marked a box with a check instead of an X and you will need to go to the back line and fill out the form all over again, that is not someone who is merely following orders, but rather a petty tyrant who is going above and beyond to follow the rules in the most minor of detail.
I too appreciate the give and take without the vitriol, etc.
The libertarian philosophy I've been exposed to most calls for a very limited role of the military and so that's what I've been commenting on--what I know libertarians have purported on their proposed system. Many libertarians have also stated that disaster response is probably one of the biggest flaws of the system since they know that this is something they expect of a government and like you've mentioned here, there are camps within the libertarian corpus of proponents who believe disaster relief should be something that a government is responsible for.
As for your petty tyrants, I know the type. From what I remember about junior high and high school, they typically were the kids who became homeroom representative, junior class officer, student body treasurer, hall monitor, etc. Yet what makes you think that these individuals would go away in a libertarian system? Your comments in this regard seem presumptuous.
Moreover, in a libertarian system, what keeps people from forming neighborhood associations in which they could very well enforce many codes and policies that can pave the way for petty tyrants that you speak of? I think a libertarian system would necessarily have people who form voluntary private associations for mutual protection of their interests and these private associations would then become the regulators of human behavior, whether that's in the gated community, the apartment complex, the workplace, or wherever. I think libertarians, for the most part, are too willing to reduce government down to the basics and have the private sector pick up where the gov. leaves off. Who's to say then that the private sector will not merely replace the so-called governmental tyrants?
As for your comments about laws, I'll add the following. I worked in PR for the attorney general of the state of Mississippi. It was one of the worst jobs I've ever had, but that's a different story for a different day. The attorney general is responsible for carrying out and upholding the laws of the state. In my capacity as a press relations secretary, I got to know the functions of the AG's office pretty well in my time there. I know for a fact that hundreds of laws on the books went unenforced. I know that the investigators in that office picked and chose, based on a cost-benefit analysis, which laws to enforce and which to ignore. Lots of laws were ignored, many for the sake of political expedience, and others merely because the enforcement programs that generated the most political capital were usually the most difficult to enforce (and most time consuming).
Item number 2 in your list is certainly no myth. The official Libertarian Platform, as adopted in May 2012, even states that Libertarians are anarchists.
It can hardly be construed as a "bizarre misconception" when the official Libertarian Party Platform flat-out admits that it desires to uphold the ideal of total anarchy.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Libertarianism and anarchism ARE NOT the same things.
That is exactly like when "progressives" call republicanism "Nazism".
I fundamentally disagree with a society that allows you to discriminate against people because of skin color and use private property rights as a reason. I think one other thing you tin foil on my head libertarians may not realize is that you simply aren't misunderstood and that most people don't like your brand of politics. There are people who actually care about the poor and the sick and don't want to see them die off. There is no way you can explain your ideology that is not some form of survival of the fittest.
I fundamentally disagree with a society that allows you to discriminate against people because of skin color and use private property rights as a reason. I think one other thing you tin foil on my head libertarians may not realize is that you simply aren't misunderstood and that most people don't like your brand of politics. There are people who actually care about the poor and the sick and don't want to see them die off. There is no way you can explain your ideology that is not some form of survival of the fittest.
Your first sentence exposes you as a hypoctrite calling others tin foil hat wearers given the numerous boogieman conspiracies your handlers in the Dem party come up with every day and get all the GED holders in their voting bloc to believe
I fundamentally disagree with a society that allows you to discriminate against people because of skin color and use private property rights as a reason. I think one other thing you tin foil on my head libertarians may not realize is that you simply aren't misunderstood and that most people don't like your brand of politics. There are people who actually care about the poor and the sick and don't want to see them die off. There is no way you can explain your ideology that is not some form of survival of the fittest.
You do understand that you are allowed to help the poor and sick without a government forcing you to, don't you?
How much do you personally do to help those less fortunate than yourself?
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,301 posts, read 4,422,615 times
Reputation: 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by nighttrain55
I fundamentally disagree with a society that allows you to discriminate against people because of skin color and use private property rights as a reason. I think one other thing you tin foil on my head libertarians may not realize is that you simply aren't misunderstood and that most people don't like your brand of politics. There are people who actually care about the poor and the sick and don't want to see them die off. There is no way you can explain your ideology that is not some form of survival of the fittest.
Your brief (thank God) summary of Libertarian thought is not even close. Americans are a charitable and gracious people (Not just Americans, but that is the context of this thread) and have ALWAYS risen to the occasion during war, tragedy, disasters, etc. Some in the Libertarian camp believe that is a practical way to go about things (and some believe that a state agency or even a Federal agency - FEMA, is the better way to go). As for your gross exaggeration of discrimination bases on skin color due to private property - some do hold that - but it is nowhere near to a majority of Libertarians.
Your first sentence exposes you as a hypoctrite calling others tin foil hat wearers given the numerous boogieman conspiracies your handlers in the Dem party come up with every day and get all the GED holders in their voting bloc to believe
how is it the boogie man? You guys believe using color of somebody's skin to dtermine you service. Ya'll believe in privatizing education, which would screw over the poor and minorities. You want to end entitlements and the simple fact is, there aren't enough churches, and private organiztions to help the poor and sick. Not everybody begins their life at the same starting line and they need help, but thats the difference between me and libertarians, I actually have compassion.
Your brief (thank God) summary of Libertarian thought is not even close. Americans are a charitable and gracious people (Not just Americans, but that is the context of this thread) and have ALWAYS risen to the occasion during war, tragedy, disasters, etc. Some in the Libertarian camp believe that is a practical way to go about things (and some believe that a state agency or even a Federal agency - FEMA, is the better way to go). As for your gross exaggeration of discrimination bases on skin color due to private property - some do hold that - but it is nowhere near to a majority of Libertarians.
Americans may rise to the occasion with events like katrina, but i'm talking about everyday citizens. As far as the bolded is concerned, I believe there are alot more people who will do this and please don't use the usual response of, "they will be boycotted and run out of business if they are stupid enough to do that"
how is it the boogie man? You guys believe using color of somebody's skin to dtermine you service. Ya'll believe in privatizing education, which would screw over the poor and minorities. You want to end entitlements and the simple fact is, there aren't enough churches, and private organiztions to help the poor and sick. Not everybody begins their life at the same starting line and they need help, but thats the difference between me and libertarians, I actually have compassion.
No, we don't do that in America...... ever hear of discrimination laws?
It is a trick played on you and many others by the Democrat party to make you believe that their is a race war going on and civil rights never happened
Leave that Libbed up hate city where you live and live in a better city where people don't see color
No, we don't do that in America...... ever hear of discrimination laws?
It is a trick played on you and many others by the Democrat party to make you believe that their is a race war going on and civil rights never happened
Leave that Libbed up hate city where you live and live in a better city where people don't see color
I like my city just fine, i just don't like your brand of politics.
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.
