Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
I'm non-Libertarian, yet I still managed to score 66 for my hostility to social security among other things.
Political Compass III
- Thread starter choxorn
- Start date
- Status
I'm non-Libertarian, yet I still managed to score 66 for my hostility to social security among other things.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
I like how they have sixty-odd questions where the "correct" answer is that poor people should die in a fire, and then finish up with "all government [is] for the benefit of a parasitic ruling elite".
I guess lolbertarians take a more liberal view of mixing messages than they do of mixing races. (ba-dum-tish)
I guess lolbertarians take a more liberal view of mixing messages than they do of mixing races. (ba-dum-tish)
gay_Aleks
from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!
Hmm. It seems that America would be perfect breeding ground for libertarians. All they need is to remove the few remaining semblances of welfare, plus all Social Security business, and volia! We're in nirvana, baby.
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
I don't think privately owned fire departments will automatically lead to 'poor people' dying 'in a fire'. For instance, if I ran a private fire dept. I'd sell fire fighting coverage to landlords which probably should cover poor people as well.
Anyway, privatising does not automatically mean making it for profit. Paleocons and Reactionaries - who are not very big on Capitalism - realise that for private institutions are not necessarily for-profit institutions.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
And there's no such thing as a negligent landlord?
Yes, but these people chose to decorate their page with the delightful mugs of Friedman, Rand and the old guy from Up. Profit-seeking is very much what they have in-mind.
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
There will always be negligent landlords, as much we should something against them.
Well, can't really argue with that. Though I'd like to think Rothbard just the old guy's even more grumpy twin brother.
Fitting example, there
RFC_Viceroy
Warlord
What's a lolbertarian?
There aren't really "Correct" answers on Caplan's test. Mind you, it IS a biased test, undeniably so, but at least it focuses on the correct spectrum (how much liberty one supports rather than meaningless concepts like "left" and "right.") Also, I think one could validly argue that Caplan focuses too much on economic issues compared to non-economic, but at least you get a mixture between the two and questions that are actually about political positions rather than vague abstract concepts (in other words, I probably got put more "left" on PC because I don't think what's best for corporations is always automatically best for everyone, even though I also don't support any government regulations on the economy.)
That said, I really doubt Caplan wants poor people to die. And I fail to see why you would assume that that would happen.
Minarchists want government to provide police, courts, and defense. Nothing else. Caplan's test is framed as such that such people would still be libertarian (though not as much so as anarchists, of course.)
Anarcho-capitalists, by contrast, are in fact against the government providing anything at all. That's the camp I'd be in, although things can get a little complicated when you start comparing government and state, or trying to say exactly where the line between minarchism and anarcho-capitalism is.
I'm actually not certain. It could mean a David Friedmanite viewpoint where there are actually multiple independent legal systems, or it could just mean that the law isn't provided by the State but could still potentially be universal. I assumed the latter.
I get your point with the spanking thing. I suppose it depends on whether you take it to mean that ALL good parents have to spank their children (I would say no) or that SOME good parents do (I would say yes.)
Gucumatz
JS, secretly Rod Serling
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 6,181
If you want to see how rapidly privatizing fire departments, education, etc. looks - just look to Detroit. Arsonists everywhere in the poorest neighborhoods that can't afford gov't services atm
RFC_Viceroy
Warlord
What if it was done slowly?
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
As far as I know, "lolbertarian" is the hipster descriptor for libertarian. A portmanteau of "lol" and "libertarian". It isn't a complimentary term. Fairly obviously.
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
Got 26 on the libertarian test. Voted yes on tax cuts but no on spending cuts. Voted no on the first two Fed limiting proposals but then yes on the free banking one 
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
Nah, "lolbertarian" specifically describes the "socially liberal, fiscally conservative", #ronpaulrevolution, it's-all-about-the-Constitution-except-the-bits-I-don't-like breed of pseudo-libertarian politics coming out of the US. The ones who haven't really thought it through, haven't really ploughed their train of thought over the Rockies to gaze upon the mighty Pacific and realised that "liberty", taken seriously, doesn't just mean championing private structures of authority instead of states.
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
Yet another day I can't help but remember one of my grad student instructors: "[in my experience] Libertarians are Marxists who haven't read enough, yet."
Farm Boy
I hope you dance
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 28,269
Uhm, wat? Few remaining semblances of welfare? You're being sarcastic about that and I'm getting bogged in the nirvana sarcasm instead, right?
RFC_Viceroy
Warlord
Got 26 on the libertarian test. Voted yes on tax cuts but no on spending cuts. Voted no on the first two Fed limiting proposals but then yes on the free banking one
You want tax cuts without spending cuts? Wouldn't that just make the debt worse? Or is this a laffer curve related concept?
I can't speak for all of Ron Paul's supporters (who have all kinds of different viewpoint) but Ron Paul was close friends with Rothbard and continues to be friends with Lew Rockwell and Walter Block... He probably isn't actually an anarchist but he is pretty much a consistent minarchist. I'm not telling you that Ron Paul is perfect, but I don't think he falls into the "socially liberal and fiscally conservative" camp that you rightly mock in this post. Regarding the constitution, the constitution is vague enough that you can support almost any state-level policy you can think of and still be a constitutionalist, but the Federal government is of course very limited. And I'd say Ron Paul is fairly consistent about that regardless of what you may think of his personal views.
For me, I've mostly moved beyond the constitution at this point, although I'll sometimes use it to make a very limited argument against someone who both claims to support the Constitution and isn't very philosophical. But my ideal is anarcho-capitalism, not the US Constitution.
As for the whole private authorities thing, ultimately I guess it comes down to how we define libertarian. I think SOME type of collectivism is ultimately unavoidable because man is a social animal. Anarcho-capitalism allows all adults to choose whether they want to be in a collective or not. That's the best you're going to get IMO, and even that's a long shot with so many people wanting to force others into the State collective. Does that mean I support large corporations dominating everyone's lives? Of course not. I don't even support limited liability, or the idea that a "corporation" is some kind of special, legally protected entity. On the other hand, I strongly support private property, which would put me at odds with the socialists.
I like Mises but I'm not sure (haven't read that much of him) that he's that much if an more libertarian than Ron Paul. Which is pretty darn good, but Traitorfish already seemed to have dismissed Ron Paul as a serious libertarian.
- Status
