• 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!

Recovering Libertarian

Doug64

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 13, 2022
Messages
1,943
Reaction score
545
Political Leaning
Conservative
Refugee from another another "discussion" site, didn't notice this forum when I signed up last weekend. Became an Ivory Tower Libertarian in College, called myself a Pragmatic Religious Libertarian for years as Real Life ground away at the edges, until I've recently admitted I've turned into a (mostly) Conservative.
 
Refugee from another another "discussion" site, didn't notice this forum when I signed up last weekend. Became an Ivory Tower Libertarian in College, called myself a Pragmatic Religious Libertarian for years as Real Life ground away at the edges, until I've recently admitted I've turned into a (mostly) Conservative.
What opinions of yours changed and why did they change?
 
That might be an upgrade, tbh

:D

What opinions of yours changed and why did they change?

Not so much a change of opinion when it comes to theory as a recognition that reality is messier than any theory can truly explain--the map is not the territory. So, for example, while theoretically I can recognize that banning sex outside of marriage only when money exchanges hands doesn't make much sense (just how is the cash supposed to make a major moral difference from a college-age modern dollymop?), in the real world legal prostitution makes investigating and prosecuting sex slavery much more difficult. While theoretically we shouldn't be the world's policeman, in the real world the American Protectorate has made the world a wealthier, more free, more peaceful place. While theoretically marriage is a personal decision whose continuation should be left purely to the couple, in the real world no-fault divorce has been a disaster and marriage is the fundamental building block of society in which, therefore, society has a vested interest.
 
That might be an upgrade, tbh
Of course depending on today's definition of "conservative".
Most of today's GOP is now in the hands of Donald Trump, hardly a traditional conservative.

Standard conservatives are an endangered species in the Republican Party today.
 
Not so much a change of opinion when it comes to theory as a recognition that reality is messier than any theory can truly explain--the map is not the territory. So, for example, while theoretically I can recognize that banning sex outside of marriage only when money exchanges hands doesn't make much sense (just how is the cash supposed to make a major moral difference from a college-age modern dollymop?), in the real world legal prostitution makes investigating and prosecuting sex slavery much more difficult. While theoretically we shouldn't be the world's policeman, in the real world the American Protectorate has made the world a wealthier, more free, more peaceful place. While theoretically marriage is a personal decision whose continuation should be left purely to the couple, in the real world no-fault divorce has been a disaster and marriage is the fundamental building block of society in which, therefore, society has a vested interest.
While I completely disagree with all of those positions, this is not the thread for all that. Im sure we will get into it in other threads 😉

Thank you for answering my question in such detail and welcome to the forum!
 
Refugee from another another "discussion" site, didn't notice this forum when I signed up last weekend. Became an Ivory Tower Libertarian in College, called myself a Pragmatic Religious Libertarian for years as Real Life ground away at the edges, until I've recently admitted I've turned into a (mostly) Conservative.
My condolences.
 
Not so much a change of opinion when it comes to theory as a recognition that reality is messier than any theory can truly explain--the map is not the territory.
Allow me to challenge your conclusions, Doug.
So, for example, while theoretically I can recognize that banning sex outside of marriage only when money exchanges hands doesn't make much sense (just how is the cash supposed to make a major moral difference from a college-age modern dollymop?), in the real world legal prostitution makes investigating and prosecuting sex slavery much more difficult.
Does it? Why? As we know from the countries that have long had legalized prostitution, legal prostitutes are regulated. Their business is open to scrutiny, they meet with social workers and they meet with healthcare workers. They are, in fact, less likely to be sex slaves. Sexual slavery thrives in those countries that do not have legal prostitution! Sexual slavery is most prevalent in southern Europe, such as in the Balkan States. But the countries where prostitution is legal ?? In Germany, Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland, et al, it is NOT a widespread problem.
While theoretically we shouldn't be the world's policeman, in the real world the American Protectorate has made the world a wealthier, more free, more peaceful place.
Another fallacy. We'd all love to believe it, but the hard evidence actually runs 180 degrees from that conclusion. In fact, over the past 20+ years, our military adventurism, albeit well intentioned, has produced anything but, and we need look no further than the Middle East and Central Asia to conclude that. For example, under the pretext of saving Iraqis from the tyrant Saddam Hussein, the US has been directly responsible for more than 200,000 civilian deaths in that country, and 5 million displaced persons, half of which became refugees in neighboring countries before 2010. The reverberations of our myopic actions echo to this day in the cultivation of more and larger terrorist organization, and terrorist bombings of civilians continues today, nearly 19 years after our American Protectorate actions to "save" them.

"Baghdad, 28 January 2022 - The United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) is deeply concerned by the current wave of attacks targeting political party offices, residences as well as businesses in Iraq, and most recently the rocket attack on Baghdad International Airport.
These despicable attacks have caused injuries and material damage, harming peaceful citizens whose only wish is to go about their daily lives without fear of attack or death." (^^emphasis mine^^)
While theoretically marriage is a personal decision whose continuation should be left purely to the couple, in the real world no-fault divorce has been a disaster and marriage is the fundamental building block of society in which, therefore, society has a vested interest.
Vague and dubious contentions, and no counterpoint to your own assertion that marriage "should be left purely to the couple". Surely your not suggesting that "the State" should have any say in whether or not a couple remains married ... are you? Explain how no-fault divorce is more of a disaster than people being somehow compelled to remain in a marriage that often serves neither of their best interests. It should seem obvious that continued strained relationships between spouses unable to separate leads to much more domestic abuse and violence, including spouses killing each other. I'd call that a disaster!
 
Refugee from another another "discussion" site, didn't notice this forum when I signed up last weekend. Became an Ivory Tower Libertarian in College, called myself a Pragmatic Religious Libertarian for years as Real Life ground away at the edges, until I've recently admitted I've turned into a (mostly) Conservative.

In the '70s, libertarians were sometimes referred to as "conservatives with a bong."
 
While I completely disagree with all of those positions, this is not the thread for all that. Im sure we will get into it in other threads 😉

Thank you for answering my question in such detail and welcome to the forum!

I’m sure you’re right, we’ll have plenty of opportunities to be a loggerheads going forward. :D Thanks for the welcome.
 
in the real world legal prostitution makes investigating and prosecuting sex slavery much more difficult.

Actually, the opposite is true. When you make it illegal you make it difficult for prostitutes to come forward when they are abused/assaulted.

But in any case, welcome.
 
:D



Not so much a change of opinion when it comes to theory as a recognition that reality is messier than any theory can truly explain--the map is not the territory. So, for example, while theoretically I can recognize that banning sex outside of marriage only when money exchanges hands doesn't make much sense (just how is the cash supposed to make a major moral difference from a college-age modern dollymop?), in the real world legal prostitution makes investigating and prosecuting sex slavery much more difficult. While theoretically we shouldn't be the world's policeman, in the real world the American Protectorate has made the world a wealthier, more free, more peaceful place. While theoretically marriage is a personal decision whose continuation should be left purely to the couple, in the real world no-fault divorce has been a disaster and marriage is the fundamental building block of society in which, therefore, society has a vested interest.

Yes, compromising your principles definitely makes you more of a conservative than a libertarian. Add some double standards and you can advance to liberal! Welcome.
 
:D



Not so much a change of opinion when it comes to theory as a recognition that reality is messier than any theory can truly explain--the map is not the territory. So, for example, while theoretically I can recognize that banning sex outside of marriage only when money exchanges hands doesn't make much sense (just how is the cash supposed to make a major moral difference from a college-age modern dollymop?), in the real world legal prostitution makes investigating and prosecuting sex slavery much more difficult. While theoretically we shouldn't be the world's policeman, in the real world the American Protectorate has made the world a wealthier, more free, more peaceful place. While theoretically marriage is a personal decision whose continuation should be left purely to the couple, in the real world no-fault divorce has been a disaster and marriage is the fundamental building block of society in which, therefore, society has a vested interest.
I have a libertarian friend who's in love with Ron Paul. Though I like Paul, I find him unrealistic. He speaks the truth, but in a world that's passed him by.
 
Believing your traditionalist principles should be enforced by the state makes one more of a conservative than a libertarian.

But also the hypocrisy. Like socialism, conservatism is a failure. It goes against human nature.
 
But also the hypocrisy. Like socialism, conservatism is a failure. It goes against human nature.
What about libertarian socialism?
 
But also the hypocrisy. Like socialism, conservatism is a failure. It goes against human nature.

I mean, if we look at 98% of human history/existence especially before the agricultural revolution, societies have been pretty dang socialist.
 
Refugee from another another "discussion" site, didn't notice this forum when I signed up last weekend. Became an Ivory Tower Libertarian in College, called myself a Pragmatic Religious Libertarian for years as Real Life ground away at the edges, until I've recently admitted I've turned into a (mostly) Conservative.
That's what most libertarians are. Conservatives in denial.
 
Thats an oxymoron.

Except libertarianism was originally a term associated with the anti-state socialists/communists/anarchists of the 19th and 20th centuries. The term was co-opted by right-wing Americans during the 20th century.

Libertarianism originated as a form of left-wing politics such as anti-authoritarian and anti-state socialists like anarchists,[6] especially social anarchists,[7] but more generally libertarian communists/Marxists and libertarian socialists.[8][9] These libertarians seek to abolish capitalism and private ownership of the means of production, or else to restrict their purview or effects to usufruct property norms, in favor of common or cooperative ownership and management, viewing private property as a barrier to freedom and liberty.[14] Left-libertarian[20] ideologies include anarchist schools of thought, alongside many other anti-paternalist and New Left schools of thought centered around economic egalitarianism as well as geolibertarianism, green politics, market-oriented left-libertarianism and the Steiner–Vallentyne school.[24]
 
That's what most libertarians are. Conservatives in denial.
Every time I see someone flying a Gadson flag and then the thin blue line flag bellow it I lose a year off my life expectancy. I recon I have a few years left to live.
 
Back
Top Bottom