- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 72,131
- Reaction score
- 58,867
- Location
- NE Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Libertarian policy is more aligned with promotion and proliferation of rights and liberties than it is with social engineering and wealth redistribution policies. Most of that stuff, barring environmental, would most likely find itself on the community rather than federal level where it can be better controlled by the local populace. Maybe some exceptions, but in general.
Can anyone provide evidence that a libertarian economic and social approach to society will yield positive results for reducing the number of poor, social issues, educational, health issues, environmental issues. Also, I am looking for data that will show the effect on income equality.
I like the idea of libertarianism, but I would like to know if such an approach actually makes society better (per the above indicators).
I am willing to look at this with an open mind too.
And before anyone posts one. Appeals to the libertarian notion of liberty will not sway me. Neither will libertarian notions of morality (you are not my responsibility, etc)
Be more specific.
Do you want an example of a whole economy or a specific industry?
Libertarianism shares a component with communism: They'd work great in theory, but there's that whole human nature problem.
Whole economy. The more people who are healthy, prosperous and with a reasonable chance at happiness the better.
As Ikari has suggested, libertarianism isn't designed to work that way. Poverty and wealth disparity won't go away under libertarian ideals. The environment won't suddenly be green and clean. Unhealthy people won't be made whole. It essentially works in a microcosm, like other ideologies that function on paper. The only difference is that while socialist and communist structures are ideal and made to believe that they can cure the world's ails, libertarian structures are designed to maximize efficiency and utility while accepting that you have to break eggs to make the omelette.
Libertarianism, in its purest form, is designed to reward those who benefit society and create distinct social castes based upon that benefit, whether inherit or acquired. You have the freedom to be anything you try and get lucky enough to be. You also have the freedom to be a minimum wage mouth-breather who is left to the world his work ethic creates.
It's a belief that you know what's best for you instead of a bloated bureaucracy. This is patently designed so that some people will indeed fall through the cracks.
Therefore, libertarianism believe that maximum utility can be gained by unfettered liberty granted to the populace to succeed or fail by their own practiced ethics. It is a long term good, while socialism and communism are more about immediate good. It also doesn't preach a utopian society where everyone works together, is autonomous, and is happy. Like smurfs. Communists like smurfs.
Perhaps I was not clear. I am not looking for utopia because, barring a change in human nature, that is something that will never happen. We, as a race, contain evil as well as good and thus are not able to achieve it.
However, what I would like to know is there is if these sorts of problems will simply be ignored or if there is a mechanism to address them in the libertarian ideology.
Im not sure what you are looking for. Take the existing federal government. Kill off the fed dept of trans, education, and every other redundant program that exists and is best served run at a state level. Pay off the debt and require a balanced budget with the federal government beholding to its citizens for every dollar raised and spent. Allow the states to tax and spend accordingly to provide for social services and mandates as per their citizens. voila. You HAVE a libertarian government.
The notion of a libertarian government is not one WITHOUT rules...its with approriate levels of rules. The term 'appropriate' can be debated.
Too often libertarians are their own worst enemy. They cling to the most ridiculous of party platforms when there are much more simple rules that could bring about effective change and would receive broad appeal.
So, for example, you would be OK with the idea of welfare as long as it is at the state level?
I was under the impression that it would still violate certain libertarian principals that I often see expressed.
megaprogman said:Perhaps I was not clear. I am not looking for utopia because, barring a change in human nature, that is something that will never happen. We, as a race, contain evil as well as good and thus are not able to achieve it.
However, what I would like to know is there is if these sorts of problems will simply be ignored or if there is a mechanism to address them in the libertarian ideology.
So, for example, you would be OK with the idea of welfare as long as it is at the state level?
I was under the impression that it would still violate certain libertarian principals that I often see expressed.
Short answer, yes they will be ignored. Libertarianism is designed for that. As stated before, libertarian utopia hinges upon perfect society, which cannot happen.
You've already hinted as to why, as I have as well - human nature. Because of human nature, they have to be ignored on a large scale. It's just polar opposites of a freedom axis. On the far left, which is all security and no liberty, you have communism and socialism. On the far right, which is all liberty and no security, you have libertarianism. Neither will fix these problems. In fact, nowhere in the middle will these problems be fixed. There is probably a positive correlation between security (left communism/socialism) and the reduction of the societal maladies you mentioned, but at what cost?
If you're looking for pure humanity and selflessness, then no, libertarianism is too cruel and selfish of an ideology. The selfishness is what we libertarians, however, encourage and believe is best. Just like Michael Douglas's character in Wall Street, Gordon Gecko, said: Greed is good. He wasn't half right. It's implied that, in a libertarian society, if everyone looked out for themselves at the utmost level, society would thrive. We'd be a little paranoid and bloodthirsty, but hey - we still have laws for those who go too far.
Ultimately it's about maximizing happiness and utility, not creating a "safe" society. No libertarian will tell you that any and all problems go away.
As Ikari has suggested, libertarianism isn't designed to work that way. Poverty and wealth disparity won't go away under libertarian ideals. The environment won't suddenly be green and clean. Unhealthy people won't be made whole. It essentially works in a microcosm, like other ideologies that function on paper. The only difference is that while socialist and communist structures are ideal and made to believe that they can cure the world's ails, libertarian structures are designed to maximize efficiency and utility while accepting that you have to break eggs to make the omelette.
Libertarianism, in its purest form, is designed to reward those who benefit society and create distinct social castes based upon that benefit, whether inherit or acquired. You have the freedom to be anything you try and get lucky enough to be. You also have the freedom to be a minimum wage mouth-breather who is left to the world his work ethic creates.
It's a belief that you know what's best for you instead of a bloated bureaucracy. This is patently designed so that some people will indeed fall through the cracks.
Therefore, libertarianism believe that maximum utility can be gained by unfettered liberty granted to the populace to succeed or fail by their own practiced ethics. It is a long term good, while socialism and communism are more about immediate good. It also doesn't preach a utopian society where everyone works together, is autonomous, and is happy. Like smurfs. Communists like smurfs.
Why talk in the theoretic about Libertarian societies?
Go spend a few weeks in Somalia and see it up close and personal.
This thread has good momentum. Lets not trash it with these kinds of comments.
No disrespect intended MegaP, merely a simple reality check. The reality is that there is not now, nor has there ever been a nation that operated successfully under the "Libertarian" model of government. With the population having reached the numbers it has, the illusion that any sort of "Libertarian" nation could operate, is laughable. It's no more possible than a PURE "Communist" state. The reality is, that with well over 6 billion people on this planet, if we don't work TOGETHER for ALL, we'll ALL lose.
The myth that supposed "libertarians" promote is that they, and they alone have made it "on their own." Which is pure, unmitigated horsefeathers. NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE in today's world has "made it" without the aid and benefit of the collective society. Not a single one.
Libertarian World is a fantasy world, populated fictional characters, living mythical existences.
Somalia is not an example of a libertarian country.
Your post shows that you don't review the history of the country at all but instead make claims with no bearing in truth.
Please educate yourself before making such claims.
Somalia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
That doesn't deal with the gross mischaracterization of the libertarian ideology.
Equating that we expect a utopia, when we know that there is no such thing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?