Libertarianism: Freedom from Logic

[numan]

'
I feel great sympathy for the Libertarian viewpoint; I share many of their concerns. But I am repulsed by their blind and lop-sided thinking. They have drawn our attention to many Great Truths, but remember what the great physicist, Niels Bohr, said:

The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth.

To fully understand a great truth, one must also understand the cogency of its opposite.

For instance: Libertarians are hypnotized by their fantasy of the Free Enterprise System. Now, if this religious ideal could exist, it would have a number of positive aspects ---- it would also have a number of negative aspects. But the real point is that it is a fantasy, a will-o'-the-wisp which ever recedes as you pursue it. Free enterprise does not exist, never has existed, and will exist ever less and less, if the libertarians have their way.

Libertarians rightly see the dangers of government, especially Big Government. But they do not see the dangers of business, especially Big Business. They see everywhere the virtues of the Invisible Hand of the Marketplace, but they ignore the dangers of the Invisible Mind of the Marketplace.

During the Middle Ages, the peasants were usually in alliance with the king, against the nobles. They were not friends, but they had a common enemy, and the peasants were in more immediate danger from the nobility than from the more distant king.

Today, the little people are endangered by both Big Government and Big Business, but Monopoly Transnational Corporations are a more immediate and profound threat than government. They insinuate themselves into every crevice of our lives, and, if unchecked, would quickly reduce all of us to serfdom and slavery. Business monopolies are the antithesis of the free enterprise ideal, and bear far more resemblance to Stalin's state capitalism than to the virtue and pluck of libertarians' competitive small-business ideal.
Government is a dangerous ally, and is now mainly controlled by Big Business Monopolies, but what other choice do the little people have than to try to use the power of government to protect themselves from being eaten alive by the Monopoly Corporations? If libertarians really want to see their ideals bear some practical fruit, they should think long and hard about countering the tyranny of Big Business as well as fighting the dangers of Big Government. Then they might find more allies.

I remember a time when small businessmen were more important in American life than they are now. Under the influence of a lop-sided and unrealistic way of thinking, they usually voted for right-wing candidates who told them pleasing lies. Once in power, these supposed supporters of free-enterprise served the interests of the richest and most powerful. Then the Big Box stores spread everywhere, marginalizing and bankrupting the small businessmen who were suckered into electing the servants of Transnational Monopoly Business. Most of these gullible people probably still vote for right-wing candidates. Thus we see that narrow-minded and obstinate clinging to only one way of looking at things can defeat even the power of basic self-interest.
.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

The problem is that you associate Free Market ideology with Corporatism & Interventionalism

Did you know the Federal Reserve is a private centralized bank? They even freely admit it on their own website.

Free market ideology denounces monopolies, government favoritism, and government intervention (other than breaking monopolies***). The Federal Reserve has created "monopolized" currency. The Federal reserve does bailouts (interventionalism/Keynesian) and favors certain businesses by putting smaller ones out of competition with excessive regulations and expenses (private bankers/corporations lobby and control Congress).

Of course, this also depends on which definition of "Monopoly" you are using.

***We often hear that we need government to intervene to prevent monopolies. But the truth is that on a free market there are no monopolies: monopolies are created by government intervention.

A bit of history is helpful. Originally the term “monopoly” referred to a special government privilege that protected a company from competition, whether through a franchise, a subsidy, or some other legal restriction on entering a field. The old East India Company, for example, had true monopoly power: the British empire would not allow any other British company to trade in the East Indies. (A modern example would be the U.S. Postal Service. If you try to compete in the delivery of first class mail, the government will put a stop to it.)

But during the 19th century, the critics of capitalism switched the meaning of “monopoly” from a company that was protected from competition by government to a company that achieved a dominant position in a given market.

This was a totally illegitimate switch. A coercive, government-backed monopoly is protected from competition; a company that has achieved a dominant position on a free market is not. A coercive, government-backed monopoly can subject its customers to poor service and high prices, since the customers have nowhere else to go. But if a company that has achieved a dominant position on a free market then slacks off, the door is open to any competitor who can do better.

So in this case, "breaking a monopoly" would be repealing the laws and regulations that created it.

One most also learn how terms and definitions have changed over time in order to understand the history of their philosophies. For instance, modern liberals (progressives) are diametrically opposed to Classical Liberalism, yet most modern liberals say "lol dude, Thomas Jefferson was a liberal!" Meanwhile Jefferson stands in strong contrast to their beliefs.

You should consult this diagram to see how sorely confused you are:

If you notice that your core beliefs don't have an intersecting area in the Venn diagram, it's because you harbor incompatible and contradictory beliefs, riddled with paradoxes and logical absurdities. If you don't believe me, you should really go and get yourself an education and discover where your true philosophies are rooted.

You can't be an "Anarchist" who believes in both Socialism and Progressivism simultaneously. Conversely you can't be a Progressive who believes in Socialism and Anarchism; or a Socialist who believes in Anarchism and Progressivism.

You can't believe in a free market and corporatism at the same time (WHAT A SHOCKER FOR NEO-CON-TARDS). You can't believe in Natural Rights (Classical Liberalism) and forced tolerance at the same time (WHAT A SHOCKER FOR LIBTARDS).

You can't believe in Republicanism combined with unaccountable & unelected bloated bureaucracies (Our Supreme Court decides to allow Congress to delegate its law making powers to the Bureaucracy).

If you're a Classical Liberal and a Capitalist, you cannot be an Authoritarian. Conversely, if you're an Authoritarian, you cannot be both Capitalist and a Classical Liberal; nor can you be Capitalist and be both Classical Liberal and Authoritarian.

This is not to say that there exists neither persons nor philosophies that actually harbor these combinations, its just that these person's/philosophies contain contradictory elements (a Marxist-Capitalist, A Libertarian-Statist, Republican-Monarchy, etc) and/or hidden paradoxes (A Classical Liberal that believes in Socialism and Progressivism).

Contradictions are seen in the diametrically opposed circles, where hidden paradoxes are exposed by combining a circle to the two circles adjacent to the diametrically opposed circle.

For instance, 1 and 4 are polar opposites, as are 2 and 5, and 3 and 6. These are direct contradictions.

Hidden paradoxes arise in 1 and (3,5) ; 2 and (4,6) ; 3 and (1, 5) ; 4 and (2, 6) ; 5 and (1,3) ; 6 and (2,4)

This is not to be construed to mean that the combination of 1 + 3, or 1 + 5 contain hidden paradoxes in philosophical thought; however the combination of all three 1 + 3 + 5 will lead to paradoxes.

 

[Pete7469]

One reason why libertarians will never be a dominant political force isn't because there's a problem with their economic school of though.

It's because freedom is hard to handle for a lot of people. It takes personal responsibility first of all, having enough brains to know just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do it. There are also too many people who can't tolerate people behaving in ways that really cause no harm to anyone.

The free markets we had, to the extent we've had them created a financial jaugernaut. We're still on top, but in decline because we've increasingly abandoned free market ideas for fascism.

I don't think any system is perfect, or that a gold standard is fool proof. There have just been too many corrupted politicians gumming up the works for far too long.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The problem with libertarianism is the same with communism: human nature is corrupt. Communism leads to cadres to dominate the people, libertarianism produces societies of "equals" to dominate the people. They are the flip sides of the same coin of depraved human nature.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

The problem with libertarianism is the same with communism: human nature is corrupt. Communism leads to cadres to dominate the people, libertarianism produces societies of "equals" to dominate the people. They are the flip sides of the same coin of depraved human nature.

Except under Libertarianism you can start ffrom nothing and become something. There's hope.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The problem with libertarianism is the same with communism: human nature is corrupt. Communism leads to cadres to dominate the people, libertarianism produces societies of "equals" to dominate the people. They are the flip sides of the same coin of depraved human nature.

Except under Libertarianism you can start ffrom nothing and become something. There's hope.

To become a war lord? In communism you can become a commissar.

 

[Pete7469]

The problem with libertarianism is the same with communism: human nature is corrupt. Communism leads to cadres to dominate the people, libertarianism produces societies of "equals" to dominate the people. They are the flip sides of the same coin of depraved human nature.

That sounds awful cynical, but I can't help but agree in part.

I suppose I still prefer things heavily slanted towards a libertarian society, merely because I'm confident I can be prosperous on my own merits.

In a communist system your only real chance for prosperity is through corruption.

I don't think human nature is corrupt though, plenty of people maintain morality and ethics even in positions they could get away with wild corruption. It's the individuals, not the species.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

That sounds awful cynical, but I can't help but agree in part.

I suppose I still prefer things heavily slanted towards a libertarian society, merely because I'm confident I can be prosperous on my own merits.

In a communist system your only real chance for prosperity is through corruption.

I don't think human nature is corrupt though, plenty of people maintain morality and ethics even in positions they could get away with wild corruption. It's the individuals, not the species.

This is where Libertarianism (in practice) truly shines. Everyone has a chance to compete for government positions in a society of free information. If people choose to be ignorant and follow dogmatic party platforms, that's their unfortunate choice.

 

[Pete7469]

The problem with libertarianism is the same with communism: human nature is corrupt. Communism leads to cadres to dominate the people, libertarianism produces societies of "equals" to dominate the people. They are the flip sides of the same coin of depraved human nature.

Except under Libertarianism you can start ffrom nothing and become something. There's hope.

To become a war lord? In communism you can become a commissar.

100 posts!!!

Libertarianism isn't anarchy.

 

[numan]

'

The problem is that you associate Free Market ideology with Corporatism & Interventionalism.

I wonder how you managed to construe that. I very much do not associate Free Market ideology with corporatism and interventionism. Rather, I regard them as being very close to opposites! That should have been very clear from my initial posting!! You should not jump to conclusions.

I suspect we agree on much more than you think.

I regard your diagram as too neat and theoretical to be realistic, but it does have some good points.

I am certainly not an anarchist. I very much think that sticks and carrots are necessary to keep humans from destroying themselves and their societies. If it is to be a good society, Truth, Beauty, Compassion and Harmony must be as important as the carrot and the stick (or more important).

I wish as much individual freedom as possible -- consistent with preventing the human race from destroying itself. That seems to imply less and less freedom as our present society degenerates and collapses.

I wish as much Free Enterprise as possible -- consistent with severe controls on commercial corruption, collusion and criminality. I applaud the Invisible Hand of the Marketplace -- but I never forget that it always goes along with the Invisible Mind of the Marketplace. I consider Monopolistic Transnational Mega-Corporations to be even more dangerous to the human race than is Big Government, which is itself enormously harmful. Increasingly, there is less and less difference between the Two Great Satans.

If I had my way, the Military-Industrial Conspiracy would be progressively reduced until it could be drowned in a bathtub. I don't think much of George Washington (the traitor!!), but Old Wooden-Teeth was right in two things : beware the military and avoid foreign entanglements!!
.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

'

The problem is that you associate Free Market ideology with Corporatism & Interventionalism.

I wonder how you managed to construe that. I very much do not associate Free Market ideology with corporatism and interventionism. Rather, I regard them as being very close to opposites! That should have been very clear from my initial posting!! You should not jump to conclusions.

I suspect we agree on much more than you think.

I regard your diagram as too neat and theoretical to be realistic, but it does have some good points.

I am certainly not an anarchist. I very much think that sticks and carrots are necessary to keep humans from destroying themselves and their societies. If it is to be a good society, Truth, Beauty, Compassion and Harmony must be as important as the carrot and the stick (or more important).

I wish as much individual freedom as possible -- consistent with preventing the human race from destroying itself. That seems to imply less and less freedom as our present society degenerates and collapses.

I wish as much Free Enterprise as possible -- consistent with severe controls on commercial corruption, collusion and criminality. I applaud the Invisible Hand of the Marketplace -- but I never forget that it always goes along with the Invisible Mind of the Marketplace. I consider Monopolistic Transnational Mega-Corporations to be even more dangerous to the human race than is Big Government, which is itself enormously harmful. Increasingly, there is less and less difference between the Two Great Satans.

If I had my way, the Military-Industrial Conspiracy would be progressively reduced until it could be drowned in a bathtub. I don't think much of George Washington (the traitor!!), but Old Wooden-Teeth was right in two things : beware the military and avoid foreign entanglements!!
.

You'd probably enjoy the introduction essay of our organization, Aegis Of Liberty.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/the-...ommon-sense-2013-introduction/590942260935667

 

[regent]

So what nations are practicing libertarianism these days?

 

[The2ndAmendment]

So what nations are practicing libertarianism these days?

None, they are all owned by the Federal Reserve or other International Banks. They are all some form of Socialism, primarily Communism.


The Cold War was a battle between Corporate Communism and Despotic Communism.

World War II was battle about a very evil fascist dictator who managed to break free of the global communist (International Bankers) system that had impoverished their country into the dark ages.



For the record, I am Jewish, my name is Edward Solomon, and Zionism is the corruption of Judaism. Most Jews are opposed to Zionism.

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

'
I feel great sympathy for the Libertarian viewpoint; I share many of their concerns. But I am repulsed by their blind and lop-sided thinking. They have drawn our attention to many Great Truths, but remember what the great physicist, Niels Bohr, said:

The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth.

To fully understand a great truth, one must also understand the cogency of its opposite.

For instance: Libertarians are hypnotized by their fantasy of the Free Enterprise System. Now, if this religious ideal could exist, it would have a number of positive aspects ---- it would also have a number of negative aspects. But the real point is that it is a fantasy, a will-o'-the-wisp which ever recedes as you pursue it. Free enterprise does not exist, never has existed, and will exist ever less and less, if the libertarians have their way.

Libertarians rightly see the dangers of government, especially Big Government. But they do not see the dangers of business, especially Big Business. They see everywhere the virtues of the Invisible Hand of the Marketplace, but they ignore the dangers of the Invisible Mind of the Marketplace.

During the Middle Ages, the peasants were usually in alliance with the king, against the nobles. They were not friends, but they had a common enemy, and the peasants were in more immediate danger from the nobility than from the more distant king.

Today, the little people are endangered by both Big Government and Big Business, but Monopoly Transnational Corporations are a more immediate and profound threat than government. They insinuate themselves into every crevice of our lives, and, if unchecked, would quickly reduce all of us to serfdom and slavery. Business monopolies are the antithesis of the free enterprise ideal, and bear far more resemblance to Stalin's state capitalism than to the virtue and pluck of libertarians' competitive small-business ideal.
Government is a dangerous ally, and is now mainly controlled by Big Business Monopolies, but what other choice do the little people have than to try to use the power of government to protect themselves from being eaten alive by the Monopoly Corporations? If libertarians really want to see their ideals bear some practical fruit, they should think long and hard about countering the tyranny of Big Business as well as fighting the dangers of Big Government. Then they might find more allies.

I remember a time when small businessmen were more important in American life than they are now. Under the influence of a lop-sided and unrealistic way of thinking, they usually voted for right-wing candidates who told them pleasing lies. Once in power, these supposed supporters of free-enterprise served the interests of the richest and most powerful. Then the Big Box stores spread everywhere, marginalizing and bankrupting the small businessmen who were suckered into electing the servants of Transnational Monopoly Business. Most of these gullible people probably still vote for right-wing candidates. Thus we see that narrow-minded and obstinate clinging to only one way of looking at things can defeat even the power of basic self-interest.
.

Translation = Libertarianism (whatever that is supposed to mean) does not equate big business as being wrong and dangerous for the economic health and viability of the country. As such, I believe they are bad.

In my opinion, the title and opening post of this thread is rather ironic in an ugly way, seeing how you employ logical fallacy to make a substantive point, when there truly isn't one, save your own personal bias.

A lot of rambling.

 

[numan]

'
I suggest that you change your motto to : vel libertas vel mors, since aut libertas aut mors could mean that you wish both -- as when people are asked, "Do you want sugar or cream?".

I am reminded of an old professor who remarked that the motto of Russia should be :

Give me slavery or give me death -- preferably both!
.

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

'
I suggest that you change your motto to : vel libertas vel mors, since aut libertas aut mors could mean that you wish both -- as when people are asked, "Do you want sugar or cream?".

I am reminded of an old professor who remarked that the motto of Russia should be :

Give me slavery or give me death -- preferably both!
.

When all else fails, deflect by trying to change the subject matter to something that is not germane.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

And yet light years ahead of marxist progressive adolescent occutard twits..........

 

[numan]

'
Goodness! Try to be helpful, and see what you get!

By the way, could you explain to me what the subject matter is? I am afraid that I found your previous posting confusing in its grammar and opaque in its references.
.

 

[Agit8r]

Historically, libertarians (or European liberals) haven't been very wary of authoritarianism. before Hernán Büchi there was Hjalmar Schacht.

Just sayin'

http://www.broowaha.com/articles/14415/neoliberal-sophisms

 

[numan]

'
Well, I read your link, Agit8r, and I do not think we are on the Road to Serfdom --- rather, we have already arrived at the destination. The Nazis could only dream about results which the succeeding years have brought to perfection.

In previous ages, the bodies of the slaves were owned by the Masters, but today a much more efficient system has been built up in which the minds of the subject population are auctioned off to the highest bidders.

I consider the so-called "division" between the so-called "right" and "left" as being simply the two wings of a master plan which work seamlessly together to achieve ever greater control over the mental slaves, who are fighting with each other over "invulnerable nothings" (to use Shakespeare's phrase) whilst their rulers are picking their pockets and driving control rods into their brains.

We live in an era when brainwashing has achieved successful results beyond the wildest dreams of previous ages -- while, of course, convincing the mental slaves that they are not brainwashed at all !!

The Control System is invincible, and becomes ever more powerful. It cannot be defeated -- yet it is based on an irrational relationship to the world which guarantees that it will ultimately fail.
.