Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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:
- No ad hominems.
- Dictionary definitions will prevail.
- Claiming that you are speaking on behalf of others is forbidden.
- What you post is de facto your opinion unless substantiated with credible links.
- When you are asked to provide a credible link to substantiate your position you must do so or you automatically forfeit your position.
- Links can be contested and if they can be shown to be biased they will be discounted.
- If you are going to invoke partisan terminology then be prepared to have it called out for what it is.
- 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
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:
- No ad hominems.
- Dictionary definitions will prevail.
- Claiming that you are speaking on behalf of others is forbidden.
- What you post is de facto your opinion unless substantiated with credible links.
- When you are asked to provide a credible link to substantiate your position you must do so or you automatically forfeit your position.
- Links can be contested and if they can be shown to be biased they will be discounted.
- If you are going to invoke partisan terminology then be prepared to have it called out for what it is.
- 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
So what are American values, principles, or traditions?
Every foreign national's un-American by the first standard. And any American at all could claim to be representative of American values, principals, and traditions. Was HUAC and McCarthy "American?"
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.
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.
“Anarchism is founded on the observation that since few men are wise enough to rule themselves, even fewer are wise enough to rule others.”- Ed Abbey
Libertarians would say that there is a spectrum which runs from anarchy to authoritarianism. It has nothing to do with right vs. left. A libertarian would be closer to the anarchist end of the spectrum than say a Bloomberg who would like to ban your large soda. Thomas Jefferson would be closer to the anarchist side of the scale, but Hamilton would be more authoritarian.
Nobody is an absolute anarchist, just as no-one is for unchecked authoritarianism. We're talking about degrees.
I believe everyone is a selective libertarian. When Pelosi tells the government to stay out of her womb, she's attempting to make a libertarian argument. On the other hand, the most ardent libertarians would probably agree that we should have a law banning vehicle-mounted grenade launchers on the freeway.
Libertarian ideals absolutely work in practice. The internet was built by thousands of private entities. Not only was it built in a libertarian fashion, but the tool itself promotes libertarianism. Uber, for example, is a peer-to-peer phenomenon which threatens the heavily regulated taxi cartel.
Lastly, a true libertarian has faith in the goodness of men. That is contrasted by Hobbes' Leviathan ( a necessary evil that is threatening enough or sufficiently awe inspiring to maintain public order).
“Anarchism is not a romantic fable but the hardheaded realization, based on five thousand years of experience, that we cannot entrust the management of our lives to kings, priests, politicians, generals, and county commissioners.”-Ed Abbey
The two examples you cited are not Libertarianism as a form of government. Instead they are simply examples of capitalism in action.
The two examples you cited are not Libertarianism as a form of government. Instead they are simply examples of capitalism in action.
You said it right there. The internet is an example of capitalism in action and how infrastructure can be built without much help from government. You can say the same thing about the global cell phone network. It happened quickly and organically.
One thing about libertarians is that they don't agree, because they each have minds of their own. But if you ask me about libertarianism as a characteristic of government, I could start with a few platform ideas;
1. End the war on drugs
2. End the One Nation Under Surveillance
3. Military sufficient enough to protect our borders, but no more of these oversea adventures and trying to solve problems for other countries. No more Team America World Police.
4. Free market health care system. No GP gatekeeper system. Freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want (if any), the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions. People should be free to purchase health insurance across state lines.
etc...
How is that any different from Obama saying he wants to "fundamentally change" America?
From the perspective that Americans are free to believe in and embrace Libertarianism you are correct.
However from the pragmatic aspect if Libertarianism were to be implemented it would effectively destroy America as we know it today and that fits the definition of unAmericanism IMO.
Items 1, 2 and 3 are liberal positions.
Number 4 is a proven failure already because Libertarianism doesn't work in practice.
Healthcare for profit is anathema to the concept of the General Welfare of We the People.
How is that any different from Obama saying he wants to "fundamentally change" America?
From the perspective that Americans are free to believe in and embrace Libertarianism you are correct.
However from the pragmatic aspect if Libertarianism were to be implemented it would effectively destroy America as we know it today and that fits the definition of unAmericanism IMO.
Libertarian ideals have more in common with the fundamental founding principles than any other political party today
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.
“Anarchism is founded on the observation that since few men are wise enough to rule themselves, even fewer are wise enough to rule others.”- Ed Abbey
Libertarians would say that there is a spectrum which runs from anarchy to authoritarianism. It has nothing to do with right vs. left. A libertarian would be closer to the anarchist end of the spectrum than say a Bloomberg who would like to ban your large soda. Thomas Jefferson would be closer to the anarchist side of the scale, but Hamilton would be more authoritarian.
Nobody is an absolute anarchist, just as no-one is for unchecked authoritarianism. We're talking about degrees.
I believe everyone is a selective libertarian. When Pelosi tells the government to stay out of her womb, she's attempting to make a libertarian argument. On the other hand, the most ardent libertarians would probably agree that we should have a law banning vehicle-mounted grenade launchers on the freeway.
Libertarian ideals absolutely work in practice. The internet was built by thousands of private entities. Not only was it built in a libertarian fashion, but the tool itself promotes libertarianism. Uber, for example, is a peer-to-peer phenomenon which threatens the heavily regulated taxi cartel.
Lastly, a true libertarian has faith in the goodness of men. That is contrasted by Hobbes' Leviathan ( a necessary evil that is threatening enough or sufficiently awe inspiring to maintain public order).
“Anarchism is not a romantic fable but the hardheaded realization, based on five thousand years of experience, that we cannot entrust the management of our lives to kings, priests, politicians, generals, and county commissioners.”-Ed Abbey
If Libertarianism is such a wonderful and practical concept why has it never worked in practice?
The two examples you cited are not Libertarianism as a form of government. Instead they are simply examples of capitalism in action.
The internet was developed by the military for the purpose of preventing nuclear bombs disrupting communications. Capitalists found a way to exploit it and make money.
Uber is nothing more than disruptive technology changing the business model of an existing market.
So no, there is nothing at all Libertarian about telling the religious right that they cannot violate the Constitution and overturn the right to privacy. That is a Liberal stance to adopt and is line with the Founding Fathers Liberal principles.
Not relly. They are what democrats would have been if slavery was never in the country. Spoiled and demanding but calling it liberalClearly libertarians confuse 'toes'.
Not relly. They are what democrats would have been if slavery was never in the country.Clearly libertarians confuse 'toes'.
There is no right to privacy.
Yes . You take liberties with the constitution and others freedoms.Not relly. They are what democrats would have been if slavery was never in the country.Clearly libertarians confuse 'toes'.
There's some truth to that, despite coming from you. Libertarians are "real" liberals, when it comes down to it.
Libertarian ideals have more in common with the fundamental founding principles than any other political party today
"Liberal" used to be live and let live. Now it more commonly refers to paternalism and the need for government to be the shepherd of the citizenry both here and abroad, and in that sense it no longer applies to items 1,2 and 3. I certainly don't see those items on any Hillary platform.
In regard to issue 4, Obamacare is a system which takes taxpayer money and or borrowed/created fiat money and hands it directly to private corporations. It's a racket where the private corporations turn around support the campaigns of the politicians who support that system. It sets up the most blunt form of crony capitalism.
On the other hand, if you de-regulate the healthcare system, maybe I can legally go see someone with a junior college degree to inexpensively stitch up a cut on my arm. All you need is good hand-eye coordination, a little pain killer and a sterile needle.
Maybe I choose to use alternative forms medicine and I shouldn't be forced to buy an insurance plan that doesn't cover the medical practices I believe in.
Medicare began in 1966, I'm pretty sure. It's not like the federal government has always been the master of healthcare, and we should be open to the fact that the 21st Century might avail us of a more effective libertarian model. Right now we're at the point where people have access to information from the internet and from wearable devices that go a long way toward creating a paradigm of health independence.
How is that any different from Obama saying he wants to "fundamentally change" America?
From the perspective that Americans are free to believe in and embrace Libertarianism you are correct.
However from the pragmatic aspect if Libertarianism were to be implemented it would effectively destroy America as we know it today and that fits the definition of unAmericanism IMO.
Libertarian ideals have more in common with the fundamental founding principles than any other political party today
Indeed. Libertarianism is about as "American" as it gets. The OP is playing Orwellian doublespeak.
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:
- No ad hominems.
- Dictionary definitions will prevail.
- Claiming that you are speaking on behalf of others is forbidden.
- What you post is de facto your opinion unless substantiated with credible links.
- When you are asked to provide a credible link to substantiate your position you must do so or you automatically forfeit your position.
- Links can be contested and if they can be shown to be biased they will be discounted.
- If you are going to invoke partisan terminology then be prepared to have it called out for what it is.
- No one is exempt from legitimate criticism including the OP.
