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.
Libertarian doctrines place the satisfaction of the individual over the need for a stable peaceful society under the rule of Law. The great libertarian fallacy is the belief that humans can form a peaceful society without the Law to discourage harmful behavior by one individual over another.
Which is why they also need a collective government to prevent anarchists from taking over.
As the saying goes, "libertarians are conservatives who have sex and smoke dope." I forgot who coined it, but it makes a lot of sense.
Libertarians like to brand themselves as being "socially liberal and fiscally conservative" but don't advocate so accordingly. Most libertarians spend their time upholding anarcho capitalist principles. Very rarely do you see them advocate for personal well being of the common man. Basically the personhood of big business is more important to them than social issues. Never do you hear them address inequality or poverty.
My take on it is that saying they're socially Liberal may be a bit of an over generalization.
As T0103E said, they belive that people should have the right to live as they wish, which includes some things that might be considered a Liberal cause or point of view such as gay marrige.
But they might not necessarily belive in it for the same reasons.....The Liberal point of view typically being driven by a sense of social justice, whereas the Libertarian may or may not have any personal or moral obections to gay marrige but belives that government has no business regulating marriage at all and that trumps his personal opinions on the subject.
Ok I can get on board with this. I remember mentioning to a liberal that while they and I may agree that abortion should be legal, our reasons for believing that are polar opposite.
You mean you'll dodge the topic again and insist on engaging in more diversionary meta-discussion, adding nothing to the actual discussion of the actual subject matter of the thread.
Let's give you another chance to try to stay on-topic:And that's the crux of the matter. There are a number of hard-won rights that have been establish through various means over the last three hundred and fifty years that libertarians, reactionaries and others who practice regressive politics deliberately blind themselves to, or worse, corrupt to their own selfish aims. They recognize only the rights that serve their own personal preferences and proclivities. They oppose rights that don't benefit themselves and instead benefit others, even when the others are the most vulnerable in society, and make all manner of rationalizations for the callous disregard they wish to practice, rationalizations for their intention to regress society back toward the barbarism of previous centuries.
This is borderline the stupidest thing I have every heard. Rants like this tell me that the majority of Americans need to be forced to be good people, and are unable, or simply unwilling, to learn and change dynamically through personal experience. Libertarians wouldn't relegate minorities back into a slave status. And just to let you know, forced slavery wouldn't have existed in a Libertarian society because it goes against the core belief of forcing people to do something beyond their will.
As the saying goes, "libertarians are conservatives who have sex and smoke dope." I forgot who coined it, but it makes a lot of sense.
Libertarians like to brand themselves as being "socially liberal and fiscally conservative" but don't advocate so accordingly. Most libertarians spend their time upholding anarcho capitalist principles. Very rarely do you see them advocate for personal well being of the common man. Basically the personhood of big business is more important to them than social issues. Never do you hear them address inequality or poverty.
Iain Banks put it this way, “Libertarianism. A simple-minded right-wing ideology ideally suited to those unable or unwilling to see past their own sociopathic self-regard.”
Granted, this sounds a bit harsh, a character from one of his science fiction style novels is attempting to explain the various (some even more byzarre) forms of government that've been tried.
This is borderline the stupidest thing I have every heard. Rants like this tell me that the majority of Americans need to be forced to be good people, and are unable, or simply unwilling, to learn and change dynamically through personal experience. Libertarians wouldn't relegate minorities back into a slave status. And just to let you know, forced slavery wouldn't have existed in a Libertarian society because it goes against the core belief of forcing people to do something beyond their will.
While I agree our form of government has never been Libertarian, I think a present day Libertarian society would be alright with voluntary slavery.
Point out to me the specific part of the Constitution that gives the federal government the right to say who can marry who.
I doubt that you are unaware of how the Equal Protection Clause requires all states to recognize marriages legitimized in one state. So let me ask you why you insist on refusing to admit that publicly? Why go through the childish games of denying the reality, when you know the precedents on the books whereby states were compelled to respect the actions of others states, and people of conscience are going to simply debunk your nonsense with a quick reference to the precedents? Do you think that after a certain amount of denial of reality that your alternative will be accepted - that people of conscience will figure after the twentieth time, "Gosh he really really wants reality to be different so let's throw him a bone"?
It is really sad to see the desperate measures right-wingers use to rationalize their antisocial promotion of violating the constitutional rights of people that they hate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW
Libertarian doctrines place the satisfaction of the individual over the need for a stable peaceful society under the rule of Law. The great libertarian fallacy is the belief that humans can form a peaceful society without the Law to discourage harmful behavior by one individual over another.
Especially given that many of those who tilt libertarian these days are so clearly doing so because it feeds into the egoistic avarice that they prefer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dooleys1300
Libertarians are not Anarchists and do not advocate the complete absence of government.....
A statement that merely begs the question, leading inextricably to the conclusion that the complaints of libertarians are simply a reflection of not getting their way. If there is standing for government to be "small" then there is standing for our three-branched to determine how small is small enough, according to the predetermined manner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grizzly Addams
This is borderline the stupidest thing I have every heard.
This is pretty close to the most childish response I've have ever received. You don't like moral repudiation directed at the immoral regression and reactionary nonsense you prefer. Big surprise. So what? How about you post a reply that defends your perspective on moral grounds, showing how it acknowledges society's obligation toward those most vulnerable in society, rather than simply underscoring the egoistic avarice and callous disregard that is the hallmark of libertarian claptrap?
Who needs history. It's a fact of life that we are each individuals who are a part of society. Human beings are both collectivist and individualists. Ignoring one or the other is fallacious.
I like history although I agree with you, & the history of humanity supports, that we are both & even much more. I would even go as far as to say it's impossible to ignore unless one is willing to wear blinders or to voluntarily imprison oneself in an ideological jail.
While it's true, one can live by bread & water alone, why would anyone choose to?
Many athiest libertarians I know would say otherwise.
It would be really hard to call a group that believes in legalizing drugs, upholding a woman's right to choose and supporting same sex marriage as being on par with the religious right.
I have been a member of the Libertarian Party since 1991, I have met many former republicans that could no longer tolerate the "social conservative" agenda of the GOP.
Ah & you remember Barry Goldwater! One of my favorites of his, "You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight."
He disagreed with the conservatives of his time, imagine now?
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.
