Libertarians: What do you think of them?

We rarely talk about these people other than a few remarks about how they are "Conservatives who smoke dope" or how we wish they would put up a viable candidate against *. Personally I think they're in the right place on social issues, but crazy as hell on economic issues.

..like you say. But I don't know any, so ...

:shrug:

but fundamentally believe their philosophy reflects, if not is based upon, a form of Social Darwinism.

And is fundamentally flawed in practical terms in the relative hostility to regulation and the belief that the marketplace - including individual lawsuits - should disuade corporate behavior.

That pretty much sums them up when they start talking about economics, when they reveal themselves to be a bunch of "invisible hand" laissez faire capitalists, economic anarchists, rabid deregulators, social Darwinists and Randorrhoids.

They do make sense on social issues, though.

They have all the answers, and are fanatics about it.

in the absence of any evidence that their system would work.

I know of no country on earth that has as small a government as they want in which any American would want to live.

They reject the very idea of society, worshipping instead at the altar of the market, which they think could solve every problem if only it was allowed to operate totally free of reason and constraint. Ruthless Social Darwinists.

I don't think you really understand much about libertarianism, because if you did you couldn't make that kind of statement.

Selfish maniacal fans of a Hobbesian state of nature.

I'm more of a Calvinist than a Hobbesian. ;-)

But tell me, since you know so much about him and "Hobbesians" in general it would seem, what have you actually spent any time reading by Hobbes?

Thought I could respect them, then I started reading articles by Bradley Gitz, a self-proclaimed Libertarian and Bush*Apologist. They are Fascist-Enablers, who have allied themselves with someone truly evil. Think Italy in WWII. When they finally get the grapes, they'll join us on important issues, for now they will simply be Bush*'s Bitches.

.

I agree with them on a lot of social issues, but their economic ideology is out in lala land. Unrestrained capitalism doesn't work. We're seeing it right before our eyes, and they still don't get it.

Thuggery and absense of rules has no place in modern society.

More like Conservatives on Crack.

who haven't got the guts or are too ashamed to admit it.

There are a few like Bill Mahr who lean the Democratic way but he is in the minority and the only one I have ever seen who isn't just a repuke in hiding.

...are easily seduced into the let it all burn Nader philosophy.

Unrealistic idealists.

n/t

than for the war-mongering imperialists currently in power, but I think they're foolish to think that unrestrained corporate capitalism brings about freedom and liberty, which they claim to stand for.

He's one.

Don't judge a political philosophy based on the views of one whacked-out member. The Libertarians I know hate Grover's guts.That's kind of like judging the merits of Christianity based on the views of Pat Robertson.

Hijacking the ones that serve their interests, i.e. the economic ones, while paying lip-service to personal liberty/small government (even as they pursue the opposite agenda). That many liberatarians haven't woken up to this by now makes them fools imo. The fact that their policy platforms are being used to rob the country and hijack our democracy should be a big clue that they are fundamentally flawed.

:think:

I think that, properly, in a democratic republic, the government
IS the people, or an expression of the peoples will, and hence it
cannot be the enemy of the people. This is in theory, of course,
so theoretically I disagree with them in that I believe there is
much that the Government ought to concern itself with, i.e. the
common business of the people.

As a practical matter, the government is an instrument of the
ruling oligarchy, not of the will of the people, and so I join
libertarians in opposing it and desiring it's reform.

but they're not always that helpful and I hate been shooshed.

but they sure do know their Dewey Decimal System!

zero integrity, zero honesty.
the economic equivalent of cult recruiters.


MDN

They're just sophist mooches who don't want admit they're mooches so they hide behind a bunch of mumbo jumbo cliches about freedom and rights.

..tho I have serious policy differences, both I and the GOP both believe that government can be a tool of the people (whithin limits) and serve the people....both of us believe in politics and public policy more or less, which is where we differ from the Libertarians.

and think your post is more descriptive of a republican than a libertarian.

Libertarians are, for the most part, NOT hypocritical, have intellectual honesty, AND integrity. You don't have to agree with them politically to see that. They hold republicans and democrats to the same standards - they ARE at least consistant.

My boss is a libertarian, and also one of my best friends. He is the only person I discuss politics with, and although his views can sometimes be infuriating to me, he IS consistant.

He also thinks that THIS flaming liberal is the bees knees and tells me often that he's never encountered anyone like me - ever. He also trusts me more completely than he's ever trusted anyone in his life and can tell me anything. As he comes to understand my heart more and more he will get a better grasp of how I ended up way left of center - and he's already starting to come around to my way of thinking on a few issues. Because libertarians are intellectually honest they are able to do that - they are more than willing to change their views if they receive compelling evidence suggesting they do so.

I think your characterization is extremely unfair.

They have no problem with people getting together to start businesses, investors, and the like. But Gods forbid that workers organize to improve working conditions!

Why would I as long as it is voluntary? I think you're striking out at a strawman.

they're even more misguided than your average republican.

If polls are close, they'll save the nation from GOP disaster.

I am totally with them on Social issues, except maybe the environment. Couldn't disagree with them more on economics. I hate their economic beliefs because they are too much like Reagan republicans.

I consider myself a libertarian because long before the right-wingers used the term, it was used to describe socialists who opposed a totalitarian state. I am a socialist. Capitalism is bullshit. I also oppose the state. I don't want any orders passed on to me from somebody up the hierarchy, who I gave no consent to rule over me, be that a businessman, a police officer, a politician, or anybody else interested in upholding the concept of capitalism, and the extortion, and oppression that go along with it.

The right wingers who use the term care nothing about freedom. Freedom and capitalism are mutually exclusive. They are either ignorant, or wish for a corporation to rule the world instead of governments.

One thing you might want to consider: the corporation _as such_ is a state construct: ie, it is something that was created by law (a legal person that was not an actual person did not exist in the US before the laws were passed to enable that in the 19th C). Getting rid of the state would also get rid of corporations.

Personally, I'm in favor of a worker-owned and managed economy -- some kind of syndicalism seems right to me for a number of reasons. I don't know though just how effective that would be -- not saying it wouldn't be just saying I don't know. At any rate I also (obviously) suppport full property rights so it would be a case of the best form of organisation winning out.

Still, it's not likely that either of us will be in a position to see at any point soon.

and have a lot to offer.

A consistent libertarian would pull us out of Iraq immediately, and cut the military down to a size necessary to defend our borders.

This sounds good to me.

Face it, the bulk of government regulations and government subsidies exist to support various sectors of domestic capitalism. Eliminating these would likely make the system more fair not less.

Where taxes are generally regressive, reducing taxes can make them less so.

The program that best supports the general welfare (social security) is funded by a highly regressive payroll tax.

Of course, I'm arguing that social justice would be served by some libertarian programs, and no true libertarian would ever give a drop for social justice.

Besides that I agree with all your points above.

The fact is that much regulation serves the interests of large companies and is mainly there to raise barriers to entry for smaller firms.

And there is simply no excuse for the obscene defense budget -- or for a standing military. We should close all our foreign bases and focus solely on defending our borders -- which don't seem to threatened to me. There's no excuse for Iraq, Kosovo, Haiti, Cuba, Vietnam, Korea and the myriad other imperial adventures that both parties have led usd into since 1945.

Essentially selfish and immature. "I got mine, screw you."

They cant really squaret their desire for 100% economic freedom with the tendancy in the US for the public to use the representative bodys (or refrenda) to do things like enacting economic & social regulation.

And they aslo have problems with the concept of judicial review.

I recall one libertarian (on another board) telling me the last Democrat he could have voted for was, I think, Grover Cleveland....who was pretty reactionary, if you recall your history (this was the president who called out the army to shoot down the Pullman strikers).

So I take this as sort of an indication of how unrealistic they are, and how, at heart, rigid and fascist they can be when it comes to "economic freedom"...the degree of repression they would support to ensure this.

What other words could describe someone that was against public schools and against laws that protect children (like carseat laws)?

...thats been my experience.

So I guess I'd have to say that I feel pretty good about them/us :) I would like to see more libertarians here on DU.

I am libertarian on social, economic and _especially_ foreign policy issues (read: complete non-intervention in other countries' internal affairs/pull our armed forces back within our borders/close all foreign bases/abolish the standing army: a position otherwise tarred as 'isolationism').

I am coming to the conclusion that the Democratic Party is the logical place for us to be -- sadly a lot of people still seem to think they have a home in the Republican Party, which is madness given their warmongering and statist stands on pretty much every issue.

Anyway, it's great to be here.

...when it comes to things like civil rights legislation....such as antidiscrimination legistlation for gays, lesbians, racial minoritys, etc, and things like the ADA (that requires reasonable accomodation of the disabled), the libertarians would be opposed to ALL of these, at least at the level of Federal legislation, as these would be an unconstitutional (in their view) impostion of the state on individual and property rights.

So, I don't see how great the libertarians are on social issues.

to any kind of state imposition against anyone's rights.

In the real world, what is happening today is that the government is actively conspiring to act _against_ therights, eg, of gay men to draw up private contracts (see the case of Tennessee that's been vastly underplayed in the press). Or to try to federalise marriage _against_ gay men instead of leaving it to the states.

They like to accuse people of being "statists", and also like to preface that by saying the regulation one may believe in is "uncostitutional", as they have this warped idea that public policy, like NASA, has to be enacted via constitutional amendment.

Statist, tho, is the big epiteth with them. I would be very suprised to see anyone who calls themselve a Democrat be sympathetic with this crackpot political ideology.

wrong, but not insane like neo-cons. Greedy, egocentric economic philosophy, imho. Great social philosophy.

Where a century ago people read Edward Bellamy's Bellamy's "Looking Backward" and saw a vision of a more just and civilized world than laissez-faire Capitalism was producing, many large & small "l" libertarians looked at repressive places that called themselves "socialist", read Ayn Rand, and had a vision of Heroic Capitalism producing a (next best thing to) Utopia.

I mean, Conservatives love to talk about smaller government while trying to fund abstinence only programs and pass morality laws that have little (if anything) to do with a functioning society. I mean, who cares if a woman flashes her breasts on network television? Would the world really end if Howard Stern were to drop the f-bomb on his radio show?

And Liberals. Well, we kind of look to the government to solve problems like pollution and poverty. The government/society should take care of people in their old age who didn't/couldn't save enough money the forty plus years they were working. But, don't tell me I can't read something because it might be anti-American - although it's okay to ban something because it isn't politically correct.

Libertarians seems to say: Government, get out of my bedroom, get out of my bank account. If I want to smoke dope, what business is it of yours? Let me keep that money you steal for taxes and I'll pay for my kid's education myself and take care of myself in retirement.

Not saying I agree, just that's my take on them.

I have no use for them. They are Republicans with even less of a social conscience.

:shrug:

than these neo-CONS. I can deal with "Repeal the New Deal" and Pat Buchanan ANY day. I know and respect many liberatarians and true conservatives, and I enjoy debating them. I rejoice too much when I win the arguement though. :)

I read a book about a Liberatarian President once. The book was called "Hope". Basically, the Republican sitting vice-president gets caught in bed with a live boy, and the "Lady Senator from New York and former first lady" is killed in an auto accident when her limosine is T-boned by a volkswagon driven by a hippy in a pot haze. The only candidate left is the Libertarian, Alexander Hope. So he wins.

The book then goes on to show Hope dismantling the entire federal government, except for a strong national defense (not offense). He says "It will be hard, but we will be stronger in the end" or some such stuff.

Very entertaining. Much better than "Bush at War". :)

No, Boortz is one of those GOP shills who pretends to be something else like a libertarian or a "conservative Democrat."

That's their little schtick, and they build an audience that way.

Real libertarians opposed the war, the Patriot Act, the Faith Based Initiative, and other Bushit.

Ron Paul is about the only one I respect for providing the truth to people about the neocons.

I disagree with them about regulation of the markets though.

You only need look at the state of our media today, to see total deregulation is pure idiocy.

He's more corporate than he is Libertarian, I'll agree. He's too pro-Bush (which, I guess, is pro-corporation).

HOWEVER, he does some really good smackdowns on people who would turn the country into a theocracy, and does a pretty decent job of exposing the "War on Drugs" His good backup cast is good. Overall, I kind of like him. He's at least funny.

CHEYENNE, WY—After attempting to contain a living-room blaze started by a cigarette, card-carrying Libertarian Trent Jacobs reluctantly called the Cheyenne Fire Department Monday. "Although the community would do better to rely on an efficient, free-market fire-fighting service, the fact is that expensive, unnecessary public fire departments do exist," Jacobs said. "Also, my house was burning down." Jacobs did not offer to pay firefighters for their service.

http://www.theonion.com/index.php?issue=4016

If he paid taxes, he did pay for their service.

...so that you pay according to your wealth, rather than paying on a free market for what the service is worth is what Libertarians believe in.

Nonetheless, it's the Onion. It's a joke.

Usually they offer crackpot social and economic ideas. When these ideas aren't justified by the evidence, they tend to reject the evidence. I recognize all theories are underdetermined to some degree, but I've come across many Libertarians with piss poor judgment.

A common tendency is to focus on what they believe is right while ignoring the consequences of actions. While intervention in some nation may be justified, for instance, a libertarian usually rejects it on grounds of right. The same thing occurs when they argue for weapons proliferation and deregulation. Some may talk up the consequences of their righteousness, but their righteousness, when push comes to shove, has always comes first in my experience.

The I got mine, so what party all the way around. The only things I agree with them on are their stances on the drug war and prostitution.

The rest is just an excuse for them to maintain economic hegemony over society.

back in the 1970s: "Young Americans for feudalism."

They want to turn the U.S. into El Salvador, which fits their description of paradise pretty well: complete freedom for business, lots of guns, social services practically nil, rich people protected by the police and army.

I love their stances on privacy and what the government has the right to tell you can and cant do, but on the other hand, i dont like how social services are out of the question. i think we should help the poor and disabled of this country at all costs. america needs to stop being selfish.

We just need to become completely liberal on social issues and find ways to be conservative on the economic ones so we can have the money to fund services and not some cracked government office that is just there for looks.

i soley believe the purpose of a government is to serve its people and serve its people only. what we do in our personal lifes should be our own business, and i totally agree with libertarians on that. but like i say, i think the government should play an active role of making sure people are protected, feed, and given shelter if they are unable to do it for themselves.

greed and the worship of money has never gotten anyone anywhere so far as i can tell in the long run, specially not a healthy conscious.

for such a 'god fearing' country, we sure do like our false idol the green bill an aweful lot.

*sigh*

cant have christianity and capitalism guys! it promotes greed! and false idols!
kinda funny tho, the supposed 'christian' country has the largest amount of materialist people.
pft, and they(people on the right) try to say religion does belong in government...PFT!...not until we get rid of capitalism.

someone should bring that up to them.
sorry i went a lil off topic.
hehe

attitude is very selfish. It seems to me some would be better off as hermits.

Around here, we have had three growth industries over the last ten years- landfills, prisons, and wind power. (Luckily the first two have slowed way down) It has been fun to watch their reactions when their laissez faire attitude has morphed into NIMBY. You hear conservationists speaking against renewable energy, as one example.

other than what they can make a buck on. They are greedy fools.

would be as mad as we are at the rethugs. The shredding of the Constitution, Big Brother agenda, implementation of a corporate theocracy, stationing of watchdogs in our bedrooms, where the hell is their outrage?

And don't forget there's more than one kind of small-l libertarian. I regard myself as a left-libertarian and anyone looking at my posts won't find a "Conservative who smokes dope", although I'll admit my wing is a bit small in numbers.

proposing to leave everything to corporations, without government intervention, leave things to market-forces; multi-billion dollar corporations vs individual consumers - arguing that consumers will have a fair choice; you can either take it or leave it.

We talk about this every time a libertarian tries to promote libertarian ism here on DU - at least once every few weeks.

Meanwhile (L)libertarians avoid discussing the topic of corruption and conflict of interest in business.

--to protect them from their slaves.