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.
Neither have successfully worked anywhere in the world, but come to think of it, there has never been a Libertarian country...now why do you suppose that is?
No form of government has ever been successful until it was first tried.
That could have been an exact quote from the obnoxious Marxists of my youth. If only their ideology was carried out in the right way, given a proper chance to work, everybody would be forced to acknowledge its superiority. (And implicitly acknowledge how smart they were in bringing it about...)
The dyed-in-the-wool Libertarians, for all the differences in the ideology, have the exact same approach.
Of course they aren't. Communism is an actual defined political philosophy that has been tried and failed. Libertarianism is the political musings of undergrads and is defined only by the person describing it at the time.
You've never heard two (lower-case c) communists going at it over some detail in their ideology? They may hate capitalism with some fervor, but what really gets them going are other communists who are doing Communism wrong.
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,300 posts, read 4,408,773 times
Reputation: 2394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
That could have been an exact quote from the obnoxious Marxists of my youth. If only their ideology was carried out in the right way, given a proper chance to work, everybody would be forced to acknowledge its superiority. (And implicitly acknowledge how smart they were in bringing it about...)
The dyed-in-the-wool Libertarians, for all the differences in the ideology, have the exact same approach.
The fact that if nothing is tried for first time then "you dont know" is a truism not only politics but also sports, skills, foods, etc. . . How successful was a Representative Republic until first it was tried? That is my point and also why sickofnyc's logic was flawed. If Libertarianism is like communism just because of this, then so is democracy, dodgeball, and sushi.
Neither have successfully worked anywhere in the world, but come to think of it, there has never been a Libertarian country...now why do you suppose that is?
Maybe because current govts enjoy all the kickbacks through corruption and don't really care about the interests of the people. Voters don't see a 3rd party as a viable solution. It's business as usuall. Vote for one of the two biggest parties that can win, even if if means tossing your values...
Your rationale was that it cant work because it has never been tried. That was what i was commenting on. Under such rationale then we are stuck with only those thoughts that have been tried. Libertarian aspects have been tried and proven. Not all but what system of thought has had that? And just because some aspects may prove ineffectual or impractical does not invalidate the system of thought. If so, both parties should have been scrapped long ago.
Quote:
Libertarians can keep holding up their dream of perfection because, as a practical matter, it will never be tried in full. Even many who say they are libertarians reject the idea when it gets too close to home.
The strongest political support for a broad anti-statist libertarianism now comes from the tea party. Yet tea party members, as the polls show, are older than the country as a whole. They say they want to shrink government in a big way but are uneasy about embracing this concept when reducing Social Security and Medicare comes up. Thus do the proposals to cut these programs being pushed by Republicans in Congress exempt the current generation of recipients. There’s no way Republicans are going to attack their own base.
But this inconsistency (or hypocrisy) contains a truth: We had something close to a small-government libertarian utopia in the late 19th century and we decided it didn’t work. We realized that many Americans would never be able to save enough for retirement and, later, that most of them would be unable to afford health insurance when they were old. Smaller government meant that too many people were poor and that monopolies were formed too easily.
And when the Great Depression engulfed us, government was helpless, largely handcuffed by this anti-government ideology until Franklin D. Roosevelt came along.
In fact, as Lind points out, most countries that we typically see as “free†and prosperous have governments that consume around 40 percent of their gross domestic product. They are better off for it. “Libertarians,†he writes, “seem to have persuaded themselves that there is no significant trade-off between less government and more national insecurity, more crime, more illiteracy and more infant and maternal mortality . . . .â€
Maybe because current govts enjoy all the kickbacks through corruption and don't really care about the interests of the people. Voters don't see a 3rd party as a viable solution. It's business as usuall. Vote for one of the two biggest parties that can win, even if if means tossing your values...
It doesn't help that the 2 corrupt parties continue to use the lamestream media to spoon feed their BS to the people! And the people just take it all in without question. Everything today is sensationalized in the name of ratings! It's all about who can out talk the other person (or out shout), or come up with the best zingers!!! It's a f**n' circus if you ask me, and anymore the talking heads on the major news networks are a bunch of blowhards! Does it make for good entertainment? Sure. But that is what it is anymore.... ENTERTAINMENT!
The way I see it libertarianism is the closest ideology that adheres to the Constitution and allows for maximum individual freedom with minimal government interference in our lives. The 2 main parties are both for big government, and 2 sides of the same coin! Oh well! By continuing to pander to the 2 corrupt main parties we get the government that we deserve!
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,300 posts, read 4,408,773 times
Reputation: 2394
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc
This pretty much sums it up for me.
And it may be that some idealistic Libertarianistic views may not work. But aspects of a pure democracy dont work either. You tailor things to your need and functionality. Libertarians are usually not so naive to think that just because a person may be elected to even the presidency, that we will become a Libertarian nation any more than we become a repub or democratic one due to the elected person. There are aspects of Libertarianism that I believe would serve us well. It is not incompatable if we decide that we need national health coverage or social security (unless they are a purist). Libertairian principles could still help streamline those bloated bureacracies.
They're apples and oranges my friend. Libertarianism: political. Communism: economic.
I'll take the ideology that allows for more individual freedoms and minimal government interference over an authoritarian ideology where the government controls everything... any damn day!
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.
