Why Should Liberals Like Libertarian Ideas?

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

The useless ideology you refer to, is a principle.
I hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose.
As govt. grows this dominion is reduced.


Moreover, over 90% of the issues we face are connected and/or intertwined, and the 1 by 1 method ends up being just as flawed.

No, it's an ideology. Principles don't have names, political parties, blind followers etc. Principles are or aren't. Libertarianism has already been destroyed by reality in the form of the Tea Party.

Many of the issues we face can be solved in isolation. If the govt stopped buying mortgages home prices would come back to real levels. If the govt stopped guaranteeing student loans and forbidding people to declare bankruptcy/defaulting on them, tuitions would go down. We already see what's going on with healthcare.... again, a well managed single payer program or regulations on the things actually driving costs (the completely arbitrary pricing of services for example) would actually solve the problem.

U know what tho, Im tired of giving u all this game. Keep clinging to meaningless ideologies and letting white men who probably hate you do all your thinking for you. People who are too scared to think for themselves deserve whatever comes to them

 

[Julius Skrrvin]

id love to hear where the loyalty and faith in unregulated cacs comes from

Ive never heard it framed like this before...

 

[DEAD7]

id love to hear where the loyalty and faith in unregulated cacs comes from

It comes from the systemic racism, and permanent underclass blacks have been reduced to under regulation.
I'd rather roll the dice in an open "free market" where we could compete on an equal playing field, rather than pander for handouts and entitlements. If you think whites are gonna voluntarily give up power, or that the system is gonna work for us, you are lying to your self.


I also think that if allowed to compete side by side with whites, black will eventually be giving them that work. We excel and eventually end up running every arena we are allowed to compete in. Its getting a chance to compete that's the challenge.



Now where does you faith in white run govt. come from?

 

[DEAD7]

Many of the issues we face can be solved in isolation. If the govt stopped buying mortgages home prices would come back to real levels. If the govt stopped guaranteeing student loans and forbidding people to declare bankruptcy/defaulting on them, tuitions would go down. We already see what's going on with healthcare.... again, a well managed single payer program or regulations on the things actually driving costs (the completely arbitrary pricing of services for example) would actually solve the problem.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Anything, socialism, libertarianism, private industry, liberalism, conservatism, will fail if it's not well managed/implemented. Makes more sense to me to address those issues directly than blame the underlying ideology. The Nordic countries show how well big govt can work. Big govt isnt the problem, incompetent govt is.

 

[DEAD7]

Anything, socialism, libertarianism, private industry, liberalism, conservatism, will fail if it's not well managed/implemented. Makes more sense to me to address those issues directly than blame the underlying ideology. The Nordic countries show how well big govt can work. Big govt isnt the problem, incompetent govt is.

I agree that the Nordic countries are good examples of effective govt, but not so much big govt.

The recent NSA revelations really put what we have here in America on another level(as far as intrusive and overreaching). I'm not sure side by side comparisons with any nation can be made at this point. Our policy of intervention, spying, with zero accountability are unparalleled.

... and as much as people are going to trash it, the libertarian platform is the only one rejecting the droning of women and children overseas, and the domestic spy program.


i agree with you're solutions on every issue you have named(save single payer), but I must say... your solutions sound pretty libertarian. is it simply the ideology itself you reject? Cause your positions line up almost perfectly.

 

[NZA]

It comes from the systemic racism, and permanent underclass blacks have been reduced to under regulation.
I'd rather roll the dice in an open "free market" where we could compete on an equal playing field, rather than pander for handouts and entitlements. If you think whites are gonna voluntarily give up power, or that the system is gonna work for us, you are lying to your self.


I also think that if allowed to compete side by side with whites, black will eventually be giving them that work. We excel and eventually end up running every arena we are allowed to compete in. Its getting a chance to compete that's the challenge.


Now where does you faith in white run govt. come from?

i dont have faith in white government. im agnostic in many things, so faith is not a strong point for people like me. unlike you, i dont wholly subscribe to an all or nothing ideology based on myths and fairy tales. i think government is a natural consequence of all societies. so i dont believe we can ever escape it. our only recourse is to attempt to shape it as much as possible, because everyone else always will attempt to do the same, regardless of which kind of system you have.this is th real way human history has played out, and there is no reason to assume anything has fundamentally changed.

history shows that when left to their own devices, unregulated cacs become super cacs. unlike yours, my beliefs are not vague and theoretical, they are based on recent history.

no one is stopping you from competing, and we are not the only ones who have received an entitlement or handout

and of course they wont voluntarily give up power, that's why i like my cacs regulated.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

I agree that the Nordic countries are good examples of effective govt, but not so much big govt.

The recent NSA revelations really put what we have here in America on another level(as far as intrusive and overreaching). I'm not sure side by side comparisons with any nation can be made at this point. Our policy of intervention, spying, with zero accountability are unparalleled.

... and as much as people are going to trash it, the libertarian platform is the only one rejecting the droning of women and children overseas, and the domestic spy program.

i agree with you're solutions on every issue you have named(save single payer), but I must say... your solutions sound pretty libertarian. is it simply the ideology itself you reject? Cause your positions line up almost perfectly.

Again, the shyt with the NSA isn't so much an issue of big govt as it is with accountability and pissing on the constitution. Nordic countries are way "bigger" per capita and as a % of GDP, but they don't do shyt like the Patriot Act or the NSA. They barely have militaries and they don't bother anybody. So a lot of our problems are just cultural... US is obsessed with being the leading central superpower, and goofy shyt like the NSA and our out of control military spending comes from that. Ideology doesn't matter, Democrats and Republicans all support it.

And for starters, I voted for Gary Johnson in the last election. So for all my gripes and concerns with libertarianism I think it is still a better alternative to the mainstream. On paper, it's leaner and lines up with a lot of my views on issues, and more importantly it would serve as a much needed wedge in the current political duopoly. So why don't I jump on the bandwagon? Well for starters I do think there are places our govt needs to slim down, but I don't think small govt for no other reason than a knee jerk hatred of govt is a smart idea. There are countries with bigger govts than ours with stronger economies and healthier + happier citizens. Plus, I just fukking hate libertarians. Your performance in this thread pretty much embodies everything I don't like about "ideologists"... you're needlessly contrarian, hyperbolic ("all growth of govt will lead to communism which will kill us all!!!!!" "tyranny!!! freedom!!! liberty!!! property!!!!"), shamelessly biased ("the theory of libertarianism is superior to the failures of the practice of liberalism"), and of course eager to recruit, as a result of my biggest gripe with ideologists... a paralyzing fear of thinking for one's self. Libertarianism creates a thought paradigm that is neat and tidy and gives folks an arsenal of talking points to argue with people on both sides of the aisle. But like any ideology it's far from perfect and shouldn't be looked at as gospel.

So I think the best system is a combo of the best of as many ideologies as possible... closed mindedness and ideological rigidity has been the downfall of many men and societies.... libertarianism would not be an exception

 

[DEAD7]

history shows that when left to their own devices, unregulated cacs become super cacs. unlike yours, my beliefs are not vague and theoretical, they are based on recent history.

 

[DEAD7]

Again, the shyt with the NSA isn't so much an issue of big govt as it is with accountability and pissing on the constitution. Nordic countries are way "bigger" per capita and as a % of GDP, but they don't do shyt like the Patriot Act or the NSA. They barely have militaries and they don't bother anybody. So a lot of our problems are just cultural... US is obsessed with being the leading central superpower, and goofy shyt like the NSA and our out of control military spending comes from that. Ideology doesn't matter, Democrats and Republicans all support it.

And for starters, I voted for Gary Johnson in the last election. So for all my gripes and concerns with libertarianism I think it is still a better alternative to the mainstream. On paper, it's leaner and lines up with a lot of my views on issues, and more importantly it would serve as a much needed wedge in the current political duopoly. So why don't I jump on the bandwagon? Well for starters I do think there are places our govt needs to slim down, but I don't think small govt for no other reason than a knee jerk hatred of govt is a smart idea. There are countries with bigger govts than ours with stronger economies and healthier + happier citizens. Plus, I just fukking hate libertarians. Your performance in this thread pretty much embodies everything I don't like about "ideologists"... you're needlessly contrarian, hyperbolic ("all growth of govt will lead to communism which will kill us all!!!!!" "tyranny!!! freedom!!! liberty!!! property!!!!"), shamelessly biased ("the theory of libertarianism is superior to the failures of the practice of liberalism"), and of course eager to recruit, as a result of my biggest gripe with ideologists... a paralyzing fear of thinking for one's self. Libertarianism creates a thought paradigm that is neat and tidy and gives folks an arsenal of talking points to argue with people on both sides of the aisle. But like any ideology it's far from perfect and shouldn't be looked at as gospel.

So I think the best system is a combo of the best of as many ideologies as possible... closed mindedness and ideological rigidity has been the downfall of many men and societies.... libertarianism would not be an exception

I'd dap&rep this post, but....

... anyways I agree, and even though I have repeatedly made clear I dont think any pure system is viable, and admitted that social programs can be beneficial to capitalism.That said, I'll take the purest critique.
... I think you read too much into the theory versus reality comparison. Of course a theory I can come up with in my head at zero cost using abstract people is going to appear superior to what we have in reality. The idea is to vet the idea(which you delight in doing) and point out the flaws in any would be application. If the theory seemed worse than reality what would be the point.
... Communism is the central planning end game. I don't know what else to say on that. I don't think its an exaggeration at all. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though, and look int it more, but i'm sure thats where it leads.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

I'd dap&rep this post, but....

... anyways I agree, and even though I have repeatedly made clear I dont think any pure system is viable, and admitted that social programs can be beneficial to capitalism.That said, I'll take the purest critique.
... I think you read too much into the theory versus reality comparison. Of course a theory I can come up with in my head at zero cost using abstract people is going to appear superior to what we have in reality. The idea is to vet the idea(which you delight in doing) and point out the flaws in any would be application. If the theory seemed worse than reality what would be the point.

Im not saying we shouldn't look at theory at all, or that theory has no value; I think looking at theory is a good exercise and can yield some good ideas. But looking at, discussing and agreeing with parts of theory != "being a libertarian", or claiming that....

... Communism is the central planning end game. I don't know what else to say on that. I don't think its an exaggeration at all. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though, and look int it more, but i'm sure thats where it leads.

This is a theory with plenty of real world evidence that contradicts its absoluteness. Again, Nordic countries are very heavily centrally planned... what is your proof... not gut feeling or baseless theory... that they will inevitably end up communist? Can you make a case beyond "I dont know what else to say on that"? This is the kind of "talking point from my ideology handbook" garbage I'm talking about.

 

[DEAD7]

This is a theory with plenty of real world evidence that contradicts its absoluteness. Again, Nordic countries are very heavily centrally planned... what is your proof... not gut feeling or baseless theory... that they will inevitably end up communist? Can you make a case beyond "I dont know what else to say on that"? This is the kind of "talking point from my ideology handbook" garbage I'm talking about.

Thomas Jefferson said, "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." His statement is profound and clearly characterizes our slide toward socialism as a natural progression in the cycle of a maturing country. Why? As people increasingly raise their standard of living, they want others to takeover much of that which earlier generations routinely accepted as individual responsibilities.
People always want others to handle things for them they don't want to bothered with. Since governments and political systems are made up of people and reflect human attitudes and behavior, examples at the individual level are applicable and often more easily understood. The principles of this progression toward wanting others to handle things therefore apply both to individuals and government. When applied to individuals, it leads to laziness. When applied to government, it leads to socialism.

I think when the stress upon the framework(of socialism) becomes too much, it gives way to communism.

But your right, I should provide some real world evidence of this. Ill dig some up and get back to you.


side note: Marx theorized that capitalism would give way socialism(via class warfare), and ultimately end in communism... and I'd hardly refer to him as a libertarian.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Thomas Jefferson said, "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." His statement is profound and clearly characterizes our slide toward socialism as a natural progression in the cycle of a maturing country. Why? As people increasingly raise their standard of living, they want others to takeover much of that which earlier generations routinely accepted as individual responsibilities.
People always want others to handle things for them they don't want to bothered with. Since governments and political systems are made up of people and reflect human attitudes and behavior, examples at the individual level are applicable and often more easily understood. The principles of this progression toward wanting others to handle things therefore apply both to individuals and government. When applied to individuals, it leads to laziness. When applied to government, it leads to socialism.

I think when the stress upon the framework(of socialism) becomes too much, it gives way to communism.

But your right, I should provide some real world evidence of this. Ill dig some up and get back to you.

side note: Marx theorized that capitalism would give way socialism(via class warfare), and ultimately end in communism... and I'd hardly refer to him as a libertarian.

So much wrong in this post. I just don't have the energy anymore. Do you fam

 

[acri1]

It comes from the systemic racism, and permanent underclass blacks have been reduced to under regulation.
I'd rather roll the dice in an open "free market" where we could compete on an equal playing field, rather than pander for handouts and entitlements. If you think whites are gonna voluntarily give up power, or that the system is gonna work for us, you are lying to your self.


I also think that if allowed to compete side by side with whites, black will eventually be giving them that work. We excel and eventually end up running every arena we are allowed to compete in. Its getting a chance to compete that's the challenge.

Now where does you faith in white run govt. come from?

What you honestly don't seem to understand at all is that power abhors a vacuum. If you take away any sort of regulation, that simply means that instead of the government making the rules, the people with the most money and power (mostly rich white guys to be honest) will make the rules instead....to their advantage. You don't seem to get that if you take away the government, then whoever has the most power will take its place. The idea of some utopian society with a "true" free market where nobody has an advantage over anyone else is unrealistic at best.

Basically, what I'm saying is that either we set up a government to set rules (and keep it accountable to the populace) or whoever in a society has the most money/power will set the rules instead. It's either or.

 

[Mikael Blowpiff]

The main reason I can't take libertarians seriously when it comes to use of force is because many of the employed ones tend to be involved with the defense and security industry. Marc Andreesen, for example, was decrying the NSAs actions yet he invested in a number of the startup firms that provided them with the platforms and frameworks that they used to gather information. You can check all of that shyt on Crunchbase. If you take "vote with your dollar" at face value then by that standard he's unscrupulous and a liar.