Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > So, how are the Libertarians?

So, how are the Libertarians?
Thread Tools
Sage
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: SoCal
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2005, 02:27 AM
 
After doing a quick search, it looks like there are at least a few Libertarians around here, so hello to you!

Anyway, I don't have an exact direction for this thread; it just gets boring seeing every topic being split right down the middle between Republican/Democrat, when there are plenty of us who feel that each party has about half of the equation right (seeing as how most Libertarians I've talked to like the Republican's fiscal freedom policies and the Democrat's social freedom policies).
     
Mac Guru
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2005, 08:20 AM
 
Hello back! I'm fine thank you.
"The young people of America need be taught that the only pride they may properly hold is in the content of their character, and the achievements they make. There is no legitimate pride or moral credit to be gained by virtue of sharing the same race with a great and admirable individual. "

My Website
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2005, 08:50 AM
 
Originally posted by Sage:
(seeing as how most Libertarians I've talked to like the Republican's fiscal freedom policies and the Democrat's social freedom policies).
Most Libertarians I know disagree with Democrat social policies on the basis that they require taxation to pay for said policies.

(The difference between a Freedom of Speech that requires nothing from anyone else, versus a Right to Healthcare that requires everyone else to pay for it- if such requirement were placed on the former, we'd all have to be a captive audience and pay for public address systems for everyone on the streetcorner to use.)
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.

     
Mac Guru
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2005, 09:03 AM
 
We have no RIGHT to free healthcare because said healthcare would NOT be free. You'd be paying for it in the form of exctremly high Taxes. BS

Mac Guru
"The young people of America need be taught that the only pride they may properly hold is in the content of their character, and the achievements they make. There is no legitimate pride or moral credit to be gained by virtue of sharing the same race with a great and admirable individual. "

My Website
     
Millennium
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2005, 09:55 AM
 
The problem I see with a true libertarian economy is that it requires three things to work as theorized, and right now the US has only one of these. Then again, I can't think of any nation that has all three right now.

The first is a capitalist economic system, either laissez-faire or minimally regulated. The US has this, more or less. Either way, it's necessary because of the economic freedom which comes with it.

The second is a highly-informed populace. The theory behind libertarian economics is that people will not patronize businesses which act dishonorably. For that to happen, however, the people must be able to know how businesses are acting, so they know which ones act honorably and which do not. There are two problems here. One, the current educational system is a joke, barely even teaching basic life skills, and not even really teaching researching skills at all. Two, the current legislation surrounding trade secrets and corporate privacy does not allow for the necessary transparency that people can get at all the information needed. Although our educational system was better in the past, our corporate transparency has never been very good. Both of these, however, might be solvable through legal reform.

The third necessity is a cultural sense of honor and a corresponding sense of shame. This is needed to act as a motive for people to not patronize businesses which act dishonorably, and in particular it needs to be strong enough to counteract the lure of lower prices which often come with dishonorable business actions.

However, if an American ideal of honor ever existed, then it has been under attack for decades by people who believe that shame equals oppression. Worse, this third necessity cannot be obtained through law. It is said that legislating morality is impossible, but legislating honor is even harder than that. This requires not legal change, but cultural change, and that is not the province of government. That also means overcoming the growing attitude that shame equals oppression, and this would face fierce resistance not only in the US but also abroad.

Do I believe that the a true libertarian system would be good? Yes. If I were to sign up with any political party, I would probably sign up with them. But the US is not ready for such a system, and will not be for years to come. My biggest problem with the Libertarian Party right now is that it doesn't seem to realize this; it thinks that it can simply waltz in, make the needed legal reforms, and everything will magically work. Libertarianism isn't Communism; it can work under the proper conditions. But those conditions are not there yet, and if they really want to make things work out then they'd best focus their attention there first.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
Mac Guru
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2005, 10:07 AM
 
I couldn't agree with you more. BUT

you can't just JUMP into a Libertarian America anyway so why theorize it? The way to GET close is to first have Libertarian representation in the govt. Of which we have close to 0%. Sure there's your occasional win here and there but I'm talkin Senators, Congressmen, PRESIDENT...

Until we as a party have a better grasp on how the country is run, then one CAN only thoerize. It's possible to acheive it just doesn't happen overnight.
"The young people of America need be taught that the only pride they may properly hold is in the content of their character, and the achievements they make. There is no legitimate pride or moral credit to be gained by virtue of sharing the same race with a great and admirable individual. "

My Website
     
Sage  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: SoCal
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2005, 08:11 PM
 
Originally posted by vmarks:
(The difference between a Freedom of Speech that requires nothing from anyone else, versus a Right to Healthcare that requires everyone else to pay for it- if such requirement were placed on the former, we'd all have to be a captive audience and pay for public address systems for everyone on the streetcorner to use.)
Sorry, by "social freedom", I meant things like gay rights, less religion in government... Healthcare is a financial issue to me, as is Social Security, since both involve taxes.
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2005, 09:13 PM
 
Sure, but when you speak with Democrats, you'll find they are Social Issues, if not Rights.

Nevermind that a right is something which you can exercise without imposing or requiring any other person to do something...
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.

     
Millennium
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2005, 01:52 PM
 
Originally posted by vmarks:
Sure, but when you speak with Democrats, you'll find they are Social Issues, if not Rights.
Oh, they are social issues; that's not the problem I have with the Democrat ideology. My problem with it is that rather than letting social problems be solved through social means, they want to solve them through law; they have no concept of separation of a society and state.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
Sven G
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Milan, Europe
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2005, 02:25 PM
 
Maybe social issues should primarily be solved by individual means (see personal good-will), and individual issues, conversely, be solved by social means (see human solidarity)...?

Hmmm, hmmm... Why not? Seems self-evident, after all.

That said, personally I don't trust any political parties anymore. BTW, your situation in the US is really stuck - but it's not that in Europe it's all that better. Especially in some more years: one (economic/financial/monolithic) world, one way of "thinking".

Anyway, some well-known pseudo-Lbertarians (even if others would define them as true anarchists), such as Lysander Spooner and Benjamin Tucker, once said some really interesting things: not at all lunatics - especially in today's nonsensical situation.

Right vs. left, left vs. right; centre-right vs. centre left, centre-left vs. centre-right; centre-centre vs. centre-centre; hey, even one-party vs. one-party (not all that difference!); and so on - well... maybe it's time to go beyond these absurd dichotomies...?

The freedom of all is essential to my freedom. - Mikhail Bakunin
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:50 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,