Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-06-2016, 08:10 PM
 
Location: Madison, WI
5,302 posts, read 2,355,944 times
Reputation: 1230

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Y2Jayy View Post
Thats not libertarianism, that's anarchism/Randism.
Randism? Like Ayn Rand? No...

Consistent libertarianism is anarchism, yes. I used to be a Libertarian (voted for Ron Paul in the 2012 primaries) as in the party, but I saw that I wasn't being fully consistent. Eventually the contradictions just bothered me so much that I gave up statism completely.

Actually it was after looking into ways that society could function without a ruling class...I had no prior concept of how that could even work, but I just took an honest look at it and said "I didn't think of that...maybe it could actually work". From there it was like my brain was finally unlocked.

The minarchist libertarians here believe in libertarian principles almost all the way, but abandon them when it comes to taxation, defense, etc... It's tough because I completely get it, and that used to be me. It's just frustrating to see them get it mostly right, and they're using the EXACT same logic and arguments that I am 95% of the time, but then that completely goes out the window for the last 5%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-06-2016, 08:40 PM
 
Location: Madison, WI
5,302 posts, read 2,355,944 times
Reputation: 1230
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
We agree on that. Now, are we better of if less is stolen from us?
It's better to have less taken from you, sure. My opinion is that that's thinking too small picture.

The big picture is that by playing the game at all, you legitimize it. If the slaves believe it's the master's decision whether or not they can be free, or how much of their own stuff they're allowed to keep, they've already lost.

I understand voting and petitioning and working within the political system to roll things back, but it won't lead to freedom. I'd rather get more people saying "*********. You have no right to take our money and regulate our lives in the first place" instead of "can you please let us keep a little more of our stuff?"

I mean, even if Ron Paul was elected, was allowed to do everything he wanted to do, etc., he would be a very nice master. I'd still be against it in principle, because what gives him the right to decide that we can be free? And that's coming from someone who greatly respects him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2016, 09:47 PM
 
Location: Ohio
24,621 posts, read 19,170,143 times
Reputation: 21738
Quote:
Originally Posted by T0103E View Post
I mean, even if Ron Paul was elected,...
That would never happen since Libertarians are all talk and no action.

Quote:
Originally Posted by T0103E View Post
...was allowed to do everything he wanted to do, etc., he would be a very nice master. I'd still be against it in principle, because what gives him the right to decide that we can be free?
You give him that right when you elect him, as part of the Social Contract in a Constitutional Republic.

It's not a difficult concept to grasp.

It must be frustrating to subscribe to an ideology that will never be brought to fruition at any level of government in the US.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2016, 11:46 PM
 
Location: Midwest City, Oklahoma
14,848 posts, read 8,210,859 times
Reputation: 4590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
That would never happen since Libertarians are all talk and no action.
The problem isn't that libertarians are all talk and no action. The problem is that they refuse to see the world for what it actually is. And continue to fantasize about what they wish the world would be. While at the same time, being useful idiots, because of their materialistic view of the world.


They refuse to accept that no government is legitimate. They have no idea why government exists in the first place. And they don't have any clue why the world is the way it is.

Their only saving grace, is that they rightly distrust the government. But while they see the government as a monster, they continue to believe that they can tame it.


Basically, they continue to fall for the delusion that all we need to do, is elect the right people.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
You give him that right when you elect him, as part of the Social Contract in a Constitutional Republic.
There is no such thing as a social contract. It is completely made-up, go read David Hume. It is absurd to believe that everyone is automatically born into a state of obedience and servitude, or that you did, or would ever do so voluntarily. The fact that you drank from your mother's teat, doesn't make you her slave forever. And the same goes for "the state."

And, the reason why they tell you these nonsensical things, isn't because they are true, but merely because they want you to believe them. And who tells you these things? Those who want to rule over you.


You have fallen for a lie. And why have you fallen for it? Either because you think it benefits you, because you don't know any better, or because you see no alternative. But don't come here peddling your garbage. I'm no fool.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2016, 03:00 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,210,872 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by T0103E View Post
Randism? Like Ayn Rand? No...

Consistent libertarianism is anarchism, yes.
Not even close.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2016, 03:07 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,210,872 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz View Post
The problem isn't that libertarians are all talk and no action. The problem is that they refuse to see the world for what it actually is. And continue to fantasize about what they wish the world would be. While at the same time, being useful idiots, because of their materialistic view of the world.
Is this sort of like the (D)'s and (R)'s believing they can attack other countries and make them a better place?

Quote:
They refuse to accept that no government is legitimate. They have no idea why government exists in the first place. And they don't have any clue why the world is the way it is.
It's so sad that those like yourself refuse to understand that (L)'s are not anti government. You do this because your beliefs are failing so badly.

Quote:
Their only saving grace, is that they rightly distrust the government. But while they see the government as a monster, they continue to believe that they can tame it.
So (R)'s are simply lying to us when they claim they want a smaller government? Those like Pelosi were doing nothing but lying to us when they claimed they were going to "clean the swamp"? Those are just lies?

Quote:
Basically, they continue to fall for the delusion that all we need to do, is elect the right people.
As opposed to the wrong people? Why even have elections? If this isn't a valid idea, it really doesn't matter then does it? Can I assume you are not going to vote so the "right person" gets elected?

Quote:
There is no such thing as a social contract. It is completely made-up, go read David Hume. It is absurd to believe that everyone is automatically born into a state of obedience and servitude, or that you did, or would ever do so voluntarily. The fact that you drank from your mother's teat, doesn't make you her slave forever. And the same goes for "the state."

And, the reason why they tell you these nonsensical things, isn't because they are true, but merely because they want you to believe them. And who tells you these things? Those who want to rule over you.


You have fallen for a lie. And why have you fallen for it? Either because you think it benefits you, because you don't know any better, or because you see no alternative. But don't come here peddling your garbage. I'm no fool.
I need to let this one go.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2016, 06:15 AM
 
Location: USA
18,496 posts, read 9,161,666 times
Reputation: 8528
Libertarians should emigrate to all of those highly successful libertarian nations that exist in the world today.

There are many countries with low corruption, low crime, high standards of living, high educational achievement, and strong innovation that follow libertarian principles.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2016, 06:23 AM
 
Location: Madison, WI
5,302 posts, read 2,355,944 times
Reputation: 1230
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Not even close.
Yes, it is. Libertarianism is about the non-aggression principle and respect for property rights, and if you're consistent with those principles, you're an anarchist (which I am).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2016, 06:29 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,210,872 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by T0103E View Post
Yes, it is. Libertarianism is about the non-aggression principle and respect for property rights, and if you're consistent with those principles, you're an anarchist (which I am).
Non aggression does not mean what you seem to think it does. What did we gain by being aggressive against Syria? Libya? Iraq?

Yours is the argument that goes...."why don't you like chocolate cake"?

"Because of the gravy".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2016, 07:43 AM
 
Location: Madison, WI
5,302 posts, read 2,355,944 times
Reputation: 1230
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Non aggression does not mean what you seem to think it does. What did we gain by being aggressive against Syria? Libya? Iraq?

Yours is the argument that goes...."why don't you like chocolate cake"?

"Because of the gravy".
The non-aggression principle is that it's wrong to initiate force. Only defensive force is justified.

I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:52 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top