Why are both left and right anti-freedom and anti-libertarian?

[tindo80]

Originally Posted by iwonderwhy

Exactly why level-headed libertarians must retake the Republican Party from the neo-cons and relegate them to the dustbin of political history.

'Retake'? Libertarians never had the republican party. The neocons are the closest thing to Libertarians. Oddly enough, they are simply less extreme than libertarians.

These are not generalizations, they are facts. Black males commit homicide at eight times the rate that white males do. African-Americans are much more likely to do poorly in academic environments. Their neighborhoods are crime-ridden and full of problems. I don't like seeing this stuff. I want black people to be equal partners in our society and this will not happen until they stop destroying themselves. Duke his ilk are white supremacists. I am not. But, I can and do criticize the black community for the problems it experiences which are mainly self-inflicted.

They are not at all facts, they are stereotypes.

1. Black males do NOT commit homicide at 8x the rates of whites (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/offenses/expanded_information/homicide.html - broken link), though per capita they do commit more.

2. The homicide rate is more reflective of poverty than race (poor whites commit homicide and all other crimes equal to that of poor blacks...rich whites commit as few crimes as rich blacks).

3. Your belief of these racialist stereotypes assuming they are 'facts' is no different than what other misguided racists believe.

Of course we have racial problems and tensions. And, as I stated before I actually think that the Sharptons and the Jacksons cause more division and tension between the races than any white supremacist ever could.

Thats your opinion, and as an American your right to it. But, the 'blame the victim' mentality gets us nowhere. How many abusive men admit to being abusers? 0 in 10. How many are? 3 in 10. How many of those that are offer justifications such as "mouthy women and feminist are more the cause of battered wives than men"? 100% of them. There is always an excuse and usually, once caught, a perp will blame everyone but themselves for wrongdoing.

I do not support racial discrimination and neither do the vast majority of libertarians. As I said, I (and mainstream libertarians) are willing to compromise when it comes to government intervention in our basic rights if said law protects individuals. Businesses should not have the right to discriminate based on race, sex, etc.. in my opinion.

Again, you are arguing as if YOU are the sole representative of Libertarianism. I never said you were. Saying "Hey I dont do that" is ireelevant, because the topic is the movement as a whole.

Likewise, the links I gave in my response directly show you are INCORRECT with the statement that most libertarians (american) do not support discrimination. They casually and openly admit they do. Its part of the 'freedom of the majority' they seek.

[flash3780]

Originally Posted by tindo80

...neocons are the closest thing to Libertarians...

Seriously? That's what you believe?
Neo-conservatives are "generally comfortable with a welfare state; and, while rhetorically supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding social purposes."

However, "the most commonly known formulation of libertarianism supports free market capitalism by advocating a right to private property, including property in the means of production, minimal government regulation of that property, minimal taxation, and rejection of the welfare state, all within the context of the rule of law."

[ergohead]

Originally Posted by tindo80

'Retake'? Libertarians never had the republican party. The neocons are the closest thing to Libertarians. Oddly enough, they are simply less extreme than libertarians.

Libertarians are non-interventionist in the affairs of foreign countries and individuals, both of which are considered sovereigns by Libertarian principles.

Originally Posted by tindo80

Likewise, the links I gave in my response directly show you are INCORRECT with the statement that most libertarians (american) do not support discrimination. They casually and openly admit they do. Its part of the 'freedom of the majority' they seek.

No - It is the freedom of the minority they seek - The individual.

[Renaldo5000]

Originally Posted by tindo80

'Retake'? Libertarians never had the republican party. The neocons are the closest thing to Libertarians. Oddly enough, they are simply less extreme than libertarians.

The party and the rank-and-file Republicans who used to populate it were much more libertarian in their views decades ago. They actually supported small government and fiscal responsibility. Now, the people leading the party pay lip service to those things, but they do not actually support them in practise. As far as extremism goes, there are extremists in every branch of political thought. They are best ignored and avoided.

Originally Posted by tindo80

1. Black males do NOT commit homicide at 8x the rates of whites (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/offenses/expanded_information/homicide.html - broken link), though per capita they do commit more.

2. The homicide rate is more reflective of poverty than race (poor whites commit homicide and all other crimes equal to that of poor blacks...rich whites commit as few crimes as rich blacks).

3. Your belief of these racialist stereotypes assuming they are 'facts' is no different than what other misguided racists believe.

The site you linked to has data that quite clearly shows that black males commit a much higher rate of homicide per capita than white males. This is not a stereotype. It is a fact. And, this is indicative of problems within the black community. Calling a spade a spade is not racism.

I am from a small and poor white city that has poverty rates that equal or exceed any black inner-city neighborhood. We might have a murder once every ten years. Yet, take a black neighborhood with the same population and there will routinely be murders (I know because I now live in a bigger city). Noticing this stuff is not racism. Why is this happening? I don't know, I'm not a sociologist. But, merely noticing the fact does not make me on par with a David Duke.

Originally Posted by tindo80

Thats your opinion, and as an American your right to it. But, the 'blame the victim' mentality gets us nowhere.

The "play the victim" mentality gets us nowhere either.

Originally Posted by tindo80

Again, you are arguing as if YOU are the sole representative of Libertarianism. I never said you were. Saying "Hey I dont do that" is ireelevant, because the topic is the movement as a whole.

Likewise, the links I gave in my response directly show you are INCORRECT with the statement that most libertarians (american) do not support discrimination. They casually and openly admit they do. Its part of the 'freedom of the majority' they seek.

One site run by one dude is not indicative of the whole movement. Again, I reiterate that you should not get bogged down in semantics and pedantic crap that some armchair libertarian on the net put on some web site. Listen the basic things that we are trying to say as a whole:

1. We have a massive federal debt. We are leaving this debt for our children. We must stop deficit spending and pay this debt down immediately. It is going to hurt and it will suck, but it must be done. The longer we wait the more it will hurt.

2. The federal government has blatantly involved itself in programs and legislation that are un-Constitutional and illegal. It has overstepped its bounds in many areas and it must be reigned in. 'Nuff said.

3. We are going down the path of every empire that has decayed and failed. We are involving ourselves in far-flung alliances and military adventures, wasting resources, and getting heavily into debt. If we continue upon this path we will lose our power.

I don't think any of those points are "extremist".

[tindo80]

Originally Posted by ergohead

No - It is the freedom of the minority they seek - The individual.

As I said. They seek the freedom of the 'individual' (who is not a minority if that individual is part of a group thats in the majority) to violate the rights and freedoms of other individuals (not in the majority).

Originally Posted by iwonderwhy

The party and the rank-and-file Republicans who used to populate it were much more libertarian in their views decades ago. They actually supported small government and fiscal responsibility. Now, the people leading the party pay lip service to those things, but they do not actually support them in practise. As far as extremism goes, there are extremists in every branch of political thought. They are best ignored and avoided.

??? Yes, but small government and fiscal responsibility have ALWAYS been part of the modern GOP mainstay. Thats not was differentiates them from libertarians. What differentiates them is the recognition that the government should act towards the good of the people in methods of which they cannot do for themselves.

Libertarianism says people should do whatever they want for themselves and to others with miniscule government interferences. As I said, if America started off as a libertarian nation, we would still have slavery, women would not have the right to vote, and our society would not have progressed further than an agrarian based one.

The "play the victim" mentality gets us nowhere either.

True. Only if it were the case that there was any 'playing' at all, or that the victimization was not real'.

Hard to argue statistics, studies and history that show white employers pay black and hispanics less than whites for the same work, give blacks and hispanics harsher sentences for crimes than whites, and profile blacks and hispanics harsher for crimes whites are more likely to commit.

One site run by one dude is not indicative of the whole movement. Again, I reiterate that you should not get bogged down in semantics and pedantic crap that some armchair libertarian on the net put on some web site. Listen the basic things that we are trying to say as a whole:

? I gave 2 sites, but I take your point.

By your own logic, however, your ideals of the movement would also not be valid indicators for what represents it. Who is to say who 'can' say?

[Renaldo5000]

Originally Posted by tindo80

??? Yes, but small government and fiscal responsibility have ALWAYS been part of the modern GOP mainstay. Thats not was differentiates them from libertarians. What differentiates them is the recognition that the government should act towards the good of the people in methods of which they cannot do for themselves.

The neo-cons blather on and on about being fiscally conservative and for small government. They are lying. Look at the Bush years. He consistently ran deficits and he expanded the size of the federal government. The neo-cons are dishonest about this stuff.

Originally Posted by tindo80

Libertarianism says people should do whatever they want for themselves and to others with miniscule government interferences. As I said, if America started off as a libertarian nation, we would still have slavery

Slavery would have eventually been addressed by the libertarians as an affront to personal freedom, but I digress. Slavery was confronted by the progressives. I can respect what the progressives of yore confronted and accomplished, but I have absolutely no patience for modern-day progressives. They are ideological windbags and elitists. And, as I have said many times, I do not support a dogmatic application of libertarian beliefs. Compromise, common sense, and conviction are necessary in a world that is not black-and-white.

Originally Posted by tindo80

Only if it were the case that there was any 'playing' at all, or that the victimization was not real'.

The president of the United States is black. If that is not an indication of how far we have come as a nation in regards to tolerance and race relations then I don't know what is. Again, I exhort the African-American community (and other "minority" communities) to stop destroying themselves, stop playing the victim, and look to examples like our president. Even though I vehemently disagree with Comrade Obama, he is the perfect example of how if one has the drive and the ability that one can do whatever they want to do in America.

Originally Posted by tindo80

Hard to argue statistics, studies and history that show white employers pay black and hispanics less than whites for the same work, give blacks and hispanics harsher sentences for crimes than whites, and profile blacks and hispanics harsher for crimes whites are more likely to commit.

Like I said, I have no qualms against laws that protect against racial discrimination.

Originally Posted by tindo80

By your own logic, however, your ideals of the movement would also not be valid indicators for what represents it. Who is to say who 'can' say?

I don't claim to represent my "movement" - only myself.

[tindo80]

Originally Posted by iwonder why

The neo-cons blather on and on about being fiscally conservative and for small government. They are lying. Look at the Bush years. He consistently ran deficits and he expanded the size of the federal government. The neo-cons are dishonest about this stuff.

I am aware of that. The liars were the neoconservatives. Thats most of my point.

Slavery would have eventually been addressed by the libertarians as an affront to personal freedom, but I digress. Slavery was confronted by the progressives. I can respect what the progressives of yore confronted and accomplished, but I have absolutely no patience for modern-day progressives. They are ideological windbags and elitists. And, as I have said many times, I do not support a dogmatic application of libertarian beliefs. Compromise, common sense, and conviction are necessary in a world that is not black-and-white.

Slavery would have been addressed by white libertarians as

1. A states rights issue to decided by the states (as it was by the confederacy).
2. Opposition to slavery would have been seen as an affront to personal freedom, because blacks were not considered citizens nor people. Banning slavery would have been (and was) seen as an attack by the fed on the economic freedoms and personal liberties of whites to own slaves.

The president of the United States is black. If that is not an indication of how far we have come as a nation in regards to tolerance and race relations then I don't know what is. Again, I exhort the African-American community (and other "minority" communities) to stop destroying themselves, stop playing the victim, and look to examples like our president. Even though I vehmently disagree with Comrade Obama, he is the perfect example of how if one has the drive and the ability that one can do whatever they want to do in America.

Yet 48% of people did not vote for him. A good number of those because he was black.

Even today with our black president, black and hispanic college graduates earn less than whites for the same jobs, blacks and latinos are (as stated earlier) given harsher sentences than whites, and profiled more often for crimes whites commit more often.

Im sorry, but you cant simply 'ignore' these discrepancies and say 'well everything is even and we all have the same opportunities'. Its just not the case.

Like I said, I have no qualms against laws that protect against racial discrimination.

Yes, but as I said, thats you. That is not the case with the mainstream of the libertarian movement. As the links I provided you stated, libertarians see anti-discrimination laws as affronts to their personal freedom as the majority. They also see no harm in discrimination, racial, religion, gender or otherwise.

I don't claim to represent my "movement" - only myself.

We have that very much in common. I am no liberal, I support personal responsibility, I like my guns, and am a religious person (or at least I try to be). But I am also not operating under some illusion everyone has it equal in America or that race and ethnicity are not severe problems that many on the right ignore.

[swbtoo]

Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale

I just went to RNC: Republican National Committee | GOP, and what's the first thing I'm hit with?

"May the God of Hope fill you with all Joy & Peace"
ROMANS 15:13 NIV

Please. Spare me.

I thought for a minute there you were referring to Obama. ("the God of Hope") -- 'cause hasn't he filled all his fans with joy and peace?