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 think libertarians really suffer from an image problem, and in American politics, perception is reality. If you look objectively at the principles of Ron Paul, for example, or the track record of Gary Johnson, they're remarkably consistent with constitutional values (limited government, non-coercion), even if you personally disagree with the platform.
Libertarians get easily dismissed as "College Republicans who smoke weed" or "Arrogant rich guys trying to seem edgy." What we get from the media are simplistic characterizations ("Ron Paul's a little weirdo with a kooky agenda" vs. "Obama's cool and sharp") or critiques of style which are frequently lacking in substance.
I think honest critics would be better served by actually reading Hayek, Rothbard, Rand, et.al, and then wrestling with the issues, rather than knocking down these straw men characterizations. When I first watched Milton Friedman online from his old Phil Donahue appearances, for example, I thought, "Here we go again, another wealthy jerk who just doesn't want to pay taxes", but by the end, I was really intrigued.
Although I'm not (quite) a libertarian, I try to study their ideas with an open mind, and I honestly wish the "Free State" movement would get off the ground so we could at least put their principles to the test.
Because if you take the libertarian view to the ultimate, it is those with the most money that will be able to afford the most freedom.
The libertarian party is a sort of dreamy release valve from the two-in-one official American political party but it does sell itself off rather cheerfully, like some 20th century model society waiting to arrive if only people understood and suddenly saw things as they should. They come off as greasy salespeople except to the young or those who like money utopias.
Other than as a rod to beat each other over the head with Americans don't really care about politics or political parties but what is promised by whom and easily identified snap associations. Few people understand the last 30 years in American politics- it seems like a movie to them. If they do they lie and stay silent as they know the serious followers of democracy = the hungering mob- and no one really wants to be bothered with all of that if they don't have to. Or they say the easiest thing which is that democracy was co-opted by Big Money, fallling for divas like Bill & Barack and await the pretty soaring arias to cue.
Most Americans are bored with waiting for government to do anything sensible but know what is expected of these hacks they 'elect' and that is to deny them, rob them, intimidate them, spy on them, dictate to them and find new perverse ways to enrichen the over-rich thru them. This is why America has no sincere third, fourth or more parties vying for serious contention: Americans tolerate politics the same way they have learned to accept poverty. It's always going to be there so feed it to keep it in check and find a work around. Another party just adds another troupe onto the stage.
Lastly, libertarianism is viewed with mockery because Americans have been taught in the last 50 years that individuality is bad, is greedy, is mean-spirited. That belonging to the herd, as ambiguous as that idea may be, is the righteous path, is solidarity, is a correct proof of intellect as preached by academe and tv personalities.
I guess I have never met the liberals you are talking about because typically the libertarians I meet are all right-wing and call themselves Libertarians because they don't want to admit they vote Republican.
They're pretty easy to spot.
They try to make the case that abortion on demand, same-sex marriage and legalized street drugs are libertarian positions since government doesn't have the right to tell people what they may or may not do with their bodies, etc.
Never once will they mention taking personal responsibility for their decisions or actions and therein is the tell.
As for libertarians, Constitutional conservatives and Republicans, there is and has been an ugly war going on for control of the Republican Party between those of us who believe in the Constitution and the old guard corporate whores.
Irelandwas Stateless for 2000 years (Brehon), the Indus River Valley was Stateless (Harappa), parts of Turkey were Stateless (Çatalhöyük), parts of the Middle East were Stateless(Jericho), much of Africa was Stateless (Axumia under the Xeer), most of southern Asia was Stateless (much still is/Zomia), a section of Europe was Stateless only 100 years ago (Moresnet), parts of the US were Stateless (Brentwood; Stapleton is still). Most of Western Europe was effectively stateless during the Middle Ages. Rhode Island was anarchist when settled by Europeans. The American West had little to no government control until after the Civil War.
And there are currently countries in Europe, Asia and South America that are moving toward Libertarianism today. They are doing better than their neighbors. Not exactly the same as what the Libertarian Party in the United States believes but close enough.
More humans have lived without a government than with one.
Can you name one country that was successful with a large central government?
Which ones?
There is no country that is successful with a large central government, though Rome did a good job with it for a while, and I am sure you think this country is a large central government, which it isn't due to the fact that each state has its own government.
you have an uneducated understanding of libertarians. They would actually help that person up.. if they were a neighbor they would be the first ones at the door to help them out.. If you want a libertarian to put money into a pot so some government entity can decide who gets what - then you can say libertarians aren't very consoling.
Common community - not government will help those in need a lot faster and a lot better.
Government decides who gets what and when.. Government waists so much money on unnecessary administration they are the WORST type of "charity" organization.
They try to make the case that abortion on demand, same-sex marriage and legalized street drugs are libertarian positions since government doesn't have the right to tell people what they may or may not do with their bodies, etc.
Never once will they mention taking personal responsibility for their decisions or actions and therein is the tell.
As for libertarians, Constitutional conservatives and Republicans, there is and has been an ugly war going on for control of the Republican Party between those of us who believe in the Constitution and the old guard corporate whores.
So you think government should have the ability to tell you what you can and can't do with your body? Then you are definitely not a libertarian. Actually personal responsibility involves making choices for yourself which includes making the choice to do drugs, have a same sex marriage, or have an abortion.
There is no country that is successful with a large central government, though Rome did a good job with it for a while, and I am sure you think this country is a large central government, which it isn't due to the fact that each state has its own government.
A few that have Libertarian qualities would be New Zealand, Switzerland, Ireland, and Estonia.
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.
