• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • 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!

Why don't Libertarians ever talk about the positives of their beliefs?

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Bartender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
50,249
Reaction score
29,964
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
More often than not, it seems that whenever I debate a Libertarian, they often talk about morality and the way things should be, based on that morality, but never talk about how their philosophy would make the world a better place. This, I think, is the source of the common stereotype of Libertarians being preachy.

However, one of the well known aspects of persuasion is that the person doing the persuading should emphasize the positives of whatever they wish to promote. Instead I tend to see negatives (such as, the economy sucks because we are not following Austrian principals, not "if we follow Austrian principals, there would be more prosperity for more people").

I guess my question is, why? Is it that I am perceiving these discussions to be a certain way? Is it because that's how the logic flows, most thought comes from certain core principals and perhaps the end result does not really matter? Or is it something else?

I am truly curious, so if you feel attacked, that was not my intent. I just want to know.
 
Last edited:

cubbies2ws

New member
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
16
Reaction score
3
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I think the basis of your question lies in the very difference of principles between ideologies. Where as say the Democratic party's actions tend to promote an underlying theme of prosperity of the people and many other positive connotations spread through highly charismatic politicians, other ideologies/parties are a bit different.

Let me say that I only speak for myself and my own interpretation of libertarianism.

I feel that liberals tend to promote their beliefs largely based on pathos. And as of recently this part of the political spectrum has gained significant ground, so we've sort of become accustomed to being appealed to through our emotions. It's sweet and simple.

It's not as attractive to our superficial society to be appealed to through logos instead, which I believe is what the libertarians as well as other factions try to do. Libertarians aren't going to talk about how everything's going to be warm and fuzzy and everyone's going to have a smile on their face. Instead libertarians, I believe, take a pragmatic approach and like to discuss the positives of their beliefs on their basis for credibility.


So I guess in an extremely arrogant and simplified form:

Liberals = look here! look at what we can do to make people :) We can do this thing, this thing, and this thing.

Libertarians = Let's look at some fundamentals and how they logically play out, and solutions to issues on the surface will be solved through guidance from found fundamentals instead of directionless decision-making which will likely yield better long-term results.


Again, just my two cents.
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,916
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
A lot of libertarians arrive at their beliefs because of all that they see going wrong in the current system, so they will naturally want to point that out.

Most of their negative comments imply solutions though, they're just not ones that most take seriously because they don't believe it's possible for society to backtrack to a safer point of departure and start over.

With so many people telling them that their views aren't possible, it's only going to result in libertarians reflecting that negation back at them.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
More often than not, it seems that whenever I debate a Libertarian, they often talk about morality and the way things should be, based on that morality, but never talk about how their philosophy would make the world a better place. This, I think, is the source of the common stereotype of Libertarians being preachy.

However, one of the well known aspects of persuasion is that the person doing the persuading should emphasize the positives of whatever they wish to promote. Instead I tend to see negatives (such as, the economy sucks because we are not following Austrian principals, not "if we follow Austrian principals, there would be more prosperity for more people").

I guess my question is, why? Is it that I am perceiving these discussions to be a certain way? Is it because that's how the logic flows, most thought comes from certain core principals and perhaps the end result does not really matter? Or is it something else?

I am truly curious, so if you feel attacked, that was not my intent. I just want to know.

Most of the time our policy beliefs aren't meant to positively make the world a better place.
I can't promise you that, if I implemented my perfect libertarian world, that you would be better off.
You may not like it, most of us won't give any guarantees like that.

I find myself often rediscovering old beliefs that most people have forgot about.
Then I have to show how common beliefs, that are very much accepted, are wrong.
Usually, I don't get to show other ways to do things because a lot of people leave the discussion or break down in to name calling.
 

Cold Highway

Dispenser of Negativity
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
9,595
Reaction score
2,739
Location
Newburgh, New York and World 8: Dark Land
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
People dont like hearing the hard truth that 98% of the government's actions result in the average person being screwed. The promise that Utopia isnt an option doesnt sound good either in the minds of other people. People want everything to be prefect, and we recognize that the world isnt and cant be perfect.
 

Fiddytree

Neocon Elitist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
29,961
Reaction score
17,357
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Freeeeeeeeeeeeeedoooooooooom!
braveheart-wallace-2.jpg
 

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This should tell you everything you need to know about libertarianism.

A great quote by a smart man:

"Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies."
 

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
More often than not, it seems that whenever I debate a Libertarian, they often talk about morality and the way things should be, based on that morality, but never talk about how their philosophy would make the world a better place. This, I think, is the source of the common stereotype of Libertarians being preachy.

However, one of the well known aspects of persuasion is that the person doing the persuading should emphasize the positives of whatever they wish to promote. Instead I tend to see negatives (such as, the economy sucks because we are not following Austrian principals, not "if we follow Austrian principals, there would be more prosperity for more people").

I guess my question is, why? Is it that I am perceiving these discussions to be a certain way? Is it because that's how the logic flows, most thought comes from certain core principals and perhaps the end result does not really matter? Or is it something else?

I am truly curious, so if you feel attacked, that was not my intent. I just want to know.

I've posted this quote to someone else, and I'll post it to you.

"Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies."

It properly identifies the wrong of doing right by enforcing a specific standard of morals. Morality and Legality are two different things. We should agree that legality does not create morality and therefore politicians cannot legislate morality. Libertarianism is a political philosophy based around the concept of law and government, not on morality and social values. You'll find libertarians who teach their children that drugs are bad, but will go to the polls and will vote Yes on 19. Why? Because one person's morality is the business of that one person; it is not the business of everyone. We do impose morality. We impose a just and fair (in our minds) government.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,315
Reaction score
6,468
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
A great quote by a smart man:

"Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies."

But isn't this just as applicable to corporations unchecked by government as it is to government itself?
 

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
But isn't this just as applicable to corporations unchecked by government as it is to government itself?

Corporations do not have absolute power over your lives. Corporations do not have the right to kill, maim, or stea from you...all under the auspices of the law.
 

Technocratic

Active member
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
359
Reaction score
103
Location
Soviet Technate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Well, the problem is that once you get beyond the catchy slogans and feel-good individualism of Libertarianism, you'll realize it's just the bastard child of Randism, and Ayn Rand's philosophy was literally the application of a Sociopath's view of the world to ethics and politics. She took what made him "great' and turned it into an ethic, which Libertarians gobbled up like candy and turned into a political movement only slightly less crazy. THey have no real adult conception of social good, community, or public duty. It's a very naive and childish philosophy based on a very low level of ethical reasoning.
 

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Well, the problem is that once you get beyond the catchy slogans and feel-good individualism of Libertarianism, you'll realize it's just the bastard child of Randism, and Ayn Rand's philosophy was literally the application of a Sociopath's view of the world to ethics and politics. She took what made him "great' and turned it into an ethic, which Libertarians gobbled up like candy and turned into a political movement only slightly less crazy. THey have no real adult conception of social good, community, or public duty. It's a very naive and childish philosophy based on a very low level of ethical reasoning.

Pure, unadulterated propaganda. Don't waste the time of those who are here to discuss important issues. If you want to be the bully on the playground, go somewhere else.
 

Technocratic

Active member
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
359
Reaction score
103
Location
Soviet Technate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Pure, unadulterated propaganda. Don't waste the time of those who are here to discuss important issues. If you want to be the bully on the playground, go somewhere else.

It's not propaganda. It's true. Libertarianism is a shallow, selfish and morally dubious philosophy, and you are angry that the Emperor Has No CLothes. I undersatnd this bothers you, hence the emotional outburst. Libertarians hide the maliciousness of their faith in smiley faces and cleverly worded feel good phrases, but it's bad at the core.

Libertarianism is ethics for Sociopaths. Rand modelled the Objectivist creed, which Libertarians today masturbate over, only less extreme, off a serial killer. Literally. It promotes greed and selfishness as virtues and strives to model a socially-darwinian political system where the weak are cast aside and the strong elite prevail according to a Gospel of Wealth.

And saying pure and unadulturated is redundant, given the latter means the former.
 
Last edited:

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,315
Reaction score
6,468
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Corporations do not have absolute power over your lives. Corporations do not have the right to kill, maim, or stea from you...all under the auspices of the law.

But only because the government has the power of law to protect us from that.

Theoretically, at least.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,315
Reaction score
6,468
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Pure, unadulterated propaganda. Don't waste the time of those who are here to discuss important issues. If you want to be the bully on the playground, go somewhere else.

Instead of dismissing than critique, why don't you instead refute it?

I'm not agreeing with him necessarily. I'd just like to know why you think he's wrong.
 
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
906
Reaction score
183
Location
Maryland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
A great quote by a smart man:

"Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies."
Sounds like a bit of a wanker.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Instead of dismissing than critique, why don't you instead refute it?

I'm not agreeing with him necessarily. I'd just like to know why you think he's wrong.

The generic form of libertarianism is really decentralization.

There are varying degrees of course.
Me, I'm more of a Distributist/Communitarian.
Where most of a person's interaction are with their local community, so that is where the laws and ethics of the population should be decided.

I will agree on a basic set of rights and restrictions from a federal level and but they must be very, very basic.
States should have more power but not more than the community.
 

DrunkenAsparagus

Devourer of Poor Children
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
4,496
Reaction score
1,878
Location
DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Well, the problem is that once you get beyond the catchy slogans and feel-good individualism of Libertarianism, you'll realize it's just the bastard child of Randism, and Ayn Rand's philosophy was literally the application of a Sociopath's view of the world to ethics and politics. She took what made him "great' and turned it into an ethic, which Libertarians gobbled up like candy and turned into a political movement only slightly less crazy. THey have no real adult conception of social good, community, or public duty. It's a very naive and childish philosophy based on a very low level of ethical reasoning.

Libertarianism also known as Classical Liberalism goes back to the 19th Century and even earlier depending on how you define it. It goes way back before Rand. Now are some Libertarians selfish, of course, but that isn't the underlying basis for it. The basis is freedom. For the government to pay Peter it has to take from Paul first. The government is necessary for certain things that even Libertarians can't totally agree on, but for the most part, if you want to be generous, be generous on your own dime.
 

Helvidius

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
735
Reaction score
325
Location
Good ol' US of A
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
More often than not, it seems that whenever I debate a Libertarian, they often talk about morality and the way things should be, based on that morality, but never talk about how their philosophy would make the world a better place. This, I think, is the source of the common stereotype of Libertarians being preachy.

However, one of the well known aspects of persuasion is that the person doing the persuading should emphasize the positives of whatever they wish to promote. Instead I tend to see negatives (such as, the economy sucks because we are not following Austrian principals, not "if we follow Austrian principals, there would be more prosperity for more people").

I guess my question is, why? Is it that I am perceiving these discussions to be a certain way? Is it because that's how the logic flows, most thought comes from certain core principals and perhaps the end result does not really matter? Or is it something else?

I am truly curious, so if you feel attacked, that was not my intent. I just want to know.

I have to be honest, I'm not sure how this differs from many other ideologies. Socialists, Marxists, anarchists, libertarians, etc all go after each other. I can't begin to write about how negative some conservatives and liberals act toward one another's ideology. Time after time there is a post about how conservatives want America to fail or liberals ruining the country.

At the end of the day libertarians probably do talk about how their ideology can make the world better, but it isn't considered a libertarian principle. For example, if I say the government has no right telling gay people they cannot marry one another, it will most likely be associated with liberal policy. If I say the government needs to allow businesses to operate without a ton or regulations, it is seen as a conservative conviction. Through my experiences I have found U.S. politics to rarely escape the context of a left-right paradigm.
 

Helvidius

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
735
Reaction score
325
Location
Good ol' US of A
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
It's not propaganda. It's true. Libertarianism is a shallow, selfish and morally dubious philosophy, and you are angry that the Emperor Has No CLothes. I undersatnd this bothers you, hence the emotional outburst. Libertarians hide the maliciousness of their faith in smiley faces and cleverly worded feel good phrases, but it's bad at the core.

Libertarianism is ethics for Sociopaths. Rand modelled the Objectivist creed, which Libertarians today masturbate over, only less extreme, off a serial killer. Literally. It promotes greed and selfishness as virtues and strives to model a socially-darwinian political system where the weak are cast aside and the strong elite prevail according to a Gospel of Wealth.

And saying pure and unadulturated is redundant, given the latter means the former.

Morally dubious? Please enlighten me as to what is a moral philosophy.

I think you put Ayn Rand on a pedestal few libertarians would place her on.
 

The Giant Noodle

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2010
Messages
7,332
Reaction score
2,011
Location
Northern Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
There is sooooooooooooooooooooooo much HATRED and venom from the Right....... there is sooooooo much irrational crap from the Left. Its hard to take time on this forum to discuss the middle ground. People here dont believe in the middle. Dont believe in even what a Libertarain IS. They are too busy HATING!
 

Technocratic

Active member
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
359
Reaction score
103
Location
Soviet Technate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Morally dubious? Please enlighten me as to what is a moral philosophy.

I say morally dubious, because of their excessive valuation of individualism and egoism without serious regard for the consequences of it for anyone else. Their statements are always prefaced with "my, mine, me, I" and emphasizing their "rights" and "freedoms." They talk a lot about freedom, but the majority of their policies tend to be supported by a rich tiny elite of powerful people very vigorously. When I speak to Libertarians about the suffering their policies cause, they range from "I don't care" to "I am more important." They tend to be people who have a severely unempathetic and sterile attitude, as if it's some natural phenomenon, therefore okay.

Remember Eboneezer Scrooge? Are there no prisons? No work houses? Death will reduce the surplus population. That's the ultimate Libertarian. And he was based off of real people during the height of Libertarian thought.


I think you put Ayn Rand on a pedestal few libertarians would place her on.

Technically, I'd agree, because Rand hated the Libertarian movement for stealing her thunder and watering down her even more extreme policy to make it more palatable. So yea. But a lot of Libertarians adhere to Objectivist ethics and see her as some sort of warped Market Goddess.

There's a reason why Rand is so popular among the Libertarian Right. Her values are mostly their values. They don't realize where she got them from. If they only knew, perhaps they would rethink their "ideal man."
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I say morally dubious, because of their excessive valuation of individualism and egoism without serious regard for the consequences of it for anyone else. Their statements are always prefaced with "my, mine, me, I" and emphasizing their "rights" and "freedoms." They talk a lot about freedom, but the majority of their policies tend to be supported by a rich tiny elite of powerful people very vigorously. When I speak to Libertarians about the suffering their policies cause, they range from "I don't care" to "I am more important." They tend to be people who have a severely unempathetic and sterile attitude, as if it's some natural phenomenon, therefore okay.

Remember Eboneezer Scrooge? Are there no prisons? No work houses? Death will reduce the surplus population. That's the ultimate Libertarian. And he was based off of real people during the height of Libertarian thought.

For the most part, that is every single person in existence, even when you think of doing positive good for others, you're all convinced that your 100% right in your actions.
We all think our own design for a system of government is the right way.

That is the very definition of egoism, I'm just not going to hide or lie about it.

Do you know why we tend to defend the so called "elite, rich and powerful?"
Because they are the most popular whipping boy when things go wrong, people automatically use their wealth as a tool of tricking the masses that they have been exploited and/or wronged.

You want to stir up some populist angst, start hating on the wealthy and corporations.
It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
 
Top Bottom