Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Ideologies > Libertarian

Libertarian Libertarian Forum - Political Philosophy Forum


Thanks Tree18Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 12th, 2018, 08:13 AM   #11
Go Go Go
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Earth
Posts: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil View Post
I consider myself a libertarian, because that's what seems closest to what I think is the best policy for society. Today we live in the era of capitalism, and the state exists to enable capitalism - make it feasible.

There are essentially two extremes when it comes to how government can be implemented.

At one extreme government is excessive; it puts the collective of society before the individual. This is what socialism does.

At the other extreme government is non-existent. We can't have a state without government, and we can't have capitalism without the state. This is what anarchocapitalists are trying to do (but it can't be done), and it would put the individual before the collective of society.

What we need to achieve is equilibrium between the individual and the collective of society. Neither one should be put before the other. Libertarian principles/policies/platforms come closest to wanting to work towards achieving this goal; it's as though that's their mission.

Libertarianism also happens to be the only political ideology that doesn't mandate or depend on the existence of capitalism. Socialism mandates capitalism by requiring things like a minimum wage, health insurance tax fine individual mandates like the one in Obamacare (ACA), etc. With anarchocapitalism - well it's in the name; it's not anarchocapitalism if it doesn't actually have capitalism.
Its difference on Right-Wing GOP but this is best Right-Wing in American political historic and i'm not against this Party and ultimate leadership Gary Johnson and the knowledge within Gary Johnson ans States building ?
the Beast is offline  
Old March 12th, 2018, 03:01 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,265
To me Libertarianism means that people should be allowed to do what they want, as long as their choices does not harm another person. This is more of the social side of the philosophy. If people want to do drugs, including heroin, fine by me. If someone wants to rent their body for sex with strangers, fine also. People might make lifestyle choices I do not like, but again, if they are doing this themselves and not negatively impacting someone else, why should there be a law against it?

My idea of government should be minimalist at best. However, there is a need for government, there cannot be a society with a government. However government's tend to be too powerful and too intrusive in the lives of the people. Sort of goes of human nature, in that humans enjoy having power over other people for their ends.

The two largest things a government must do is the protection of the people and the coinage of money, that is, a balanced monetary structure and system. The protection of the people consists of different levels. First, the military. The military should be used only in defense of the nation, but not interfering in the affairs or governance of other nations, unless the foreign nation is a true threat and really and truly violates the human rights and dignity of the people of that country. Second a domestic police to protect the people in the country against crimes committed by people who harm people. Protections against drug companies, environmental dumpers and others who harm society to make a profit.

There must be a level and stable monetary system. The USA in my opinion really does not have this. Money is printed by a cabal of private banks called the "Federal Reserve" which charges the State money for the bills they print while giving an artificial value to the money. What has happened over time is that money becomes devalued, robbing the people to serve the ends of very wealthy bankers, and this has happened for over a hundred years.

The free market is an absolute and are more than competent to do everything that they can do better than the government. The Postal System is a good example. Privatize the post office and one would see cheaper prices on deliveries, services and greater accountability. Privatization of education would create competition in schools, a better product and much cheaper per student with better quality than a government model. Free market with minimal governmental interference in health care and drug costs. Medical care would be much more affordable without government interference outside of protection of health (against bad doctors and bad drugs).
senor boogie woogie is offline  
Old March 12th, 2018, 03:14 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
skews13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: nirvana
Posts: 9,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by goober View Post
I believe in a system of regulated markets, with the market doing what it does best, markets with many buyers, many sellers, low barriers to entry, and near perfect knowledge of market conditions by buyers and sellers, and the state doing what it does best, regulating monopolies and monopsonies. Managing large social insurance schemes, and planning and providing key infrastructure.
This was the premise of the book Wealth of Nations. The free market only works fairly with many small producers. When the Sherman Act stopped being enforced in the 80's, allowing the merger mania that took place creating the monolithic corporations that have taken their place. It is why we have the inequality we do now. And the failure of a society that has allowed a merger of multiple giant corporations to actually be classified by law as an individual with free speech rights.

Until this reversed, and we go back to pre 1980's markets, and laws regarding money in politics, it is only going to get worse, not better.
Thanks from Camelot
skews13 is offline  
Old March 12th, 2018, 04:27 PM   #14
Go Go Go
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Earth
Posts: 141
Close Right-Wing Party are my only truth liked and its are because it is my interests and I couldn't missed it is perfectation in my taste.
the Beast is offline  
Old March 13th, 2018, 01:45 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Neil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Virginia
Posts: 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by the Beast View Post
Its difference on Right-Wing GOP but this is best Right-Wing in American political historic and i'm not against this Party and ultimate leadership Gary Johnson and the knowledge within Gary Johnson ans States building ?
I'm having trouble following what you're trying to ask, but I'll try to address.

Yes, there are some differences and some overlap between the GOP and libertarian principles. Libertarianism is neither Left nor Right wing (they're both just different versions of socialism and libertarianism is a bit distant from socialism), but on a logical political spectrum (where socialism is on one extreme and anarchism is on the opposite extreme), libertarianism is somewhere in between those two extremes.

Gary Johnson is fairly libertarian, but he's not the standard bearer for libertarian principles; the standards come from the science method, logic, truth, being consistent, being objective, and reality in general; that includes recognizing that trust in the state is not something that ought to be imposed on anyone, and if you look at the Bill of Rights for the US Constitution you'll see that this is what it's mainly about.

Gary Johnson was just a candidate for a political party that uses the word "libertarian" in the title; I suppose it is more libertarian than the Democrats and Republicans, but I'm more interested in the philosophy rather than the party. I don't care what party offers it; if the Republican candidate runs on a libertarian platform, or platform compatible with libertarian principles, then I'll vote for the Republican; if the Democrat candidate runs on a libertarian platform, or platform compatible with libertarian principles, then I'll vote for the Democrat. If the Libertarian party candidate does not run on libertarian principles, then I won't vote for the Libertarian candidate.

Libertarian principles involve making the state strong, reliable, and useful where it needs to be, and keeping it out of the way where doesn't belong.
Thanks from guy39
Neil is offline  
Old March 13th, 2018, 02:35 PM   #16
Go Go Go
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Earth
Posts: 141
I prefer one by Koch brothers in the anarcho-capitalism party a must in this Party in election 2020 and this is cool stuff.
the Beast is offline  
Old March 13th, 2018, 07:52 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
guy39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kekistan
Posts: 4,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil View Post
I'm having trouble following what you're trying to ask, but I'll try to address.

Yes, there are some differences and some overlap between the GOP and libertarian principles. Libertarianism is neither Left nor Right wing (they're both just different versions of socialism and libertarianism is a bit distant from socialism), but on a logical political spectrum (where socialism is on one extreme and anarchism is on the opposite extreme), libertarianism is somewhere in between those two extremes.

Gary Johnson is fairly libertarian, but he's not the standard bearer for libertarian principles; the standards come from the science method, logic, truth, being consistent, being objective, and reality in general; that includes recognizing that trust in the state is not something that ought to be imposed on anyone, and if you look at the Bill of Rights for the US Constitution you'll see that this is what it's mainly about.

Gary Johnson was just a candidate for a political party that uses the word "libertarian" in the title; I suppose it is more libertarian than the Democrats and Republicans, but I'm more interested in the philosophy rather than the party. I don't care what party offers it; if the Republican candidate runs on a libertarian platform, or platform compatible with libertarian principles, then I'll vote for the Republican; if the Democrat candidate runs on a libertarian platform, or platform compatible with libertarian principles, then I'll vote for the Democrat. If the Libertarian party candidate does not run on libertarian principles, then I won't vote for the Libertarian candidate.

Libertarian principles involve making the state strong, reliable, and useful where it needs to be, and keeping it out of the way where doesn't belong.
That is very well said. I am beginning to look forward to your posts. Thank you for being a poster here
Thanks from Neil
guy39 is offline  
Old March 14th, 2018, 05:14 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
iolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Rhondda
Posts: 2,018
Neil tends to make things sound well, but I can't see how you can be 'libertarian' and keep the state, or make any sort of shot at keeping capitalism without all the armed power you can get to hang onto the thievings.
iolo is offline  
Old March 14th, 2018, 01:07 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Neil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Virginia
Posts: 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by iolo View Post
Neil tends to make things sound well, but I can't see how you can be 'libertarian' and keep the state,
I don't get what you mean by this. Libertarianism doesn't try to keep the state per se; it's neither directly for nor against having the state. It's basically fine with the state, provided there's equilibrium between rights of the individual and rights of the collective.

We have scarcity of resources - goods & services, and so far we can't mitigate that scarcity without someone somewhere exerting effort in the form of manual labor to produces the goods & services we want and need.

As a result, we have basically 2 options. One option is to have capitalism, which involves having the state then as a result of having the state being able to trade and having the right to own property; the other option involves war, killing others to take what they have in their possession, every man for himself wild & savage beast kind of stuff - basically something chaotic, unstructured, and un-established when it comes to being civilized, or at least some sort of society.

Capitalism is generally the more peaceful & prosperous version of the two. Under capitalism, there can be two extremes, one where the state is nothing more than a referee to deal with contractual agreements, and go after criminals when there's a victim. The other extreme (in the economic context), is where the state intervenes with control of resources and means of production by placing bans, mandates, or other restrictions on buying, selling, or owning property. Under capitalism, the libertarian advocates for something close to the former.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iolo View Post
or make any sort of shot at keeping capitalism without all the armed power you can get to hang onto the thievings.
Capitalism is not a necessity or even a given for libertarianism, so I think your premise is problematic.
Thanks from the Beast
Neil is offline  
Old March 15th, 2018, 04:48 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
iolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Rhondda
Posts: 2,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil View Post
I don't get what you mean by this. Libertarianism doesn't try to keep the state per se; it's neither directly for nor against having the state. It's basically fine with the state, provided there's equilibrium between rights of the individual and rights of the collective.

We have scarcity of resources - goods & services, and so far we can't mitigate that scarcity without someone somewhere exerting effort in the form of manual labor to produces the goods & services we want and need.

As a result, we have basically 2 options. One option is to have capitalism, which involves having the state then as a result of having the state being able to trade and having the right to own property; the other option involves war, killing others to take what they have in their possession, every man for himself wild & savage beast kind of stuff - basically something chaotic, unstructured, and un-established when it comes to being civilized, or at least some sort of society.

Capitalism is generally the more peaceful & prosperous version of the two. Under capitalism, there can be two extremes, one where the state is nothing more than a referee to deal with contractual agreements, and go after criminals when there's a victim. The other extreme (in the economic context), is where the state intervenes with control of resources and means of production by placing bans, mandates, or other restrictions on buying, selling, or owning property. Under capitalism, the libertarian advocates for something close to the former.



Capitalism is not a necessity or even a given for libertarianism, so I think your premise is problematic.
We have no scarcity of anything except sense - there is plenty for everyone to use as wanted. Capitalism exports extreme violence out of any state that looks peaceful and creates constant mass unhappiness through its silly competition games. So all you are saying, I think, is that anything is nice that isn't nasty, but that is not possible. How can anyone be free in a class dictatorship that forces everyone to work about twenty times what is necessary, while preventing those with least personal resources from doing anything.
iolo is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Ideologies > Libertarian

Tags
libertarian



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Libertarian Quote of the Day Nwolfe35 Libertarian 78 March 13th, 2018 08:28 AM
Do you think we all have at least SOME libertarian CentristVoice Libertarian 42 May 30th, 2016 01:31 PM
Libertarian Scum Franklin Libertarian 1 September 13th, 2015 12:59 PM
YOU are Libertarian Nwolfe35 Current Events 10 August 13th, 2012 08:36 AM
The Libertarian party liberalguy Libertarian 15 February 1st, 2012 04:43 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.