• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Libertarianism: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
I happen to be a hardcore libertarian, and was so glad to find the party when I did because it portrays exactly how I think the US should be. However, I'm sure plenty of people have their criticisms for the party's beliefs and idealogies, so this thread is for all of us to discuss and debate the ideas of libertarianism.

PS: If you don't know what libertarianism is, go to www.libertarianism.com to find out more.

PPS: Please keep flames to a minimum, as constructive posts make you sound less like an idiot and make your posts sound more valid. ;)
 

argexpat

Active member
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
460
Reaction score
8
Location
I was there, now I'm here
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Libertarianism is the ideological opposite of communism. (Neither system has ever been successful on a large scale; the most successful modern economies have all been a mix of the private and public sectors.) But the political spectrum isn't linear, it's circular. Extreme libertarianism and extreme communism essentially meet each other at the other end, and in practice would be virtually indistinguishable from each other, because in both systems everyone owns everything.

The reason these two extreme ideologies haven't succeeded is that they essentially violate human nature. People want inherently contradictory things: they want freedom to do as they wish, and they want to be told what to do. This contradiction is embodied in the Republican Party, which preaches liberty and freedom while glorifying military and religious authoritarianism. This is why Christians have flocked to the party: they want to be free to be told what to do.

Libertarianism, like communism, is totalitarian, in that it cannot work unless everything is libertarian. You can't be a little libertarian, or a little communist. But these ideologies do have a place in a healthy economic mix. There are some things the government does well, and there are some things the private sector does well. An enlightened socio-economic system knows which is which, and applies different ideologies like ingredients in a recipe: the key is in using them in the right amounts.

For these reasons there will never be a pure libertarian society, just as there has never been a pure communist society in the modern age. Yet libertarianism is used by many of its adherents as an over-simplistic answer to the gnawing societal questions that challenge us. (If we could just achieve this unachievable state, everything would be better.) It’s essentially utopian, evidenced by libertarians who pine for a lost golden age that never existed. I suspect many who call themselves libertarian (as I once did) do so simply as an excuse to do nothing.
 
Last edited:

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
Libertarianism and communism are complete opposites!

With Communism, the state owns and controls every aspect of our lives.
With Libertarianism, the people own and control every aspect of their life.

Libertarianism is the purest form of Capitalism.
Capitalism is the OPPOSITE of Communism.
Therefore, Libertarianism is the OPPOSITE of Communism.


Think about Anarchy.
Seems all fine and dandy, but there is ONE problem.
Your choices could compromise someone else's (murder, etc.)

Libertarianism is one step up from Anarchy, eliminating the one problem.
It only constricts your choices so you don't compromise anothers'.
If you do, it makes you give retribution for what you've done.

Thus, everyone is allowed the maximum amount of freedom possible.


Communism is slavery of the entire nation. You have no rights, nor any incentives to do your best (let alone any incentives to exist at all).


The political spectrum is not a circle, either. It is a sphere.
At the north pole exists libertarianism, and the south pole is communism.
Left and right (liberal and conservative) are the part of the globe that circles around making a loop.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
6,023
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Most of the time I COMPLETELY disagree with argexpat, but in this case I believe he is correct.

I took the "liberatarian challenge" several years ago and I really like some of the positions that they have. The biggest issue I had was 'open borders'. They wanted to completely open the borders to Canada and Mexico - allowing passage every which way. Interestingly enough, I have been told that sinse 9/11 that has changed. They no longer want open borders.

So, one booboo and the Liberitarians are willing to change thier principles?

But, to take the another approach - when our nation was founded - everyone was practically a Libertarian.
 

argexpat

Active member
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
460
Reaction score
8
Location
I was there, now I'm here
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
vauge said:
Most of the time I COMPLETELY disagree with argexpat, but in this case I believe he is correct.
Dear God, hell must have frozen over! :eek:

vauge said:
But, to take the another approach - when our nation was founded - everyone was practically a Libertarian.
Everyone except slaves, Native Americans, women, immigrants and white males without land.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
6,023
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
:rofl


Thank you for the correction.
 

KBeta

New member
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
36
Reaction score
1
Location
Seattle, WA
vauge said:
Most of the time I COMPLETELY disagree with argexpat, but in this case I believe he is correct.
Look out! argexpat and vague agree! The end it nigh! ;)

I don't see politics as either a circle or a sphere. It's clearly a torus:



It inflates and deflates depending on how much hot air is injected into it, but it is ALWAYS hollow.

Sorry. I've been taking things too seriously lately. Now we return to your regularly scheduled debate...
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
6,023
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Thank you Kbeta... I needed a good chuckle!

(wipes away tears from eyes...)

Actually I am glad for this thread.
I needed a reminder to revisit the libertarian website again.
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
vauge said:
I took the "liberatarian challenge" several years ago and I really like some of the positions that they have. The biggest issue I had was 'open borders'. They wanted to completely open the borders to Canada and Mexico - allowing passage every which way. Interestingly enough, I have been told that sinse 9/11 that has changed. They no longer want open borders.

So, one booboo and the Liberitarians are willing to change thier principles?
Not necessarily. Many libertarians (myself included) still want to keep the borders open.

The huge problem here now is the fact that a situation caused by the Republicans and Democrats, this terrorism issue, has no real answer from libertarians. Under libertarian rule, it would never have happened in the first place.

I still believe the borders should remain open. If terrorists are going to kill people they're going to kill people. Being extremely unfair to tons of innocent people by refusing them life in this country is not worth the possibility of preventing a couple terrorists from entering. And if people don't want their businesses bombed, they can install preventative measures on their own to stop suspected terrorists from entering their buildings.
 
J

Jufarius87

yes but what we must remember is that common people at that time considred themselves citizens of their state before citizens of the bigger usa govt so naturally they would be libertarian
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
Jufarius87 said:
yes but what we must remember is that common people at that time considred themselves citizens of their state before citizens of the bigger usa govt so naturally they would be libertarian
:confused: Sorry, you confused me here.
 
Top Bottom