Just What is Libertarianism?

[PratchettFan]

If you remove the coercive mandate of government, how is economic coercion prohibited?

If my understanding of the term "economic coercion" is accurate, nothing. From my reading it's just another form of persuasion.

Then you lack understanding of the term. If I buy a grocery store in a town, then purchase or come to an agreement with trucking companies servicing the town, then I can control competition by simply cutting off access to goods for any other store. I then control the food supply of the town. I can then apply precisely the same approach to hardware, electronics, or any other type of outlet to pretty much control the entire town. That is economic coercion. As you said, it is prohibited. But the only reason it is prohibited is because of that horrible coercive mandate of government.

The mocking tone is unnecessary. I don't think all state coercion is "horrible". When it's in defense of our freedoms, that's exactly what I want from government.

So it sounds like you're using "economic coercion" as a reference to the monopoly problem. True monopolies are rare, and as such I see little problem with using government, in those rare instances, to address the problem. Especially since the problem can usually be traced to a manipulation of state power in the first place.

Persuasion is not a limited term. Holding a gun to your head is persuasion too.

The gun makes it coercive. But if you tell you someone that you'll fire them if they don't do what you want, or that you won't shop at their store, is not coercive, and it's that conception of "economic coercion" that I consider just another form of persuasion.

You're right. My apologies. The tone was unnecessary. I am more than capable of being a bit of a jerk and I appreciate your bringing it to my attention.

Monopolies are rare because they are prohibited. If they exist at all, they do so under strict governmental control. If monopolies were not prohibited, they would not be rare. They would be pretty much all there is.

If I control your access to life's necessities, own the home you live in and the place you earn your money, then I can certainly coerce you any way I like. Otherwise, you are penniless and homeless - as will be your family. It is the threat that makes it coercion, not the gun.

There is a reason these things are illegal. The laws did not just appear out of nowhere. If you find some arcane law on the books that said you can't tie a duck to your head and march in front of a school, you can bet the bank its because someone insisted on doing that very thing and scaring the kids. Company towns existed, major firms in the late 19th century attempted to quash competition through control of raw materials and transportation. These are not hypothetical examples, I'm pulling them right out of our history. The laws we have today exist as a response to the problems those practices created. Remove the prohibitions and the problems return because people have not changed.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Libertarianism: I got mine, fuck the rest of you

Here's your first clue as to why anyone would attack Libertarianism. Blatant stupidity.

Yes, our genius Founders were libertarians who not coincedently created greatest country in human history.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Libertarians: I got mine or hope to get it, let me show you how to get yours and not become a crippled dependent living on Democratic welfare.

 

[Avorysuds]

Libertarian: We believe in freedom and liberty
Republican: We believe in freedom and liberty: By way of welfare, wars, taxes and countless laws and regulations.
Democrat: We believe in freedom and liberty: By way of welfare, wars, taxes and countless laws and regulations.

 

[rightwinger]

If Libertarians believe in the concept of "No harm, no foul" I am OK with it

Smoking a joint does not harm anyone.....leave it alone
Prostitution does not harm anyone.....leave it alone
Gays are not harming anyone.....leave them alone

But they go beyond that in a blind fanaticism that the founding fathers somehow knew everything this country would ever need

You know, the founders never supported welfare so we shouldn't do it


You know, the founders never said we should have healthcare, social security or schools....so we don't need them

As a broad philosophy, Libertarianism views are worth considering. But the movement has filled with whack jobs and haters who are little more than anarchists

"You know, the founders never supported welfare so we shouldn't do it"

Not at the Federal level, this is obviously something the founders had intended the various states to deal with. The constitution even states that any power not specifically delegated to the federal government is an issue to be dealt with by the states.

"You know, the founders never said we should have healthcare, social security or schools....so we don't need them"

Same as above, these issues are to be left to the various states to find the best solutions. ESPECIALLY education. That is a deeply local issue, how one educates ones child. The fact that there is a national agency to treat kids all across the land the same? Complete bureaucratic, corporate evil.


When you end your post with an ad hominem attack by saying, "the movement has filled with whack jobs and haters," you do yourself no favors. You only make them look quite good by comparing them to the most politically wise of all, anarchists. Remember, it's that State that is evil, not the individuals that question the wisdom of these bureaucratic monstrosities. Those individuals have learned from history, why haven't you?

The founders lived in a different era with a different concept of the role of government at different levels

They couldn't have had a strong federal government if they wanted to. The country was too big, too poor and communicationand movement between the states was tedious

The concept of public welfare has evolved since the 18th century. It was once the resposibility of local communities and churches. As our country grew to over 300 million people, local charity could no longer work

 

[manorchurch]

I've read several of your blattings, "rightwinger". You know absolutely nothing about libertarianism; you have a very loud opinion, quite obviously formed in utter ignorance.

When I checked-out usmessageboard a few years ago, the phenomenon of the ignorant, ranting poster was already in full flower.

I see the trend continues.

 

[occupied]

I've read several of your blattings, "rightwinger". You know absolutely nothing about libertarianism; you have a very loud opinion, quite obviously formed in utter ignorance.

When I checked-out usmessageboard a few years ago, the phenomenon of the ignorant, ranting poster was already in full flower.

I see the trend continues.

If you judge American Libertarianism by the attitudes and comments of those who claim to be Libertarians it is not nearly so noble as the slate of beliefs on various websites. It is selfish, racist, corporatist and disdainful of civil rights.

 

[rightwinger]

I've read several of your blattings, "rightwinger". You know absolutely nothing about libertarianism; you have a very loud opinion, quite obviously formed in utter ignorance.

When I checked-out usmessageboard a few years ago, the phenomenon of the ignorant, ranting poster was already in full flower.

I see the trend continues.

Two posts in four years

I can see why you waited so long for this one

 

[manorchurch]

I've read several of your blattings, "rightwinger". You know absolutely nothing about libertarianism; you have a very loud opinion, quite obviously formed in utter ignorance.

When I checked-out usmessageboard a few years ago, the phenomenon of the ignorant, ranting poster was already in full flower.

I see the trend continues.

If you judge American Libertarianism by the attitudes and comments of those who claim to be Libertarians it is not nearly so noble as the slate of beliefs on various websites. It is selfish, racist, corporatist and disdainful of civil rights.

You too.

Here, try this: Libertarianism Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Yes, it's long and complicated.

Most people who rant wildly against libertarian principles do not have the faintest notion of what they are.

 

[manorchurch]

I've read several of your blattings, "rightwinger". You know absolutely nothing about libertarianism; you have a very loud opinion, quite obviously formed in utter ignorance.

When I checked-out usmessageboard a few years ago, the phenomenon of the ignorant, ranting poster was already in full flower.

I see the trend continues.

Two posts in four years

I can see why you waited so long for this one

No problem You are a consummate self-righteous jackass.

Ignored.

 

[rightwinger]

I've read several of your blattings, "rightwinger". You know absolutely nothing about libertarianism; you have a very loud opinion, quite obviously formed in utter ignorance.

When I checked-out usmessageboard a few years ago, the phenomenon of the ignorant, ranting poster was already in full flower.

I see the trend continues.

If you judge American Libertarianism by the attitudes and comments of those who claim to be Libertarians it is not nearly so noble as the slate of beliefs on various websites. It is selfish, racist, corporatist and disdainful of civil rights.

You too.

Here, try this: Libertarianism Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Yes, it's long and complicated.

Most people who rant wildly against libertarian principles do not have the faintest notion of what they are.

Libertarians have no idea who they are

Other than opposing anything they do not directly benefit from



.

 

[dblack]

I've read several of your blattings, "rightwinger". You know absolutely nothing about libertarianism; you have a very loud opinion, quite obviously formed in utter ignorance.

When I checked-out usmessageboard a few years ago, the phenomenon of the ignorant, ranting poster was already in full flower.

I see the trend continues.

If you judge American Libertarianism by the attitudes and comments of those who claim to be Libertarians it is not nearly so noble as the slate of beliefs on various websites. It is selfish, racist, corporatist and disdainful of civil rights.

You too.

Here, try this: Libertarianism Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Yes, it's long and complicated.

Most people who rant wildly against libertarian principles do not have the faintest notion of what they are.

Libertarians have no idea who they are

Other than opposing anything they do not directly benefit from

:yawn:

Still flinging it?

 

[occupied]

I've read several of your blattings, "rightwinger". You know absolutely nothing about libertarianism; you have a very loud opinion, quite obviously formed in utter ignorance.

When I checked-out usmessageboard a few years ago, the phenomenon of the ignorant, ranting poster was already in full flower.

I see the trend continues.

If you judge American Libertarianism by the attitudes and comments of those who claim to be Libertarians it is not nearly so noble as the slate of beliefs on various websites. It is selfish, racist, corporatist and disdainful of civil rights.

You too.

Here, try this: Libertarianism Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Yes, it's long and complicated.

Most people who rant wildly against libertarian principles do not have the faintest notion of what they are.

Libertarians have no idea who they are

Other than opposing anything they do not directly benefit from

It's nothing more than a cowardly way to be a republican voter but never having to defend them. Being on the defensive sucks, this way they never have to do anything but attack. Since no legislature in it's right mind will actually do any of the stuff they say they want they get to continually play the noble, lone defender of Americanism while refusing to meaningfully participate.

 

[rightwinger]

I've read several of your blattings, "rightwinger". You know absolutely nothing about libertarianism; you have a very loud opinion, quite obviously formed in utter ignorance.

When I checked-out usmessageboard a few years ago, the phenomenon of the ignorant, ranting poster was already in full flower.

I see the trend continues.

If you judge American Libertarianism by the attitudes and comments of those who claim to be Libertarians it is not nearly so noble as the slate of beliefs on various websites. It is selfish, racist, corporatist and disdainful of civil rights.

You too.

Here, try this: Libertarianism Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Yes, it's long and complicated.

Most people who rant wildly against libertarian principles do not have the faintest notion of what they are.

Libertarians have no idea who they are

Other than opposing anything they do not directly benefit from

It's nothing more than a cowardly way to be a republican voter but never having to defend them. Being on the defensive sucks, this way they never have to do anything but attack. Since no legislature in it's right mind will actually do any of the stuff they say they want they get to continually play the noble, lone defender of Americanism while refusing to meaningfully participate.

Libertarians wrap themselves in the concept that they are they only "true Americans"

Yet at no time in our history has anyone adopted their ideals

 

[occupied]

I've read several of your blattings, "rightwinger". You know absolutely nothing about libertarianism; you have a very loud opinion, quite obviously formed in utter ignorance.

When I checked-out usmessageboard a few years ago, the phenomenon of the ignorant, ranting poster was already in full flower.

I see the trend continues.

If you judge American Libertarianism by the attitudes and comments of those who claim to be Libertarians it is not nearly so noble as the slate of beliefs on various websites. It is selfish, racist, corporatist and disdainful of civil rights.

You too.

Here, try this: Libertarianism Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Yes, it's long and complicated.

Most people who rant wildly against libertarian principles do not have the faintest notion of what they are.

Libertarians have no idea who they are

Other than opposing anything they do not directly benefit from

It's nothing more than a cowardly way to be a republican voter but never having to defend them. Being on the defensive sucks, this way they never have to do anything but attack. Since no legislature in it's right mind will actually do any of the stuff they say they want they get to continually play the noble, lone defender of Americanism while refusing to meaningfully participate.

Libertarians wrap themselves in the concept that they are they only "true Americans"

Yet at no time in our history has anyone adopted their ideals

Libertarianism is as unnatural a system of governance and every bit as fraught with the peril of tyranny as communism. Both are built on dogma as to how they think people ought to act rather than working with how people actually are and what they expect from their society.

 

[reason10]

Okay, over and over again, I'm reading articles attacking this political philosophy. Here's what Wiki says about it:


Libertarianism (Latin: liber, "free") is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its principal objective. Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, emphasizing political freedom, voluntary association and the primacy of individual judgement.


If this is the case, why should there be so many attacks against what is, to me, the very foundation of Americanism? Is it a growing dependence on government? An indoctrination in the education system against self-reliance?


And the left – and even some conservatives, are attacking Doctor Rand Paul for being a Libertarian running under a false flag. (I like some of his views, but still would vote for an governor over him)


What do you think?

Libertarianism in American politics can be summed up on one word: Irrelevant.

There aren't enough grass roots libertarians to get a free market individual elected dog catcher. There aren't even enough libertarians to pull votes from a Republican candidate in a close race. Ralph Nader's Green Party actually has more power, by yanking liberal Democrat votes from Algore.

So what's the point of discussing our latest crazy uncle in the basement?

 

[occupied]

Okay, over and over again, I'm reading articles attacking this political philosophy. Here's what Wiki says about it:


Libertarianism (Latin: liber, "free") is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its principal objective. Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, emphasizing political freedom, voluntary association and the primacy of individual judgement.


If this is the case, why should there be so many attacks against what is, to me, the very foundation of Americanism? Is it a growing dependence on government? An indoctrination in the education system against self-reliance?


And the left – and even some conservatives, are attacking Doctor Rand Paul for being a Libertarian running under a false flag. (I like some of his views, but still would vote for an governor over him)


What do you think?

Libertarianism in American politics can be summed up on one word: Irrelevant.

There aren't enough grass roots libertarians to get a free market individual elected dog catcher. There aren't even enough libertarians to pull votes from a Republican candidate in a close race. Ralph Nader's Green Party actually has more power, by yanking liberal Democrat votes from Algore.

So what's the point of discussing our latest crazy uncle in the basement?

Because some of their lunacy has infected the GOP making them seem terribly schizophrenic at times.

 

[rightwinger]

If you judge American Libertarianism by the attitudes and comments of those who claim to be Libertarians it is not nearly so noble as the slate of beliefs on various websites. It is selfish, racist, corporatist and disdainful of civil rights.

You too.

Here, try this: Libertarianism Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Yes, it's long and complicated.

Most people who rant wildly against libertarian principles do not have the faintest notion of what they are.

Libertarians have no idea who they are

Other than opposing anything they do not directly benefit from

It's nothing more than a cowardly way to be a republican voter but never having to defend them. Being on the defensive sucks, this way they never have to do anything but attack. Since no legislature in it's right mind will actually do any of the stuff they say they want they get to continually play the noble, lone defender of Americanism while refusing to meaningfully participate.

Libertarians wrap themselves in the concept that they are they only "true Americans"

Yet at no time in our history has anyone adopted their ideals

Libertarianism is as unnatural a system of governance and every bit as fraught with the peril of tyranny as communism. Both are built on dogma as to how they think people ought to act rather than working with how people actually are and what they expect from their society.

Libertarianism does not work at any level of government. Its base animosity towards the functions of government along with the basic selfishness of its practitioners make it an impossible form of government

 

[kaz]

Most people who rant wildly against libertarian principles do not have the faintest notion of what they are.

Libertarians have no idea who they are

Here you go:

What is a small government libertarian US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Other than opposing anything they do not directly benefit from.

While liberals support only that you do directly benefit from, you're the ho, ho

 

[dblack]

So what's the point of discussing our latest crazy uncle in the basement?

Can't think of any. Yet here you are, discussing libertarianism. Must be something to it after all.