Debate Now Is Libertarianism UnAmerican?

[Derideo_Te]

From the OP:

Taxation is another Libertarian pipe dream. The refuse to pay for anything that doesn't directly benefit them. So when they refuse to pay taxes to repair roads there are accidents that not only cost lives but impact the efficiency of corporations to receive raw materials and deliver finished goods. There are countless examples along these lines.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I can only assume that there is evidence that libertarians near universally refuse to pay established taxes and are in jail.

Or was the statement that they won't support new taxes ?

The claim is that they refuse to pay for anything that does not directly benefit them.

I am sure we'll get some links showing them being escorted to jail.

I pay my extortion money because I don't want to be violently kidnapped.

I expect you don't refuse to pay legally established taxes.

I don't know if that is what the OP was saying or not.

The disagreement would be in the claim that libertarians refuse to pay for anything that doesn't directly benefit them - suggesting that we're short-sighted or fail to appreciate indirect benefit - which isn't true. What libertarians are opposed to is coercion. We're opposed to the idea that government, even if it represents the will of the majority, should decide what is beneficial and force us to pay for it even if we disagree.

I am not sure of this wording.

If the will of the people dictates taxes...then we all pay taxes, including libertarians.

The claim that you don't is garbage (if that is actually the claim).

I would agree that the claim that libertarians don't want to pay anything that does not directly benefit them is also false.

Agreed. Most libertarians recognize the indirect benefits of altruism and social responsibility. They just balk at forcing it on people via government.

Too bad Libertarians don't have a viable and feasible alternative.

 

[dblack]

I pay my extortion money because I don't want to be violently kidnapped.

I expect you don't refuse to pay legally established taxes.

I don't know if that is what the OP was saying or not.

The disagreement would be in the claim that libertarians refuse to pay for anything that doesn't directly benefit them - suggesting that we're short-sighted or fail to appreciate indirect benefit - which isn't true. What libertarians are opposed to is coercion. We're opposed to the idea that government, even if it represents the will of the majority, should decide what is beneficial and force us to pay for it even if we disagree.

I am not sure of this wording.

If the will of the people dictates taxes...then we all pay taxes, including libertarians.

The claim that you don't is garbage (if that is actually the claim).

I would agree that the claim that libertarians don't want to pay anything that does not directly benefit them is also false.

Agreed. Most libertarians recognize the indirect benefits of altruism and social responsibility. They just balk at forcing it on people via government.

Too bad Libertarians don't have a viable and feasible alternative.

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I expect you don't refuse to pay legally established taxes.

I don't know if that is what the OP was saying or not.

The disagreement would be in the claim that libertarians refuse to pay for anything that doesn't directly benefit them - suggesting that we're short-sighted or fail to appreciate indirect benefit - which isn't true. What libertarians are opposed to is coercion. We're opposed to the idea that government, even if it represents the will of the majority, should decide what is beneficial and force us to pay for it even if we disagree.

I am not sure of this wording.

If the will of the people dictates taxes...then we all pay taxes, including libertarians.

The claim that you don't is garbage (if that is actually the claim).

I would agree that the claim that libertarians don't want to pay anything that does not directly benefit them is also false.

Agreed. Most libertarians recognize the indirect benefits of altruism and social responsibility. They just balk at forcing it on people via government.

Too bad Libertarians don't have a viable and feasible alternative.

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

 

[westwall]

The disagreement would be in the claim that libertarians refuse to pay for anything that doesn't directly benefit them - suggesting that we're short-sighted or fail to appreciate indirect benefit - which isn't true. What libertarians are opposed to is coercion. We're opposed to the idea that government, even if it represents the will of the majority, should decide what is beneficial and force us to pay for it even if we disagree.

I am not sure of this wording.

If the will of the people dictates taxes...then we all pay taxes, including libertarians.

The claim that you don't is garbage (if that is actually the claim).

I would agree that the claim that libertarians don't want to pay anything that does not directly benefit them is also false.

Agreed. Most libertarians recognize the indirect benefits of altruism and social responsibility. They just balk at forcing it on people via government.

Too bad Libertarians don't have a viable and feasible alternative.

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

Unfortunately the progressives are even worse. City and state governments are an excellent example of progressivism run amok. Detroit is probably the best example based on the simple fact that they have had the longest period of time to do their work.

Detroit is losing population, and has been for over 20 years. It is now a shell of its former great self. Bureaucrats and politicians have taken over from the wealthy industrialists with their corruption.

Libertarians are not selfish, as you claim, they are self reliant. If a major disaster occurs you had best be friends with one because they, not the government which will be in collapse, will be the ones to sort you out, and keep you alive.

 

[dblack]

The disagreement would be in the claim that libertarians refuse to pay for anything that doesn't directly benefit them - suggesting that we're short-sighted or fail to appreciate indirect benefit - which isn't true. What libertarians are opposed to is coercion. We're opposed to the idea that government, even if it represents the will of the majority, should decide what is beneficial and force us to pay for it even if we disagree.

I am not sure of this wording.

If the will of the people dictates taxes...then we all pay taxes, including libertarians.

The claim that you don't is garbage (if that is actually the claim).

I would agree that the claim that libertarians don't want to pay anything that does not directly benefit them is also false.

Agreed. Most libertarians recognize the indirect benefits of altruism and social responsibility. They just balk at forcing it on people via government.

Too bad Libertarians don't have a viable and feasible alternative.

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

Not at all. That's like saying a person who doesn't want to steal to feed their kids wants them to starve. Get a grip.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I am not sure of this wording.

If the will of the people dictates taxes...then we all pay taxes, including libertarians.

The claim that you don't is garbage (if that is actually the claim).

I would agree that the claim that libertarians don't want to pay anything that does not directly benefit them is also false.

Agreed. Most libertarians recognize the indirect benefits of altruism and social responsibility. They just balk at forcing it on people via government.

Too bad Libertarians don't have a viable and feasible alternative.

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

Unfortunately the progressives are even worse. City and state governments are an excellent example of progressivism run amok. Detroit is probably the best example based on the simple fact that they have had the longest period of time to do their work.

Detroit is losing population, and has been for over 20 years. It is now a shell of its former great self. Bureaucrats and politicians have taken over from the wealthy industrialists with their corruption.

Libertarians are not selfish, as you claim, they are self reliant. If a major disaster occurs you had best be friends with one because they, not the government which will be in collapse, will be the ones to sort you out, and keep you alive.

/ignored

 

[Derideo_Te]

I am not sure of this wording.

If the will of the people dictates taxes...then we all pay taxes, including libertarians.

The claim that you don't is garbage (if that is actually the claim).

I would agree that the claim that libertarians don't want to pay anything that does not directly benefit them is also false.

Agreed. Most libertarians recognize the indirect benefits of altruism and social responsibility. They just balk at forcing it on people via government.

Too bad Libertarians don't have a viable and feasible alternative.

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

Not at all. That's like saying a person who doesn't want to steal to feed their kids wants them to starve. Get a grip.

Since Libertarians don't have a feasible and viable plan to help the less fortunate they are forcing them into a life of crime because here is no other option available.

 

[dblack]

Agreed. Most libertarians recognize the indirect benefits of altruism and social responsibility. They just balk at forcing it on people via government.

Too bad Libertarians don't have a viable and feasible alternative.

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

Unfortunately the progressives are even worse. City and state governments are an excellent example of progressivism run amok. Detroit is probably the best example based on the simple fact that they have had the longest period of time to do their work.

Detroit is losing population, and has been for over 20 years. It is now a shell of its former great self. Bureaucrats and politicians have taken over from the wealthy industrialists with their corruption.

Libertarians are not selfish, as you claim, they are self reliant. If a major disaster occurs you had best be friends with one because they, not the government which will be in collapse, will be the ones to sort you out, and keep you alive.

/ignored

It's easier if you put your fingers in your ears and chant "I can't hear you" while you walk around in circles.

 

[westwall]

Agreed. Most libertarians recognize the indirect benefits of altruism and social responsibility. They just balk at forcing it on people via government.

Too bad Libertarians don't have a viable and feasible alternative.

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

Unfortunately the progressives are even worse. City and state governments are an excellent example of progressivism run amok. Detroit is probably the best example based on the simple fact that they have had the longest period of time to do their work.

Detroit is losing population, and has been for over 20 years. It is now a shell of its former great self. Bureaucrats and politicians have taken over from the wealthy industrialists with their corruption.

Libertarians are not selfish, as you claim, they are self reliant. If a major disaster occurs you had best be friends with one because they, not the government which will be in collapse, will be the ones to sort you out, and keep you alive.

/ignored

It must piss you off no end that you can't ignore me. Your juvenile tantrum aside, the evidence speaks for my viewpoint, and not yours. I look forward to you presenting an argument not based on emotion and prevarication.

 

[westwall]

Agreed. Most libertarians recognize the indirect benefits of altruism and social responsibility. They just balk at forcing it on people via government.

Too bad Libertarians don't have a viable and feasible alternative.

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

Not at all. That's like saying a person who doesn't want to steal to feed their kids wants them to starve. Get a grip.

Since Libertarians don't have a feasible and viable plan to help the less fortunate they are forcing them into a life of crime because here is no other option available.

But, they do. The less fortunate are less fortunate because the progressive government wants them to remain that way. The war on poverty has spent well over 5 trillion dollars and the end result is there are now MORE people in poverty than before. And, what's worse the situation is getting worse.

Education is terrible in our public schools thus our workers can't compete on a level field. Illegal immigrants drive down the wages of everyone here, and remove the jobs that the youth used to do which gave them life experience while they were still in school.

Progressivism has been a net drain on society and has harmed far more people than it has helped.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Too bad Libertarians don't have a viable and feasible alternative.

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

Unfortunately the progressives are even worse. City and state governments are an excellent example of progressivism run amok. Detroit is probably the best example based on the simple fact that they have had the longest period of time to do their work.

Detroit is losing population, and has been for over 20 years. It is now a shell of its former great self. Bureaucrats and politicians have taken over from the wealthy industrialists with their corruption.

Libertarians are not selfish, as you claim, they are self reliant. If a major disaster occurs you had best be friends with one because they, not the government which will be in collapse, will be the ones to sort you out, and keep you alive.

/ignored

It's easier if you put your fingers in your ears and chant "I can't hear you" while you walk around in circles.

WW has proven that he is incapable of engaging in civil discourse without resorting to specious vulgarities hence I reminded him that he is being ignored.

That situation will prevail since he is incapable of rehabilitating himself.

 

[westwall]

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

Unfortunately the progressives are even worse. City and state governments are an excellent example of progressivism run amok. Detroit is probably the best example based on the simple fact that they have had the longest period of time to do their work.

Detroit is losing population, and has been for over 20 years. It is now a shell of its former great self. Bureaucrats and politicians have taken over from the wealthy industrialists with their corruption.

Libertarians are not selfish, as you claim, they are self reliant. If a major disaster occurs you had best be friends with one because they, not the government which will be in collapse, will be the ones to sort you out, and keep you alive.

/ignored

It's easier if you put your fingers in your ears and chant "I can't hear you" while you walk around in circles.

WW has proven that he is incapable of engaging in civil discourse without resorting to specious vulgarities hence I reminded him that he is being ignored.

That situation will prevail since he is incapable of rehabilitating himself.

And yet here I am countering your remarks with facts and you resort to juvenile tantrums. Thanks for letting the world see the true you.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

Unfortunately the progressives are even worse. City and state governments are an excellent example of progressivism run amok. Detroit is probably the best example based on the simple fact that they have had the longest period of time to do their work.

Detroit is losing population, and has been for over 20 years. It is now a shell of its former great self. Bureaucrats and politicians have taken over from the wealthy industrialists with their corruption.

Libertarians are not selfish, as you claim, they are self reliant. If a major disaster occurs you had best be friends with one because they, not the government which will be in collapse, will be the ones to sort you out, and keep you alive.

/ignored

It's easier if you put your fingers in your ears and chant "I can't hear you" while you walk around in circles.

WW has proven that he is incapable of engaging in civil discourse without resorting to specious vulgarities hence I reminded him that he is being ignored.

That situation will prevail since he is incapable of rehabilitating himself.

Is this as an effort at humor ?

Praytell, what specious vulgarities ? I am dying to have you point them out in his post.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

Unfortunately the progressives are even worse. City and state governments are an excellent example of progressivism run amok. Detroit is probably the best example based on the simple fact that they have had the longest period of time to do their work.

Detroit is losing population, and has been for over 20 years. It is now a shell of its former great self. Bureaucrats and politicians have taken over from the wealthy industrialists with their corruption.

Libertarians are not selfish, as you claim, they are self reliant. If a major disaster occurs you had best be friends with one because they, not the government which will be in collapse, will be the ones to sort you out, and keep you alive.

/ignored

It's easier if you put your fingers in your ears and chant "I can't hear you" while you walk around in circles.

WW has proven that he is incapable of engaging in civil discourse without resorting to specious vulgarities hence I reminded him that he is being ignored.

That situation will prevail since he is incapable of rehabilitating himself.

And yet here I am countering your remarks with facts and you resort to juvenile tantrums. Thanks for letting the world see the true you.

It is unfortunate that what you speak appears to be true.

I quoted part of the OP where the claim was made that libertarians "refuse" to pay taxes. On the surface, this would look like a claim of civil disobedience. I expect the OP is smarter than that, si I've asked for clarification. So far, nothing.

Additionally, I still see nothing that defines "un-American".

The OP is really going from bad (failure) to really bad (failure).

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Too bad Libertarians don't have a viable and feasible alternative.

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

Not at all. That's like saying a person who doesn't want to steal to feed their kids wants them to starve. Get a grip.

Since Libertarians don't have a feasible and viable plan to help the less fortunate they are forcing them into a life of crime because here is no other option available.

But, they do. The less fortunate are less fortunate because the progressive government wants them to remain that way. The war on poverty has spent well over 5 trillion dollars and the end result is there are now MORE people in poverty than before. And, what's worse the situation is getting worse.

Education is terrible in our public schools thus our workers can't compete on a level field. Illegal immigrants drive down the wages of everyone here, and remove the jobs that the youth used to do which gave them life experience while they were still in school.

Progressivism has been a net drain on society and has harmed far more people than it has helped.

I suppose that is the definition of being American (as opposed to being unAmerican).

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I am not sure of this wording.

If the will of the people dictates taxes...then we all pay taxes, including libertarians.

The claim that you don't is garbage (if that is actually the claim).

I would agree that the claim that libertarians don't want to pay anything that does not directly benefit them is also false.

Agreed. Most libertarians recognize the indirect benefits of altruism and social responsibility. They just balk at forcing it on people via government.

Too bad Libertarians don't have a viable and feasible alternative.

The viable and feasible alternative to forcing others to bend to your will is: don't.

AKA letting the least fortunate suffer and die under a selfish Libertarian regime.

Not at all. That's like saying a person who doesn't want to steal to feed their kids wants them to starve. Get a grip.

Yes, what we have here is the fallacy of false dilemas.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

This was the next paragraph from the OP that sounded almost strange:

Worst of all Libertarians hate democracy. They don't want to have to obey laws passed by a democratically elected majority and signed into law if they don't agree with them. Libertarians don't want any laws that would infringe upon their individual rights, period. (Just read their manifesto, er, platform on the Libertarian Party website.)

Hate democracy: First of all we are a republic. And no, they don't hate it.

They don't want to have to obey laws......garbage.

As shown earlier, they understand the concept of federalism.

Libertarians don't want any laws that would infringe upon their individual rights, period. Hello, the conservative point of view is certainly similar. And there is nothing wrong with wanting to maximize your liberty.....but that does not mean we all have to subscribe to that same philosophy and I don't believe they would make us.

Libertarians don't want to stand up for the right of gays to have wedding cakes baked for them by businesses that bake wedding cakes if it goes against their religious beliefs about gays.

Knock knock....not the only ones. Conservatives certainly are backing those who feel that way. Why are Libertarians being singled out ? This isn't about anything as much as it is about the garbage claims of the OP.

Gays don't have any more rights than anyone else. Forcing businesses to do things against the beliefs of their owners is what is UnAmerican.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The more I thought about it, the more I had to wonder.

Why, if libertarians hate democracy so much, are they so active in elections ?

They constantly run third party candidates and (as has already been shown) they have successfully participated in elections in New Hampshire and are now part of the government.

Would a party that hates democracy do that ? Doubtfully

 

[Delta4Embassy]

There was an article written on the Thom Hartmann website in 2011 called "Libertarianism - the Un-American Pipe Dream that Backfires".

It exposed the fundamental paradox of Libertarianism which can be summarized as having the ideal of absolute individual rights will always result in a complete loss of all of those rights.

None of the Libertarian ideals actually work in practice.

Remove all regulations on corporations and the subsequent pollution alone will end up destroying other corporations. For example if one state has a corporation that spews toxins into a river that runs downstream to a state where corporations depend upon fishing and tourism from that same river there is nothing in Libertarianism that prevents that from happening. The rights of the corporate owners to pump toxins into the river is absolute in a Libertarian Utopia. That it kills fish and destroys the livelihoods of others cannot be used to challenge those rights. There is not government regulation allowed to prevent that from happening. Those harmed, if still alive, might try to sue but since they don't have standing in the other state they probably won't even get a hearing from a judge.

Taxation is another Libertarian pipe dream. The refuse to pay for anything that doesn't directly benefit them. So when they refuse to pay taxes to repair roads there are accidents that not only cost lives but impact the efficiency of corporations to receive raw materials and deliver finished goods. There are countless examples along these lines.

Worst of all Libertarians hate democracy. They don't want to have to obey laws passed by a democratically elected majority and signed into law if they don't agree with them. Libertarians don't want any laws that would infringe upon their individual rights, period. (Just read their manifesto, er, platform on the Libertarian Party website.)

There is something fundamentally wrong with Libertarianism to the point of being unAmerican. Personal individual rights only exist because others are willing to stand up for those rights just as it is the duty of every American to stand up for the rights of others. Libertarians don't want to stand up for the right of gays to have wedding cakes baked for them by businesses that bake wedding cakes if it goes against their religious beliefs about gays.

Unfortunately Libertarians just don't understand how the Constitution and their rights actually work. Instead they want to tear it all down in a "constitutional convention" and throw out all of the rules and regulations and start from scratch.

That is why Libertarians are, to all intents and purposes, unAmerican.

The Question to be Debated in this Discussion:

Is Libertarianism unAmerican? ​

RULES FOR THIS DISCUSSION:

1. No ad hominems.
2. Dictionary definitions will prevail.
3. Claiming that you are speaking on behalf of others is forbidden.
4. What you post is de facto your opinion unless substantiated with credible links.
5. When you are asked to provide a credible link to substantiate your position you must do so or you automatically forfeit your position.
6. Links can be contested and if they can be shown to be biased they will be discounted.
7. If you are going to invoke partisan terminology then be prepared to have it called out for what it is.
8. No one is exempt from legitimate criticism including the OP.

To say something's un-American, you'd have to be able to define or demonstrate what "being American" is.

Would say the person who says something's un-Americans is the only one un-American. We tolerate all ideas here, wanna be an atheist communist anarchist you're just as American as the Baptist Democrat for law and order.

 

[Derideo_Te]

There was an article written on the Thom Hartmann website in 2011 called "Libertarianism - the Un-American Pipe Dream that Backfires".

It exposed the fundamental paradox of Libertarianism which can be summarized as having the ideal of absolute individual rights will always result in a complete loss of all of those rights.

None of the Libertarian ideals actually work in practice.

Remove all regulations on corporations and the subsequent pollution alone will end up destroying other corporations. For example if one state has a corporation that spews toxins into a river that runs downstream to a state where corporations depend upon fishing and tourism from that same river there is nothing in Libertarianism that prevents that from happening. The rights of the corporate owners to pump toxins into the river is absolute in a Libertarian Utopia. That it kills fish and destroys the livelihoods of others cannot be used to challenge those rights. There is not government regulation allowed to prevent that from happening. Those harmed, if still alive, might try to sue but since they don't have standing in the other state they probably won't even get a hearing from a judge.

Taxation is another Libertarian pipe dream. The refuse to pay for anything that doesn't directly benefit them. So when they refuse to pay taxes to repair roads there are accidents that not only cost lives but impact the efficiency of corporations to receive raw materials and deliver finished goods. There are countless examples along these lines.

Worst of all Libertarians hate democracy. They don't want to have to obey laws passed by a democratically elected majority and signed into law if they don't agree with them. Libertarians don't want any laws that would infringe upon their individual rights, period. (Just read their manifesto, er, platform on the Libertarian Party website.)

There is something fundamentally wrong with Libertarianism to the point of being unAmerican. Personal individual rights only exist because others are willing to stand up for those rights just as it is the duty of every American to stand up for the rights of others. Libertarians don't want to stand up for the right of gays to have wedding cakes baked for them by businesses that bake wedding cakes if it goes against their religious beliefs about gays.

Unfortunately Libertarians just don't understand how the Constitution and their rights actually work. Instead they want to tear it all down in a "constitutional convention" and throw out all of the rules and regulations and start from scratch.

That is why Libertarians are, to all intents and purposes, unAmerican.

The Question to be Debated in this Discussion:

Is Libertarianism unAmerican? ​

RULES FOR THIS DISCUSSION:

1. No ad hominems.
2. Dictionary definitions will prevail.
3. Claiming that you are speaking on behalf of others is forbidden.
4. What you post is de facto your opinion unless substantiated with credible links.
5. When you are asked to provide a credible link to substantiate your position you must do so or you automatically forfeit your position.
6. Links can be contested and if they can be shown to be biased they will be discounted.
7. If you are going to invoke partisan terminology then be prepared to have it called out for what it is.
8. No one is exempt from legitimate criticism including the OP.

To say something's un-American, you'd have to be able to define or demonstrate what "being American" is.

Would say the person who says something's un-Americans is the only one un-American. We tolerate all ideas here, wanna be an atheist communist anarchist you're just as American as the Baptist Democrat for law and order.

The OP says that dictionary definitions will prevail.

Here are two that you could have looked up for yourself;

Un-american Define Un-american at Dictionary.com

un-American

adjective
1.
not American; not characteristic of or proper to the U.S.; foreign or opposed to the characters,values, standards, goals, etc., of the U.S.

Un-American Definition of un-American by Merriam-Webster

un–American

adjective un–Amer·i·can \ˌən-ə-ˈmer-ə-kən\

: not agreeing with American values, principles, or traditions