• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Libertarianism unrealistic?

Are Libertarians unrealistic?

  • Total voters
    86
TurtleDude said:
the biggest impediment to a libertarian government is the amount of Americans that have become addicted to government handouts and are terrified of that public teat drying up
Click to expand...

Yup, this is exactly why the LP cant gain any traction. Their message of financial independence doesnt resonate with several generations of people that are used to handouts and the nanny state. I pretty much believe the only way most people will ever take libertarianism seriously is when there is a massive economic and social upheaval.
 
TurtleDude said:
and erroneous. later
Click to expand...

"No fair oversimplifying our overly simplistic philosophy!"


LIBERTARIANS24types.jpg
 
it is self centered point of view on socio economic issues ,so it is not unrealistic considering humans are usually selfish
 
PoS said:
Yup, this is exactly why the LP cant gain any traction. Their message of financial independence doesnt resonate with several generations of people that are used to handouts and the nanny state. I pretty much believe the only way most people will ever take libertarianism seriously is when there is a massive economic and social upheaval.
Click to expand...
Except... libertarianism has never appealed to the masses, as evidenced by it never being voted in as a system (via enough candidates to make it "the system"). And this evidence goes back to long before the "public teat" as we know it today.

Just as people say they hate Congress... , and then go out and re-elect them in overwhelming numbers... said same people say they want the government to leave them alone (ala libertarianism) yet they only want to be left alone in the narrowly specific areas that they already want to do things for themselves. Don't confuse what people say want with what people actually think and want as evidenced by their actions.
 
PoS said:
Yup, this is exactly why the LP cant gain any traction. Their message of financial independence doesnt resonate with several generations of people that are used to handouts and the nanny state. I pretty much believe the only way most people will ever take libertarianism seriously is when there is a massive economic and social upheaval.
Click to expand...
Pt 2 (just thought of this)...

I believe the opposite. Massive economic and social upheaval will only increase the clamor for increased government intervention... for government to "fix it". The Great Depression is a great example of this. People weren't clamoring for the ability to be self-sufficient. In some ways, to a degree greater than today, they already had that. No, people were clamoring for government to "fix it". Even the Communist Party had it's greatest (in a relative sense) popularity during this time.

Libertarianism's fatal flaw... other than ignoring human nature... is that it requires individual effort. As I said above, it won't appeal to people in times of crises, because people naturally want government to "fix it". On the flip side, it won't appeal in good times because, well, times are good... why upset the cart?
 
I have always cringed at the Libertarians on social issues. However, given the Presidential choices this year, the Libertarian is the most sane choice.
 
radcen said:
Except... libertarianism has never appealed to the masses, as evidenced by it never being voted in as a system (via enough candidates to make it "the system"). And this evidence goes back to long before the "public teat" as we know it today.

Just as people say they hate Congress... , and then go out and re-elect them in overwhelming numbers... said same people say they want the government to leave them alone (ala libertarianism) yet they only want to be left alone in the narrowly specific areas that they already want to do things for themselves. Don't confuse what people say want with what people actually think and want as evidenced by their actions.
Click to expand...

Exactly! The worst enemies of libertarianism are those who pretend that they are libertarians but on election day dutifully go to the polls and pull the Republican lever. Its like somebody claiming to be a vegetarian but they order the steak when they go out to eat.

I think for some people, the label of libertarian is more of an image thing... and affectation .... a pretended ideological costume they put on and can prance around in trying to get attention in a LOOK AT ME sort of display. But when push comes to shove - they know where they belong and it is in the Republican column.
 
radcen said:
Except... libertarianism has never appealed to the masses, as evidenced by it never being voted in as a system (via enough candidates to make it "the system"). And this evidence goes back to long before the "public teat" as we know it today.

Just as people say they hate Congress... , and then go out and re-elect them in overwhelming numbers... said same people say they want the government to leave them alone (ala libertarianism) yet they only want to be left alone in the narrowly specific areas that they already want to do things for themselves. Don't confuse what people say want with what people actually think and want as evidenced by their actions.
Click to expand...

Before the Fed and SS were set up people were actually living in a quasi libertarian market, they just werent aware of it. The Gilded Age was also the era of the largest peacetime economic expansion in American history- it was a time of almost non-existent taxes and no social safety net, yet it vaulted the majority of the population into prosperity.

Massive economic and social upheaval will only increase the clamor for increased government intervention... for government to "fix it". The Great Depression is a great example of this.
Click to expand...

FDR's New Deal never fixed anything. It took a war to get the economy back on track. I'd like to see the day when people demand more government action when the money runs out.
 
When I define libertarianism as "ideology that puts a maximum emphasis on freedom":

It's IMO unrealistic to the degree there is poverty and inequality. In very wealthy countries where basically everybody gets a fair share (in his eyes) of the cake, it may work well.

But the problem is, "freedom" won't fill your belly, and "freedom" won't make life for you and your family safe enough not to live in fear. That's the problem. So when you're hungry, you don't give a damn about freedom, until your belly is filled. And when you live in constant fear of falling victim to a crime or conflict, freedom isn't your primary concern, but safety of your health and body is.

So these people will turn to other kinds of ideologies than libertarianism, sometimes even to militants or radicals, which is the point when libertarianism won't work anymore. Because extreme economic liberty causes extreme inequality, libertarianism is sawing off the branch it's sitting on.
 
It is only unrealistic because it is antiquated and best suited to small rural populations set in wide open "God's Country" locales where few if any city services exist and the chief means of support is agrarian.
Alaska, for example, seems like it might function rather well under a libertarian system if for no other reason than the fact that services are few and far between outside of energy industry support.
 
The only way that libertarianism can be realistic is if it satisfies order insofar as dismantling the power structures that currently result in drastic inequity.
 
nothanks700 said:
If we consider that libertarianism, at least in it's current political capacity, seems to be verging toward anarchy. Is this a reasonable way of looking at the world? Government in it's purist form is designed to make an entire group of people more powerful. Government gives us the ability to pool resources, create protections, foster growth, etc.

By this logic, the larger government is, the better. The only caveat being that corruption in government would be the issue. But theoretically, big government with little corruption would ultimately be the most advantageous to a society.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by "big government?"

You're kind of speaking about government like a high school government class might teach it. "What is government? What types of government can there be?" Hmm... get ready for a fun semester of learning!

Government doesn't "give us" the ability to pool resources. Government is the pooling of resources. The essence of government is the collective establishment of rules and organization of confiscated resources from all members to build things they independently wouldn't organize to build very well without that system.
 
TurtleDude said:
the biggest impediment to a libertarian government is the amount of Americans that have become addicted to government handouts and are terrified of that public teat drying up
Click to expand...

PoS said:
Yup, this is exactly why the LP cant gain any traction. Their message of financial independence doesnt resonate with several generations of people that are used to handouts and the nanny state. I pretty much believe the only way most people will ever take libertarianism seriously is when there is a massive economic and social upheaval.
Click to expand...

OK and so what about all those people that don't take handouts and use the nanny state and also think libertarianism is unrealistic?????

We do exist you know. :2wave:
 
Nilly said:
OK and so what about all those people that don't take handouts and use the nanny state and also think libertarianism is unrealistic?????

We do exist you know. :2wave:
Click to expand...

the left is made up of those who want to live as children and have the government take care of them and those "elites" who want to be the parents of all of them. That latter group tends to damn libertarian values
 
TurtleDude said:
the left is made up of those who want to live as children and have the government take care of them and those "elites" who want to be the parents of all of them. That latter group tends to damn libertarian values
Click to expand...

Lol.

You're a smart guy turtle, and I can understand you defending and espousing the philosophy that you yourself to believe in, but when you claim to know the intentions of the other side then you really just come across as laughable. You just called someone out for oversimplifying your position then you reduce 'the left' down to that.
 
I agree with Libertarians on Political Freedom.

I disagree with Libertarians on freedom of drugs or self-harm.
 
Nilly said:
Lol.

You're a smart guy turtle, and I can understand you defending and espousing the philosophy that you yourself to believe in, but when you claim to know the intentions of the other side then you really just come across as laughable. You just called someone out for oversimplifying your position then you reduce 'the left' down to that.
Click to expand...

I think I am generally correct on what motivates most groups of people. The attitude of leftwing elites is that they are in a better position to run peoples' lives then those people themselves. Its why Democrat elites spend so much time trying to convince us that anyone who isn't a left-winger is "stupid" or uneducated. You have to pretend that is true if you want to run the lives of others. Liberal elites want government to run the lives of others because they figure they are going to run government.

I have already set forth several reasons why people are lefties

some want to be taken care of-a large bloc of the Left's voters


some hate the religious right and tire of being called "sinners" by often uneducated, under achieving simple folk. I certainly see why this causes well educated successful yuppies to hate part of the right. This is what I call the libertine wing of the left-the Bill Maher type Dem voter.


others want to run the lives of others-either due to malevolence or due to an altruistic attitude they know what is best for others

and then you have single issue voters

abortion advocates, gay rights advocates, gun banners and those who despise the wealthy.
 
It is no more unrealistic than Conservatism.

Centering everything around pumping the super rich with the hope that some might trickle down and be lapped up by the working class is not a sustainable ideology.
Just as Libertarians would plunge us into anarchy if they got what they wanted, Conservatives would plunge us into despair, chaos, and revolt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom