Five myths about Libertarianism

[TakeAStepBack]

That's just a dodge so you people don't have to address the gaping flaws of logic, reason, and common sense that libertarianism represents.

You people are trying to tell us that libertarianism represents both pro-abortion and anti-abortion.

What the fuck is that? That's like saying in my religion, it's both a sin and not a sin to steal.

lol. Are you trying to convince us that to be a Libertarian is to stand for nothing?

No one said libertarianism respresents both of those. it's a personal issue best left to the individual involved. The doctor and patient. Libertarianism as one of it's main philosophical points, is that people are INDIVIDUALS.

I realize you come from the hive, where everyone buzzes on and on sasying the same shit and no dissent to any issue is allowed. We dont have that problem. We embrace individuals right to take responsibility for themselves and their decisions. Whether I like it or not or advocate it is entirely beside the point. it's not my decision to make, nor is it anyone elses, what some woman decides about abortion, or whether a doctor chooses to, or chooses not to perform it for their own INDIVIDUAL beliefs.

The fact you can not grasp this is of course, to no one's surprise here.

So if I support the fundamental principles of Roe v. Wade, which I do,

am I a libertarian or not?

You're about as libertarian as i am LOLberal. You really aren't very good at this stuff at all. it's a giant mountain of nonsense with you and nothing more.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[No professor it's more akin to claiming that Catholics and Protestants are both Christians even though they draw different conclusions from the same philosophy.

.

So you can be Libertarian on abortion either by wanting it legal and wanting it illegal? Both positions represent Libertarianism?

Because there are pro-choice and anti-choice Christians.

All you're saying is that Libertarianism can't be meaningfully applied to the issue of abortion.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No one said libertarianism respresents both of those. it's a personal issue best left to the individual involved. The doctor and patient. Libertarianism as one of it's main philosophical points, is that people are INDIVIDUALS.

I realize you come from the hive, where everyone buzzes on and on sasying the same shit and no dissent to any issue is allowed. We dont have that problem. We embrace individuals right to take responsibility for themselves and their decisions. Whether I like it or not or advocate it is entirely beside the point. it's not my decision to make, nor is it anyone elses, what some woman decides about abortion, or whether a doctor chooses to, or chooses not to perform it for their own INDIVIDUAL beliefs.

The fact you can not grasp this is of course, to no one's surprise here.

So if I support the fundamental principles of Roe v. Wade, which I do,

am I a libertarian or not?

You're about as libertarian as i am LOLberal. You really aren't very good at this stuff at all. it's a giant mountain of nonsense with you and nothing more.

In case you didn't notice, abortion was one of the five 'myths' in the OP.

What is the libertarian view of abortion?

 

[Plasmaball]

You quote two different posters (with no attribution on either of them I might add) in an effort to demonstrate the difference in opinion between them and then scoff at the idea of libertarian individualism, the defense rests your honor, the prosecution has made our case for us. Or were you perhaps attempting to practice some deception in your omission of attribution there and hoping nobody would notice those quotes came from two different people?



You are of course entitled to your opinions, hopefully such notions have the intended of effect of making you feel better about yourself.

Have a wonderful day.

i know i did, That was the point. It shows not even people arguing on your side of things can agree.

I don't have a side, I'm a student of philosophy not a player in "politics as a team sport", you can agree with my conclusions regarding philosophy or not, we can discuss them on condition that you are a thoughtful, rational individual (something which is still in doubt).


I'm not sure how you arrive at that conclusion given that I don't belong to or believe in political parties, I'm sure the details of your reasoning will be fascinating though.

I dont need to show the difference in posters because you yourself just made the same argument that uncensored made.

Really? maybe you should go back and review what was said, who said it and the chronological order in which it was said.

Its too easy with you people. Everyone wants to think they are an individual, Liberal, Con, and liberts.
There is no hive mind, there is just set ideal policies people agree on.

I did not assert libertarian individualism ( I assumed that the individuality of individuals was self evident, apparently I was mistaken) nor do I have a "set of ideal policies", you're either engaged in projection or you're reading things that aren't there.

i stand by what i said and don't buy this crap you are pushing.
if you do not have a set of ideals then you are a worthless nothing.
are you a mindless robot then programmed to spew forth this info? You must be since you seem to have no core values.

What a joke.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Oh, the repeater, heh?

Sure. The libertarian view is that no government involvement. While you turn around and cite case law you approve of which somehow as only ONE issue would make you libertarian.

You're just stuck on the abortion issue, aren't you? Is it because you absolutely have no clue regarding any of the other issues, or is it the meds you're on?

What kind of meds are those, anyway? Some sort of lithium or something?

 

[Pete7469]

lol, it's hard to figure out what Libertarians would do if elected to high office,

But not leftists - because Pete is right, you all march in lockstep, more automatons than people. The party dictates what you think and feel. You will do whatever the party prefers, in every case. Hillary, Obama, Edwards, Biden - it's all the same, different clown masks on mindless drones who execute party orders to the letter.

until some of them actually get elected.

You're right. Libertarians are individuals, each one a free thinker who hold views of their own. But unlike the democrats, Libertarians prize integrity; so the candidate will probably do what he or she said they would do.

Exactly, case in point ;

The Iraq War. Libertarians oppopsed it. I didn't and I'm still proud to have had an insignificant role in getting rid of a despotic authortarian regime that terrorized the entire region, and committed unspeakable acts to it's own people.

The bed wetting moonbats however didn't just oppose it. They protested violently, destroyed property, infiltrated public offices and raised hell. They slandered public officials and attempted to sabotage military logistics. They slandered troops, pretended to be troops, and just in general made complete asses out of themselves.

Libertarians opposed it peacefully, and were equally as opposed to the moonbat messiah lobbing missles all over the world, interfering in civil wars, ignoring soveriegn borders and killing US Citizens without a trial.

The bed wetters? They CELEBRATE all these events as "proof" their moonbat messiah was "tough on terror".

So Bush invading the middle east, setting up camp, raising a flag and telling the terrorists all over the world to "bring it on" was somehow more reprehensible than arbitrarily lobbing missles all over the world and killing buildings full of people who just happened to be in there with a suspected terrorist?

It takes someone as mindless as a liberal not to at least see the contrasts between the actions of the two presidents, but to support the guy who's actions are more reflective of a cowardly terrorist bomber than a man who at least risked his office and put boots on the ground in an effort to make sure buildings full of people who otherwise didn't deserve to die, didn't have too.

The ROE we had in Iraq was tough to deal with, but it limited collateral damage. It put people in a position to render aid if a mistake was made.

Lobbing bombs indiscriminately? That's what terrorists do.

And the moonbat messiah.

 

[Foxfyre]

So if I support the fundamental principles of Roe v. Wade, which I do,

am I a libertarian or not?

You're about as libertarian as i am LOLberal. You really aren't very good at this stuff at all. it's a giant mountain of nonsense with you and nothing more.

In case you didn't notice, abortion was one of the five 'myths' in the OP.

What is the libertarian view of abortion?

The libertarian view is that there should be no interference with the people being pro choice, if that is what they want, or pro life, if that is what they want, and, if it will be an official policy, it should be a component of the local social contract only. There is no constitutional basis for the federal government to take a position on abortion or have any jurisdiction over that.

 

[Pete7469]

Oh, the repeater, heh?

Sure. The libertarian view is that no government involvement. While you turn around and cite case law you approve of which somehow as only ONE issue would make you libertarian.

You're just stuck on the abortion issue, aren't you? Is it because you absolutely have no clue regarding any of the other issues, or is it the meds you're on?

What kind of meds are those, anyway? Some sort of lithium or something?

It's too bad some of these bed wetters survived Roe V Wade.

 

[thanatos144]

I like watching liberals and libertarians fight. They never realize how close ideological they are to each other.

You think? What similarities do you see? I'm afraid I don't see ANY similitaries other than maybe their choice in music or movies or such as that.

Sex, Drugs, Abortion, Foreign policy, Size of government (one want huge state government the other huger federal), Resp0onsibility, Religion and about everything BUT taxes.

 

[Pete7469]

I like watching liberals and libertarians fight. They never realize how close ideological they are to each other.

That's bullshit.

The foundation of liberalism is a massive authortarian state.

The entire concept of being a libertarian, is to have a minimally invasive state.

You would be wiser to read up on it friend.

 

[Pete7469]

yawn....go back to sucking dicks nazi.

What a clever retort, pussball. You think of that all by yourself?

You know bed wetters cannot think for themselves.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I like watching liberals and libertarians fight. They never realize how close ideological they are to each other.

That's bullshit.

The foundation of liberalism is a massive authortarian state.

The entire concept of being a libertarian, is to have a minimally invasive state.

You would be wiser to read up on it friend.

Corky is too busy stocking the beer cooler and learning correct pronunciation of the ingredients to convenience store packaged goods.

 

[Uncensored2008]

In case you didn't notice, abortion was one of the five 'myths' in the OP.

What is the libertarian view of abortion?

There is no Libertarian view on abortion.

There are pro-abortion Libertarians, and anti-abortion Libertarians - and some like me, that fall in-between.

Virtually all Libertarians oppose FEDERAL involvement in abortion, and take the side of the Constitution, leaving it up to the many states to decide.

You are a leftist - ergo without ethics. As such, you think yourself clever by merit of your dishonesty - but abortion has never been a litmus test for Libertarians the way it is for democrats.

 

[Pete7469]

Can anyone show an example where government was doing anything other than fucking everything up restraining any business over the last 50 years?

OBAAAAMAAAA Killed Ossama, and GM is still alive!!!

 

[Pete7469]

The topic isn't about the libertarian parties platform. it's about libertarioanism. i realize this must come as a shock, but not all libertarians are in the party.

And you went right ahead and used more flawed reasoning to support your flawed reasoning. Does this circle ever end?

That's just a dodge so you people don't have to address the gaping flaws of logic, reason, and common sense that libertarianism represents.

You people are trying to tell us that libertarianism represents both pro-abortion and anti-abortion.

What the fuck is that? That's like saying in my religion, it's both a sin and not a sin to steal.

lol. Are you trying to convince us that to be a Libertarian is to stand for nothing?

Politic is is becoming a religion to many citizens these days be they Democrat or Republican.
That is why we have a Libertarian Party.

Of course there's some of us who'd like to marginalize the zealots in the republicrat party, and defeat the democrooks.

 

[Foxfyre]

I like watching liberals and libertarians fight. They never realize how close ideological they are to each other.

You think? What similarities do you see? I'm afraid I don't see ANY similitaries other than maybe their choice in music or movies or such as that.

Sex, Drugs, Abortion, Foreign policy, Size of government (one want huge state government the other huger federal), Resp0onsibility, Religion and about everything BUT taxes.

Libertarians, as a group, take no position on sex other than it is none of the federal government's business. Liberals want government to set the rules liberals want re sex and how it is expressed.

Libertarians, as a group, take no official position on abortion other than it should be a local matter of conscience and the federal government has no constitutional authority to regulate it in any way. Liberals want the federal government to make abortion legal everywhere for everybody, period.

Libertarians, as a group, take no official position on foreign policy other than the federal government should be strictly limited to its constitutional authority when it comes to foreign policy. Liberals put no constitutional restrictions on much of anything.

Libertarians, as a group, take no official position on drugs other than it is appropriate for the federal government to have some oversight over safety issues re imported products, but the legalization and use of drugs by the people should be decided at the local level. Those states or communities who want them should be able to have them. Those that don't should be able to make them illegal. The federal government should stay out of that. Liberals want the federal government to have total control.

Libertarians take the view that those who want religious symbols, displays, and other religious expression should be free to have them. Those who don't want them should be able to have a socail contract that keeps them out of the public venue. The federal government cannot dictate any matters of religion and has no constitutional authority to interfere with that. Many anti-religious liberals would have the federal government remove all religious evidence from everything.

Libertarians believe people should be allowed to do whatever they choose to be or do so long as it requires no contribution or participation by any others. Liberals do not trust people to make all their own choices and want the federal government to be in charge of much of that.

Liberals want government to be their protector, safety net, mommy, daddy, and available teat if they get into any kind of difficulty. Libertarians see a government that can solve our problems as a government that can and will take anything it wants from us and therefore wants people to work out their own solutions to their problems and deal with the consequences of the choices they make.

Libertarians want the federal government to be restricted to its constitutionally mandated functions and be involved in absolutely nothing else.

I see no similarities of any kind between modern American liberals and libertarians.

 

[NightFox]

[No professor it's more akin to claiming that Catholics and Protestants are both Christians even though they draw different conclusions from the same philosophy.

.

So you can be Libertarian on abortion either by wanting it legal and wanting it illegal? Both positions represent Libertarianism?

Yes on the question of abortion, their are pro-choice libertarians and pro-life libertarians, the difference between the two is how they define "human life" or more accurately at what point it begins. Neither position however is incompatible with the principle of non-aggression, the pro-life libertarian believing that human life begins prior to birth feels that the state is justified in using force to protect the life of the unborn, the pro-choice libertarian believing that human life begins at birth doesn't believe that the state is justified in using force to violate the rights of the mother.

Because there are pro-choice and anti-choice Christians.

The reasoning of Christians on this issue is more likely to be based on religious beliefs rather than secular philosophical principle, not that a libertarian cannot be a christian and have religious objections to abortion it just in my experience that mode of reasoning is less prevalent in libertarian circles.

All you're saying is that Libertarianism can't be meaningfully applied to the issue of abortion.

That's inaccurate, I'm saying that in order to understand a given libertarians position on the question of abortion you need to pay attention to their reasoning on how they arrived at their particular conclusion, you know, look beneath the label and listen to the person with an open mind.

 

[NightFox]

You think? What similarities do you see? I'm afraid I don't see ANY similitaries other than maybe their choice in music or movies or such as that.

Sex, Drugs, Abortion, Foreign policy, Size of government (one want huge state government the other huger federal), Resp0onsibility, Religion and about everything BUT taxes.

Libertarians, as a group, take no position on sex other than it is none of the federal government's business. Liberals want government to set the rules liberals want re sex and how it is expressed.

Libertarians, as a group, take no official position on abortion other than it should be a local matter of conscience and the federal government has no constitutional authority to regulate it in any way. Liberals want the federal government to make abortion legal everywhere for everybody, period.

Libertarians, as a group, take no official position on foreign policy other than the federal government should be strictly limited to its constitutional authority when it comes to foreign policy. Liberals put no constitutional restrictions on much of anything.

Libertarians, as a group, take no official position on drugs other than it is appropriate for the federal government to have some oversight over safety issues re imported products, but the legalization and use of drugs by the people should be decided at the local level. Those states or communities who want them should be able to have them. Those that don't should be able to make them illegal. The federal government should stay out of that. Liberals want the federal government to have total control.

Libertarians take the view that those who want religious symbols, displays, and other religious expression should be free to have them. Those who don't want them should be able to have a socail contract that keeps them out of the public venue. The federal government cannot dictate any matters of religion and has no constitutional authority to interfere with that. Many anti-religious liberals would have the federal government remove all religious evidence from everything.

Libertarians believe people should be allowed to do whatever they choose to be or do so long as it requires no contribution or participation by any others. Liberals do not trust people to make all their own choices and want the federal government to be in charge of much of that.

Liberals want government to be their protector, safety net, mommy, daddy, and available teat if they get into any kind of difficulty. Libertarians see a government that can solve our problems as a government that can and will take anything it wants from us and therefore wants people to work out their own solutions to their problems and deal with the consequences of the choices they make.

Libertarians want the federal government to be restricted to its constitutionally mandated functions and be involved in absolutely nothing else.

I see no similarities of any kind between modern American liberals and libertarians.

IMHO You're devolving into an issues based tit-for-tat here Foxfyre, the fundamental difference between libertarians and modern "liberals" (or any other flavor of pro-statist ideology) is the libertarian belief in the principle of non-aggression and that it applies both to the individual AND the state. The modern "liberal" believes that the morality of the individual is separate from that of the state and thus the state is justified in using aggressive force (violence) to achieve it's goals while the individual is not, the libertarian believes that neither the individual nor the state is justified in initiating force to achieve it's goals. The use of force in the libertarian view is only justified by either party to protect the life, liberty and/or property of the citizenry.

It's really not a very complicated concept at it's core, however it can spawn a beautifully complex range of conclusions regarding any particular public policy question.

 

[Gadawg73]

Personally I have no problem with gays and do not judge them in any way morally or in the rights I believe they deserve.
Many Libertarians believe otherwise on religious grounds but still believe they have the same rights to marriage.
Same as many Democrats oppose massive waste in government give away programs.
Same as many Republicans oppose the ban on gay marriage in the GOP platform.

 

[Foxfyre]

Sex, Drugs, Abortion, Foreign policy, Size of government (one want huge state government the other huger federal), Resp0onsibility, Religion and about everything BUT taxes.

Libertarians, as a group, take no position on sex other than it is none of the federal government's business. Liberals want government to set the rules liberals want re sex and how it is expressed.

Libertarians, as a group, take no official position on abortion other than it should be a local matter of conscience and the federal government has no constitutional authority to regulate it in any way. Liberals want the federal government to make abortion legal everywhere for everybody, period.

Libertarians, as a group, take no official position on foreign policy other than the federal government should be strictly limited to its constitutional authority when it comes to foreign policy. Liberals put no constitutional restrictions on much of anything.

Libertarians, as a group, take no official position on drugs other than it is appropriate for the federal government to have some oversight over safety issues re imported products, but the legalization and use of drugs by the people should be decided at the local level. Those states or communities who want them should be able to have them. Those that don't should be able to make them illegal. The federal government should stay out of that. Liberals want the federal government to have total control.

Libertarians take the view that those who want religious symbols, displays, and other religious expression should be free to have them. Those who don't want them should be able to have a socail contract that keeps them out of the public venue. The federal government cannot dictate any matters of religion and has no constitutional authority to interfere with that. Many anti-religious liberals would have the federal government remove all religious evidence from everything.

Libertarians believe people should be allowed to do whatever they choose to be or do so long as it requires no contribution or participation by any others. Liberals do not trust people to make all their own choices and want the federal government to be in charge of much of that.

Liberals want government to be their protector, safety net, mommy, daddy, and available teat if they get into any kind of difficulty. Libertarians see a government that can solve our problems as a government that can and will take anything it wants from us and therefore wants people to work out their own solutions to their problems and deal with the consequences of the choices they make.

Libertarians want the federal government to be restricted to its constitutionally mandated functions and be involved in absolutely nothing else.

I see no similarities of any kind between modern American liberals and libertarians.

IMHO You're devolving into an issues based tit-for-tat here Foxfyre, the fundamental difference between libertarians and modern "liberals" (or any other flavor of pro-statist ideology) is the libertarian belief in the principle of non-aggression and that it applies both to the individual AND the state. The modern "liberal" believes that the morality of the individual is separate from that of the state and thus the state is justified in using aggressive force (violence) to achieve it's goals while the individual is not, the libertarian believes that neither the individual nor the state is justified in initiating force to achieve it's goals. The use of force in the libertarian view is only justified by either party to protect the life, liberty and/or property of the citizenry.

It's really not a very complicated concept at it's core, however it can spawn a beautifully complex range of conclusions regarding any particular public policy question.

Yes, most of these issues are not always strictly black or white but can sometimes include shades of gray that allow principle to override ideology. But the purpose of my post was to make the argument that libertarianism and modern American liberalism have nothing in common. I just used the issues Thanatos threw out there, at my request, to make the point.

I haven't thought of it in terms of aggression and non-aggression though and will think that one through. For me it is live and let live which maybe is the same thing just said differently?

In my view libertarianism is the freedom to do what is right and smart and edifying to me whether others agree or not. But there is no freedom if people are also not free to do what is wrong or stupid or destructive.

What people are allowed to do with impunity is measured by whether contribution or participation is required of others. If what I want to do requires you to contribute or participate in any way, I do not have any right to what I want or need. I do have the right to negotiate with you or form a social contract to accomplish my goal and it is your right to choose how much you wish to participate in that process.

Modern American liberalism would give government the power to determine what is for my own good, to have at least some control over what I should or should not be allowed to do in my own interest, and to confiscate whatever it needs/wants of my space, labor, or property for some fuzzy concept of the 'common good'.