|
0 members (),
16
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums59
Topics17,128
Posts314,539
Members6,305
| |
Most Online294
Dec 6th, 2017
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,740 Likes: 1
veteran
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,740 Likes: 1 |
Discuss:
my reason for posting this is i read an article that referred to such a notion. I realised then i didnt know enough about libertarianism. if true its yet another example of how 2 different idealogies can reach a similar conclusion.
Last edited by Schlack; 11/13/07 10:28 PM.
"The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words."
(Philip K.Dick)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,819 Likes: 2
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,819 Likes: 2 |
I feel it is a truism to state that less government is better and no government is best. If one should wish to define that as "anarchism", so be it.
How eager they are to be slaves - Tiberius Caesar
Coulda tripped out easy, but I've changed my ways - Donovan
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,235
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,235 |
My personal understanding is this:
Libertarianism
Equals
Adam Smith's "Enlightened Self Interest"
Minus
"Enlightenment"
Plus
"The Second Amendment"
Minus
"Militia"
Plus
"My Tax Deductions"
Minus
"All the Other Tax Deductions"
Plus
"My Social Security and Medicare"
Minus
"Welfare".
I really don't care what anybody else thinks about Libertarianism, because it works just fine for ME.
Which is a huge
PLUS
"I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct." J. Coleman (Founder of the Weather Channel poo-poos Globwarm)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,290
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,290 |
In a Zen or Woody Allen sort of way, why would an anarchist want to be head of the govt? Isnt the leader of the anarchists an oxymoron?
An anarchist party would make herding cats look plausible.
TAT
There's nothing wrong with thinking
Except that it's lonesome work
sevil regit
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,003 Likes: 191
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,003 Likes: 191 |
In the same sort of way, Tat, why would anyone support any Republican?  Seriously, though, I wonder what a "true" libertarian agenda would look like.
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,290
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,290 |
Maybe they should form a committee, and elect a chair !  TAT
There's nothing wrong with thinking
Except that it's lonesome work
sevil regit
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 12,581
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 12,581 |
Discuss:
my reason for posting this is i read an article that referred to such a notion. I realised then i didnt know enough about libertarianism. if true its yet another example of how 2 different idealogies can reach a similar conclusion. I doubt if you are going to be able to get very far, knowledge-wise, Schlack, because of the lack of definition and mislabeling -- though there may still be a substantial number of posts made. Probably the only thing that the anarchist element within Libertarianism and the anarchist element within socialism would have in common would be the ideal of an absence of government. Other than that they would have not much, if anything else, in common. By the way, the "right wing anarchism" you are suggesting would be better termed "anarcho-capitalism", which is heavily influenced by classical liberalism and modern libertarian thought. It is not, however, the equivilent of libertarianism. But, good luck with your thread.:-) Yours, Issodhos
"When all has been said that can be said, and all has been done that can be done, there will be poetry";-) -- Issodhos
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 754
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 754 |
By the way, the "right wing anarchism" you are suggesting would be better termed "anarcho-capitalism", which is heavily influenced by classical liberalism and modern libertarian thought. It is not, however, the equivilent of libertarianism. But, good luck with your thread.:-)
Yours,
Issodhos As someone who has been active here and there within the Libertarian Party, I believe that they squandered their chance to become a proper political force, when they bought into the elevation of property rights to primacy propounded by the Austrian School. Before then, they could still state that Natural Liberty was the axiom, and all else was simply corollary. That argument was able to attract some strongly anarchistic leftists into the party. It was an appeal to logic: economic liberty was the flip-side of social liberty on the coin of freedom. The Austrians have now distorted reality, and far too many libertarians believe complex property rights are preexistent to the state. This is not an attempt to devalue the place of private ownership in a free society; that is an imperative, but as I believe you know full well; habeas corpus and due process of law are even stronger predicates for a free society. T. Jefferson reasoned this out logically: It has been pretended by some, (and in England especially) that inventors have a natural and exclusive right to their inventions, and not merely for their own lives, but inheritable to their heirs. But while it is a moot question whether the origin of any kind of property is derived from nature at all, it would be singular to admit a natural and even an hereditary right to inventors. It is agreed by those who have seriously considered the subject, that no individual has, of natural right, a separate property in an acre of land, for instance. By an universal law, indeed, whatever, whether fixed or movable, belongs to all men equally and in common, is the property for the moment of him who occupies it, but when he relinquishes the occupation, the property goes with it. Stable ownership is the gift of social law, and is given late in the progress of society.
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Isaac Mcpherson, August 13, 1813
The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Definitive Edition,
Albert Ellery Bergh; Editor, 1907
Volume XIII; pp 326-338 By not standing up and vocally repudiating the Bush Administration's assault upon personal liberty, while they instead worked tirelessly to secure eminent domain legislation, which if enacted, because of its delineated remedies, would invariably find in favor of collectivist landholders (trusts, REITS, etc) over the individuals when society is forced to choose between two competing claims of abridged property ownership rights, they are now rightfully pointed out as being naught but greedheads, looking only to fatten their own pockets. They fretted about property while our leviathan tortured humans who had never even been convicted in a tribunal that adhered to due process of law. Their priorities speak loud and clear about the rectitude of their intent. This is abomination, and as I aided, ever so slightly in its creation, so I am also responsible for seeing that it behaves, or that it is not granted a legacy of future political viability.
Last edited by a knight; 11/14/07 06:55 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,740 Likes: 1
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,740 Likes: 1 |
Discuss:
my reason for posting this is i read an article that referred to such a notion. I realised then i didnt know enough about libertarianism. if true its yet another example of how 2 different idealogies can reach a similar conclusion. I doubt if you are going to be able to get very far, knowledge-wise, Schlack, because of the lack of definition and mislabeling -- though there may still be a substantial number of posts made. Probably the only thing that the anarchist element within Libertarianism and the anarchist element within socialism would have in common would be the ideal of an absence of government. Other than that they would have not much, if anything else, in common. By the way, the "right wing anarchism" you are suggesting would be better termed "anarcho-capitalism", which is heavily influenced by classical liberalism and modern libertarian thought. It is not, however, the equivilent of libertarianism. But, good luck with your thread.:-) Yours, Issodhos as i said Iss, i dont hink i know enough about it. however i should clarify, i meant the extreme end of libertarianism. my prupose in this thread was finding out a little but more about this stream of thought, most of what ive seen at the moment amounts to opposition to collectivism rather than anything concrete about what libertariansim actually means. or is that it?
"The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words."
(Philip K.Dick)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,290
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,290 |
The beauty is that each "libertarian" feels free enough, (thats what its all about right?) to define the goals, etc. around their own personal philosophy. They are harmless because there is no chance they will ever concede a point to any of the others, and remain solitary voices crying out into the wilderness.
What is the sound of one libertarian flapping?
If a libertarian falls in the forest does it make a sound?
Just wait until Ron Paul explains to the masses of libertarians that he thinks social security and medicare should be dismantled.
What is the sound of one voter clapping?
TAT
There's nothing wrong with thinking
Except that it's lonesome work
sevil regit
|
|
|
|
|
