How Libertarian Are You?

[Angst]

This quote: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=12008487&postcount=193

But hey, please enlighten me what political theories - books specifically - you utilize to support your views. Now you're just rejecting some stuff. I know you're 17, so you don't actually have an education behind your views. Yes it illegitimizes your viewpoint severely and you can not go "I do not agree with this or that guy".

Btw I took the test. Scored 23. It was a dumb test, but I get it was intended as a for-fun test for libertarians. Your claim that CFC would score 15 makes your spectrum look kind of black and white though. I did not read the first replies, so I do not know whether this claim was true or not.

 

[GhostWriter16]

The government does not exist to make you happy.

Indeed, so they should stop serving the neocon bloodlust.

I'm the one arguing that government exists to make anyone happy? Really? I'm the one who wants to abolish more than half of you, you are the neocon modern American liberal who wants an all-pervasive state both at home and abroad, making you far more evil than even the average conservative or liberal.

It may exist to serve you in the highly general sense, but this is far and away from obey your every whim.

They don't exist to serve us either, merely to make sure we are left alone, and to punish those who will not.

Similarly, you don't get to just stop paying taxes when you disagree with the purpose they are being used for, or else society wouldn't function at all.

I didn't say you "Get to." Any government that would even think about not prosecuting tax evaders would be far more benevolent than it is.

All I said is that I don't give a crap. In other words, screw the government.

The relationship between the government and the citizens has to be mutual, it cannot just be one making demands of the other. As it stands American democracy is already an increasingly one way street, where the citizens elect politicians who obstruct the process of government and the passing of legislature to fulfill the desires of their special interests.

The only thing the legislator should be doing now is repealing laws.

In other words, there is a certain extent to which yes, government does know what's best for you. It exists to serve your interests, but not your whims.

False, absolutely false. Government doesn't know what's best for one single person, and their absurd imperialism does not help a single person outside the elite.

 

[AdamCrock]

The government does not exist to make you happy. It may exist to serve you in the highly general sense, but this is far and away from obey your every whim. Similarly, you don't get to just stop paying taxes when you disagree with the purpose they are being used for, or else society wouldn't function at all. The relationship between the government and the citizens has to be mutual, it cannot just be one making demands of the other. As it stands American democracy is already an increasingly one way street, where the citizens elect politicians who obstruct the process of government and the passing of legislature to fulfill the desires of their special interests.

In other words, there is a certain extent to which yes, government does know what's best for you. It exists to serve your interests, but not your whims.

"Render unto Ceasar" ???!!! (Previous quote) The dude obviously played too much "Fallout New Vegas" to say that at least (slaver scum .... joking of course )

"Obey me!" says the Emperor how the masses respond ? .... They rebel ! (being Libertarian) or they compel (being conservative), It is pretty much clear for me but don't mind me ... just passing through

 

[Lord of Elves]

False, absolutely false. Government doesn't know what's best for one single person, and their absurd imperialism does not help a single person outside the elite.

Oh, I see. When private corporations exploit foreign nations and their citizens through the free market then it is the acceptable and beneficial result of free trade and a form of economic Darwinism, but when governments do it for the benefit of their citizens, that is truly and utterly unconscionable.

 

[GhostWriter16]

This quote: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=12008487&postcount=193

But hey, please enlighten me what political theories - books specifically - you utilize to support your views. Now you're just rejecting some stuff. I know you're 17, so you don't actually have an education behind your views. Yes it illegitimizes your viewpoint severely and you can not go "I do not agree with this or that guy".

Btw I took the test. Scored 23. It was a dumb test, but I get it was intended as a for-fun test for libertarians. Your claim that CFC would score 15 makes your spectrum look kind of black and white though. I did not read the first replies, so I do not know whether this claim was true or not.

I don't have any good books on hand ATM. The internet is a useful thing, and I mostly came to my conclusions, believe it or not, via CFC and seeing some logical inconsistencies with conservatism.

As for CEOs serving the public, here's the thing (Sig this). CEOs do not force anyone to use their service. They may take higher than "Fair" salaries (Although fair is irrelevant unless it can be defined, otherwise "Fair" is what the market says it is.) They may pay their stockholders more than is "Fair" (See above.) But they do not, generally, utilize any kind of force. You do not HAVE to have anything to do with them. It is perhaps an exception if they monopolize a necessity, but otherwise you can completely ignore them and have nothing to do with them.

With government you don't get that choice. You HAVE to pay them taxes. You sometimes HAVE to serve in the military. And you have to obey laws, some of which is necessary but some of which is simply the coercion of the majority. If I want to own a gun for peaceful purposes, or smoke marijuana, or make voluntary contracts with people that make me super rich or have me work for less than a certain wage, the government should not interfere with my free choice. "It's for your own good" is no legitimate reason to threaten force.

Corporations NEVER make you buy their product. Yet government does, coercively, tell you what to do, and all too often beyond the simple extent of "Don't tread on the other guy."

To expand on some other problems I have with social democracy (I think I've said "Theft" enough times) generally it REQUIRES paternalism. If you have Universal Healthcare, every person in the nation has a vested interest in your personal choices (This is just one example that popped up in my head.)

 

[AdamCrock]

Oh, I see. When private corporations exploit foreign nations and their citizens through the free market then it is the acceptable and beneficial result of free trade and a form of economic Darwinism, but when governments do it for the benefit of their citizens, that is truly and utterly unconscionable.

Now I feel exploited all of a sudden ! Free market is a free market in all of the meanings of "free" - You can do what You want and nobody will blame You in the end" It is of course imperfect but there is no other "market form" known to man that actually is perfect right ?

 

[Angst]

Yeah that can't be sigged man. I need a two-sentence puncher. Something like what I wrote in my post.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Yeah that can't be sigged man. I need a two-sentence puncher. Something like what I wrote in my post.

Fine.

Thou shall not steal.

 

[AdamCrock]

Fine.

Thou shall not steal.

"You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor" (lie about him) (if I translated it correctly Sorry if I didn't... was in a hurry )

 

[JollyRoger]

You HAVE to pay them taxes.

Name a mandatory tax.

 

[AdamCrock]

Name a mandatory tax.

"VAT" in my country

 

[JollyRoger]

"VAT" in my country

You don't have to pay that - just avoid purchases with VAT.

 

[AdamCrock]

You don't have to pay that - just avoid purchases with VAT.

I have to eat something and everything in my country seems to be a "luxury" da**it ! That is why my country sucks but I will not confess where I am from in order to avoid flames

 

[Angst]

Fine.

Thou shall not steal.

That's really smartassy and is not your quote. The thing is that your post was almost quotable but needed the context of the discussion. I want the context integrated in the quote.

What's wrong with my interpretation of your opinion as presented in my post? Can't I quote that? If I can, please type it out so it's actually a quote. If not, why is it not what you believe?

 

[Antilogic]

I have to eat something and everything in my country seems to be a "luxury" da**it ! That is why my country sucks but I will not confess where I am from in order to avoid flames

You have the choice of starving to death or growing your own food on a plot of land in the wilderness (although how it became yours is shrouded in mystery), therefore it is voluntary. At least, if I've been following this thread correctly.

 

[AdamCrock]

You have the choice of starving to death or growing your own food on a plot of land in the wilderness (although how it became yours is shrouded in mystery), therefore it is voluntary. At least, if I've been following this thread correctly.

I would VERY much love planting a sollar collector in my garden and give the "corporations" a wide berth but it seem imposible in my current position. I would like to see man as free as They could possibly be ! (No f*ing crap from corporations and their oil blood business practice). I would love to see man as They are ! If it's not Libertarian than what is ?

 

[Leoreth]

I know, she said they were "Right-wing hippies" but I don't really know the details of her critique.

That's already spot on. I would say "right-wing hipsters", but she can hardly be blamed for not knowing the current meaning of that word.

 

[Traitorfish]

The government does not exist to make you happy. zIt may exist to serve you in the highly general sense, but this is far and away from obey your every whim. Similarly, you don't get to just stop paying taxes when you disagree with the purpose they are being used for, or else society wouldn't function at all. The relationship between the government and the citizens has to be mutual, it cannot just be one making demands of the other. As it stands American democracy is already an increasingly one way street, where the citizens elect politicians who obstruct the process of government and the passing of legislature to fulfill the desires of their special interests.

In other words, there is a certain extent to which yes, government does know what's best for you. It exists to serve your interests, but not your whims.

My, my, is it 1832 already?

Fine.

Thou shall not steal.

And property is theft. 2 + 2 being 4, we can conclude that libertarianism is necessarily communist, or it is no libertarianism at all.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

But it's rubbish, isn't it? Or am I being hasty?

Hasty. There have been sensible libertarians trying to post their thoughts on the matter, but they're swamped in volume and in .. well the other kind of volume by the nitwits who are unable to string together two sentences to create an argument beyond: government is bad, or tax too high, or spending wrong. There are those who are libertarians but realize that in today's society the concept doesn't work. So they are arguing for a change in culture first in order to reach the goal of libertarianism.

 

[Borachio]

I think libertarianism (as I understand it) would be perfectly fine, provided a sufficiently large majority of people were sufficiently responsible.