• 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!

Rand Paul: Nutcase; Why the Libertarians are Going Nowhere

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
47,360
Reaction score
26,059
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Libertarianism is supposdly a way to utopia for all of us, but all the Libertarians that I have come across are "way out there" and are basically nothing more than an extremist form of Republicans. Like this:

 
Hell, here's the Libertarian Party's tax policy:



When you pay taxes, do you do so voluntarily? Or do you do so because you are forced to do so? If you don’t pay your taxes, what will happen? Will you be fined further? Harassed by the IRS or other government entities? Jailed? The Libertarian Party is fundamentally opposed to the use of force to coerce people into doing anything. We think it is inherently wrong and should have no role in a civilized society. Thus we think that government forcing people to pay taxes is inherently wrong.

Libertarians advocate for voluntary exchange, where people are free to make their own choices about what to do with their lives, their time, their bodies, their livelihood, and their dollars. If Americans want to give money to the government for one reason or another, they should be free to do so. If Americans prefer to spend their money on other things, then they should be free to do that also.



How clueless does a person have to be to think America could function as a country united under a federal government if the only way government can get money is from Americans who "want to give money to the government for one reason or another"? Very little would give and there would be no way to plan for the future.

Aside.
You'll note this goes farther than the usual suggestion of these folks, which is that sales taxes and the like would be enough. (They usually frame it as "voluntary" taxation, but that's moronic. A voluntary sales tax would be: cashier rings you up, you are prompted to say whether or not you would like to pay the tax. Instead, it's just as involuntary as income tax: sure, the action that triggers the tax is voluntary - working (income tax) or buying (sales tax))

At any rate, just think about what passing that tax platform would mean. More or less immediately, the federal government would become insolvent and collapse. Nobody is going to lend to a country that has just done away with its ability to raise revenue. Do they expect all federal workers to just sort of volunteer or something? Manufacturers to donate needed supplies? Lunacy.





The best thing one can say about a Libertarian candidate is that they probably wouldn't get their way since congress would never do something that catastrophically stupid, even though it may be congress.
 

You don't understand Libertarianism if you think that it's supposed to be Utopia. The concept of Utopia is more of a liberal bent, trying to construct a perfect society but there is no such thing so continual measures pile on top of each other until you have an oppressive regime.

Libertarianism understands there is no Utopia but there is no need to micro-manage every aspect of people's lives. It prefers to error on the site of freedom and liberty so people have a choice to do what they want with their lives.

Would you rather have an oppressive system that's imperfect or an imperfect system that is free?
 

Rand Paul is a bad joke, and libertarianism is little more than the sentiment of “**** you, got mine“ masquerading as a political ideology.
 
Judging from the values of the Libertarians on this board, I'd rather not cede any powers to them.

Let's be fair - some Libertarians are 'useful idiots', in that they want nice things, and just don't understand they are fighting for evil. It's like someone who enlists in Vader's army to prevent any death stars. They aren't all sociopaths, that's just the arguably dominant type.
 
Rand Paul is a Republocrat, his dad was far more libertarian than he is.
 
You spam this exact reply often. No need to continue, we get it. If you have original content, then by all means, but if you're just going to spam regurgitated posts, it is not necessary.
 
The father of US Libertarians is Ron Paul who was a lifelong politician who used the US military to pay for his medical degree. Yea it is nonsense
 

I would rather have an an oppressive system that enforces the aspect of people's civil rights. The oppressive system that is free enough to allow widespread oppression gays, women, people of color, etc. will result in chaos and mayhem...
 

Those are not the only two choices.

And yes, a primary aspect of Libertarianism is spending most of the time condemning liberals, just like Republicans do. Basically a distinction without a difference between the two, other than the Libertarians being more extreme.

And Libertarians do indeed act and argue and present as if everything would be just hunky-dory if only people would understand just how pleasant ot would be to be "free" under their UTOPIAN, Randian vision.
 


More to the point, we TRIED that, with the articles of confederation. It didn't work, so we adopted the current constitution.
 

So do you think, like Rand Paul, that business owners should have the right to refuse service to blacks?
Do you believe that public schools should basically be vanished and that people should then band together to establish and fund schools on their own ans screw those who can't afford it? I know Libs who do.
 
You spam this exact reply often. No need to continue, we get it. If you have original content, then by all means, but if you're just going to spam regurgitated posts, it is not necessary.

You have got to be kidding me.

Do you have any idea how many times you have posted the exact same points about what you call "Republocrats"? Do an advanced search. Posts by Ikari containing "Republocrats." Ten pages of results, generally making the same drumbeat: they're corrupt, they're beholden to corporations, they've got a stranglehold on the system.

I haven't made the point about the loony tax policy anywhere near that many times.


Secondly, it's not wrong for either of us to do this. It's expected. If the same threads and points keep being made by the same people, the same general replies are going to fit. If a hundred people ask why 2+2=4, they're all going to get the same answer. Like all the threads about non-existent voter fraud in the election. You, me, and so many others, had exactly the same kind of laugh-it-off reply in each one.


Maybe it bothers you because you say you voted Libertarian, but I can't help that. If someone is wondering why the Libertarian Party isn't getting traction, the answer is going to be the same: because of their policies. I'm not much in the mood to come up with a new answer for why 2+2=4 every time. Occam would approve. Similarly, you don't go beyond your standard line against the Ds and Rs. Why bother when you feel it sufficient?


PS: and it's not a copy/paste. The rare occasion when I really do copy/paste a post, I note that I'm quoting myself from the last time I said it. The tax policy is the part that's copy/pasted because of course it is: it's their platform.
 
Last edited:
Libertarianism is largely obsolete now, as an ideology it is entirely not compatible with modern economic understanding or the role governments play, nor modern social understandings and dealing with community rural to urban, nor really how nations engage in 'coopetition' with one another impacting everything from trade to labor.

There are ideas within the ideology worth keeping at the table of discussion, especially when dealing with all things authoritarianism.

However we have no path now for Libertarianism to be mainstream.
 
More to the point, we TRIED that, with the articles of confederation. It didn't work, so we adopted the current constitution.

Indeed. Though I think that if you review their full platform, you'll find that if my prophecy about their tax policy collapsing government didn't happen, we'd still end up with a federal government weaker than the joke of one set up in the articles.

I'd love a party that shared a lot of policy positions with the Democrats, but had more libertarian-oriented ideals in it. I usually score about half-way to libertarian on those political affiliation tests (though those things are jokes), but man....I need a sane platform. Otherwise, it's the least worst option for me, which these days means Democrats, at least federally. We get sane GOPers here in MA, like our governor.
 

In the jungle everyone is left alone and completely free. Doesn’t work out so well. Only the strong live, and if you ever find yourself even a little bit in a position of weakness and vulnerability, you will be eaten for lunch. Concepts of fairness and justice or any other nonsense which sissy modern civil societies want and have come to accept do not exist.
 
What could possibly be the problem of funding the federal government with bake sales and donations? How does Rand Paul expect to pay for the federal policies/programs that he votes for and does this mean that he does not take a salary as senator because he rejects the idea of taxes that currently pays his salary?

The field of macroeconomics seems to be an idea that they have never heard of.
 
Last edited:
What could possibly be the problem of funding the federal government with bake sales and donations?

The field of macroeconomics seems to be an idea that they have never heard of.

I go for that because it's the lowest-hanging fruit. But you see the same thing throughout the platform. It strikes me as naive as communism or anarchy.

There's no way we could function as a nation if it were all implemented. One thing after another, the platform says "we don't believe government should do that. People should be free to [blah blah blah]". Both anarchism and communism postulate a government-free state (one of the reasons no state that has called itself "communist" actually is - they're all totalitarian governments with highly socialist economies). Humans in a government-free state very quickly revert back to government. Namely, when a local warlord decides to step into a power vacuum. Bingo, now you've got a government.

The Libertarian Party platform is not all that far off. There is very little they want government to do, and they don't want to give it the means to do it. It chaps my ass because we've already seen what happens with a threadbare federal government. Somolia, Ethiopia, etc., all sorts of war-torn regions. There's always going to be someone or some group who is willing to take power. Maybe here it'd be corporations with private armies, not local warlords, but we sure as hell wouldn't all just get along under rainbows farted out by the flying unicorns.

It's true as to most single-issues, too. Take regulation of businesses, both as to labor and environment. Now look at the industrial revolution. That's what we got. Businesses polluting where they want, making no effort to protect workers, child labor for 12h+ a day, and the sausage you picked up from the butcher being 1/5th human, 1/5th rat, 1/10th rat shit, and the rest....pork of dubious quality.

"The free market will fix it because people won't buy it", they say. No it won't, and no it didn't. Set up a race to the bottom and everyone races to the bottom. Yadda yadda. As I've been reminded, I have said it all before. But I'll say it all again.
 

The Framers rejected the Articles of Confederation because they created a government that was too weak to govern and it still had the power to levy and raise taxes but apparently libertarians weren't taught that in school, or did they also reject mandatory education for those under the age of 16? The idea of no taxes is laughably naive outside of microstates such as Monaco that relies on gambling for income. The entire concept is absurd to the point of it being a parody of public policy.

The supposed free market that libertarians appear tio deify doesn't do anything but to make a profit. It doesn't fix anything or we would not have needed to enact government regulations to address the abuses of the 1900s, 1920s, and then in the 2010s.
 
Fred Koch was a libertarian with Fascist tendencies so it goes who also made sure Stalin had gas refinery........ now we have Charles Koch as two of the brothers bailed and one passed away.

I have watched candidates come forth running as libertarians yet didn't get squat number of votes ...... same for fundamentalists.

American Legislative Exchange Council and Democratic Leadership council are KOCH inspired and funded primarily through Koch dollars no matter what ID is attached as KOCH dollars funds many organizations.

Here comes ALEC bringing Ageis Strategic with it ...... definitely libertarian with a fascist bent........

http://www.pfaw.org/rww-in-focus/al...te-special-interests-state-legislatures#Voter

United States of ALEC


ALEC Teams Up With The Religious Right = Sick


Meet the American Legislative Exchange Council Boot Camp Team:
 
I sometimes think these folks think they are in the early eighteen hundreds where they can just go out and claim land and keep everyone away from their little bit of heaven. Libertarians are republicans just more out there than the average R.
 
ALEC/Charles Koch and associates are organized, smart, plenty of dough and not afraid. This group has been around for at least 50 years.

ALEC is the Republican Party providing deception with a monster budget.
 

Republocrats is a generalized term for the oligarchy. I do not cut and paste entire arguments despite my frequent use of the term "Republocrat". Can you see the difference? Hopefully this is within your capacity.
 
At least some right-libertarians are anti-war!
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…