Why are you not a Libertarian?

[mangxema]

The problem arises whereas I believe that some things that people do hurt others, as well as themselves.... I believe that the use of drugs by individuals not only hurts them, but others. Libertarians would not agree.

Do you mean the actual use of drugs itself, or subsequent things one may do while on drugs but not otherwise? By alcohol analogy, I mean things like DUI, drunken rage, etc.

 

[Mathilda]

Because losertarians cant win and are pretty much powerless. I have no desire to be associated with the powerless....thus I have no interest in the party.

Moderator Action: trolling - warned.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[JohnRM]

Do you mean the actual use of drugs itself, or subsequent things one may do while on drugs but not otherwise? By alcohol analogy, I mean things like DUI, drunken rage, etc.

I mean the actually use of drugs. I find it ridiculous that people try to seperate the acts of DUI, "drunken rage", and other things from the actual use. People who use drugs are far more likely to commit these crimes, because most of them do not care about anyone else or anything. They only care about the next "fix".

 

[mangxema]

I mean the actually use of drugs. I find it ridiculous that people try to seperate the acts of DUI, "drunken rage", and other things from the actual use. People who use drugs are far more likely to commit these crimes, because most of them do not care about anyone else or anything. They only care about the next "fix".

If you want to get stoned with your buddies, I don't care. If you hurt other people then we have a problem. Robbery, theft, etc. are all crimes and should be punished. But if you have enough of your own money, I don't care what you spend it on.

Some people abuse alcohol but plenty of other people manage to drink and never get into any trouble. If you can do that with drugs, I'm fine with it.

I should note that I am strongly opposed to drugs personally... the whole addiction thing doesn't jive well with libertarianism.

 

[Rambuchan]

I am not a Libertarian because, in the words of Michael Bakunin:

"Liberty without socialism is privilege, injustice; socialism without liberty is slavery and brutality."

It's also worth looking into the history of Libertarianism in the UK. They were quite prevelant in the '80s under Thatcher, but they ran aground eventually. I believe the fulcrum issue that made a laughing stock of them was...the legalisation of heroin.

 

[The Yankee]

Good luck with that.

Stick to your guns. Vote for who you think will do the best job. If you don't, we will always have to put up with the Republicans and Democrats running everything. There are too many libertarians in this country to think they would never have a chance.

A good principle to follow. Though I see the same problem in the Libertarian Party as I do in the Green Party and it's the same problem that led to the Democratic retreat in the 1990s; they're not focusing on cultivating local candidiates. They're too busy running more candidiates for governor or for President and not putting more of their resources building a base. Godwynn is likely experiencing that right now; there may be candidiates for governor or for Senate, but none for State Assembly. Same thing is happening in New York.

 

[El_Machinae]

I mostly agree with John about the drugs, with the 'hardcore' drugs, we'd need better policies than just 'let them be'.

Their philosophy is "hey, there's the enviroment, let's use it!"

That is one of the things that I have a slight problem with them on, but I still consider myself fairly lax on the enviroment.

If tort law was more efficient, then it wouldn't be a problem. If someone's pollution affected you, they'd be liable to you for the damages. And then, they'd factor in this liability before polluting.

Again, imho, we need a drastic evolution in the courts before libertarianism is viable.

 

[Adebisi]

I think the Libertarian principles are good, but they aren't worth much if they would lead to a society noone wants to live in. I think tax cuts, deregulation and open borders would lead to prosperity for Europe, though. So basically I am a libertarian, just not a very dogmatic one.

 

[MamboJoel]

No...I vote for winners that share my viewpoints and principles.

Lets just say I am a realist. And realistically....the Libertarian party isnt going to do squat for all your ideals or issues as they are truly powerless to affect anything.

Now then...I vote Republican because they are the party that carry most of my ideals that actually have a realistic chance at winning...thus actually implementing my ideals in our world as we know it.

Makes sense doesnt it?

But he was talking about ideology, not about beeing member of any group or political party.
Could you answer the question about the ideology itself please ?

 

[MamboJoel]

As for my personal taste : I'd say I'm a libertarian. But maybe a humanist libertarian, or rather a pragmatic libertarian.

I'm pretty shocked by both :

- The total lack of humanity some posters have when blindly applying libertarian ideology (say classical economics) mostly without having a clue of it's postulates. Postulates that inevitably moderate any common sens discussion about free market IRL.
- The total mistrust the socialists have in reality. They mainly talk about assistancy, restrictions without ever considering their counterparts : expenditures, lower initiatives.

In fact I think what amazes me the most is extremism.

 

[Che Guava]

No...I vote for winners that share my viewpoints and principles.

Lets just say I am a realist. And realistically....the Libertarian party isnt going to do squat for all your ideals or issues as they are truly powerless to affect anything.

I'm starting to see why the US is a two-party system...I have to say, if I was a US citizen I would vote for a third party every time. Not because I want to throw my vote away, but because I think a lot could be accomplished by breaking the current 'duopoly' on power

Having said that, I'm not a libertarian: I like the welfare state

 

[Adebisi]

Also I think there are alot of fundies with them? I have a very hard time supporting fundies of any kind.

I agree with you here, most libertarians are too dogmatic. That is the reason I didn't vote for the Finnish Libertarian party - too much dogma and too little pragmatism.

But, in 2006 when 95% of us will work not just for someone else, but for, in most cases, multi-national corporations or industries, who have the same "rights" as people, and who dominate the lobbying of Washington DC, you'd stand no chance. And its not just the common workers. There are too many things that the average worker needs some protection from or some regulation of.

And, as consumers, the average person is not savvy enough to know what's in that food they're eating or to understand a lot of the economic decisions they'd have to make with no govt. regulation to protect their minimal interest. Look at the unregulated day-traders of the late 1990s. They had no idea what they were doing, they were largely unregulated and by and large they were devoured.

I think there are a few things you haven't thought of here - worker unions would still be allowed, a minimal government would probably not be as easily affected by lobbying and it still wouldn't be legal too sell food with clear health hazards.

Because I disagree with most of their stances on various issues:

• (...)
• Total disregard for the environment.
• (...)

I actually agree with you here - in order to deal with the problems of global warming massive taxes on fossile fuels and great number of new nuclear power plants are needed. This is not something the market forces can take care of.

 

[Turner]

Moderator Action: The Last Conformist - warned, language.

Bypassing the autocensor is a .
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[seanos08]

Libertarianism would basically lead to domination by corporations and great economic hardship for the majority.

It should be the aim of countries like the US an Australia (where I am from) that no person is homeless or starving - our GDP is easily adequate to ensure this.

As a teacher I am aware that no child can reach their potential without adequate nutrition and resources.

Finally as a science teacher I am aware that the Greenhouse is real, the rural region I am in is in severe drought and CO2 emmisions are everybodys problem and Liberterian Ideology has no way to force corporations to behave in an environmentally responsible manner.

 

[Bast]

According to the political compass thing libertarianism is the direct opposite of what I believe in. I agree with the economic left firstly. But I also feel that there needs to be a little more laws and rules with regards to social order too. I'm definitely for tougher criminal punishments and more power to the government to maintain social control and law and order.

So I disagree with libertarians on many levels.

 

[Hotpoint]

I'm not a Libertarian for exactly the same reason I'm not a Marxist. I'm not deluded enough to universally apply an academic theory to all sectors of the economy/society when it is evidentially only the best model for some of them.

Results are what matters, not ideological purity. A mixed economy may be "messy" but at least it gives you the freedom to determine the best way to run things on a case by case basis.

Beware people with a theory who are prone to ignore inconvenient facts because of it

 

[JerichoHill]

Little l libertarians compose 13% of the American electorate and are the largest block of swing voters. They are responsible for the 1994 Republican revolution, and will likely be responsible for the 2006 Democractic revolution (they're pissed)

Why am I a libertarian? Because I believe that freedom was the ideal our country was founded on, and what we've bled on. And that's freedom in all forms.

 

[JerichoHill]

Finally as a science teacher I am aware that the Greenhouse is real, the rural region I am in is in severe drought and CO2 emmisions are everybodys problem and Liberterian Ideology has no way to force corporations to behave in an environmentally responsible manner.

You are wholly incorrect on this one. Carbon-trading was a free-market concept which has reduced greenhouse emissions for high pollution industries, and was one such policy championed by several libertarian-esque thinkers.

The market CAN be used to curb undesirable behavior, rather than government legislation, and libertarians recognize this

 

[JerichoHill]

The libertarians would let capitalism run so free that it would ruin the world.

But its not capitalism that's the problem, its the culture of our current world that is. Capitalism is just a box that takes in inputs and delivers outputs based on people tastes/values/preferences.

Change those, change the world. Changing the system...doesn't change TVP

 

[JerichoHill]

I suppose I should mention that in GA and VA and NH there are very viable "libertarian" groups. It's not uncommon in those states to see libertarians in elected office in towns and such