Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Gunslinger on January 26, 2004, 02:06:13 PM
-
Seriously....what is a libertarion? I'm kinda curious cause I'm fed up with the republicans and hate the librals. If possible keep the replys to a serious and constructive.
-
Anarchists, individualists and tired, old, disillusioned hippies with no real answer on how society should function.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
with no real answer on how society should function.
wouldnt this describe all political parties?;)
-
Libertardians = T3h W1N (http://www.lp.org)
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Anarchists, individualists and tired, old, disillusioned hippies with no real answer on how society should function.
Wow....nice work Dowding:)
-
I lean more toward libertarian than anything. I am most definitely not an old hippy. Hippies love government when it is "their" government... libertarians want less government.
Libertarians are basicaly constitutionalists... They want the government to have no more power than it was originaly designed to have by OUR constitution. I have no idea what dowding is talking about because he is talking about libertarians from a british point of view apparently.
las
-
Really? I just made that up. :aok
-
wow i think i'm a libertarion as well. There isnt one issue that i've read so far that I dont agree with 100%
health care
gun laws
drug prohibition
environment
I'm still not through the list as of yet.
-
gee dowding... no one doubted that in any case... we pretty much figure that everything you post is made up.
lazs
-
Libertarian --> No government control over their lives whatsoever.
Republican --> Only as much government control as needed.
Moderate --> In the middle.
Democrat --> Want a large amount of goverment control.
Communist (another term, forgot) --> Want complete governmental control.
That's an easy way to look at it. How the other topics surfaced and stemmed is a completely different subject.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
wow i think i'm a libertarion as well. There isnt one issue that i've read so far that I dont agree with 100%
health care
gun laws
drug prohibition
environment
I'm still not through the list as of yet.
A lot of people that think they're republican would be better classified as libertarians, they just don't know it (or vote it).
Sigh... isn't the two-party system wonderful?
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Republican --> Only as much government control as needed.
That's an easy way to look at it.
And if you believe that you just bought the Republican spiel hook line and sinker. I'd laugh if it wasn't so sad that so many voters are similarly deluded.
-
Every year, they take 12.4% of your income to prop up their failed Social Security system - a system that is heading toward bankruptcy.
If you are an American earning the median income of $31,695 per year, and were given the option of investing that same amount of money in a stock mutual fund, you would retire a millionaire - without winning the lottery or a TV game show.
That million dollars would provide you with a retirement income of over $100,000 per year - about five times what you could expect from Social Security.
Even a very conservative investment strategy would yield three times the benefits promised by Social Security.
http://www.lp.org
this right here just sold me......I'm a libertarion
-
Here's an interesting quiz, 10 questions, that can help you figure where your political beliefs land. The 'left' vs. 'right' scale is far too simplistic. Technically Stalin and Ghandi would be left extremists while Reagan and Hitler would be right extremists, and that's definately not a fair comparison for either.
This quiz gives you a 2D location on a chart that splits the questions into personal liberty and economic policy.
http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
My answers put me in the Libertarian side, my sisters answers put her in the Authoritarian side, a friend came up as left liberal, and another came up as right conservative, so it definately offers different real world answers.
(http://www.self-gov.org/quiz/s090_090.gif)
-
Libertarianism is a doctrine concerning the primacy of negative property rights.
That means that a person's body and property are protected from invasion/violation.
If you need to summarise libertarianism with one word, that word would be "nonagression". The only legitimate use of aggression against someone body or property is the direct agression by that person against other's body/property.
While libertarians would like the Constitution to replace what we have now, in view of libertarians the Constitution is still a flawed document illegitimately limiting people's freedoms.
Gunslinger, do you need good links to the libertarian resources? The libertarian party is not the best one. Plenty of libertarians make quite a distinction of being small 'l' libertarians rather than the party members.
In fact nominating a libertarian candidate goes against the libertarian philiosophy. The goal of libertarianism is not go get control of the state power but to limit that power to withing it's legitimate boundaries.
miko
-
Platform Comparison Results
You preferred the Democratic stance for 0 issues. Democratic Platform
You preferred the Green stance for 2 issues. Green Platform
You preferred the Libertarian stance for 2 issues. Libertarian Platform.
You preferred the Republican stance for 3 issues. Republican Platform.
I consider myself a Republican with common sense. Least government is best government.
-
not really a surprise here as the test is kinda slanted but good none the less
(http://www.self-gov.org/quiz/s060_100.gif)
-
Here are my answers w/ explanations. I just sent this to my sister, so this is a convenient cut/paste:
Personal Issues
1. I think military service should be voluntary.
2. I don't think the Government should control the media.
3. I don't think the Government should be say what consenting adults can and cannot do behind closed doors.
4. I think that the war on drugs is a mistake and hurts more people then it helps.
5. I don't have a strong opinion on the subject or borders and people crossing them easier. I can see pros and cons for both arguments.
Economy
6. I think that government subsidies are a mistake. A business should never be paid to NOT grow or build something, that's what subsidies do.
7. Using tariffs to slow trade and create a market beneficial for local businesses is counterintuitive. A business should succeed or fail on its own merits.
8. I used to be medium on minimum wage laws, but I think that market forces would force businesses to adopt pay structures that are reflective of the actual demand and skill needed to do a job.
9. I can go either Maybe or No on 'End taxes. Pay for services with user fees.' It works for some things (like gas taxes paying for roads) and doesn't work for others (people without kids complain about paying for public schools).
10. I do think that foreign aid should be privately funded. If it was, then I suspect the Isreal/Palestine issue would have already been resolved. The US has funded Isreal (who I sympathize with) exclusively (which I disagree with) to detriment. If the government set it up so organizations could have tax benefits for organizing and dispering foreign aid, I think private industry would see profit in funding that because they benefit. A vacuum would be filled by different organizations representing different groups, so our foreign aid would potentially benefit all foreign groups, not just those that currently have the ear of our government.
-
Using the second link I came out on the chart as a centerist.
-
Every day millions of adult Americans agree to make love. There is no justification for throwing them in jail. These are peaceful voluntary agreements between consenting adults. A tiny fraction of these involve money.
Criminal penalties do not stop prostitution. They just create real problems. One study showed it costs taxpayers two thousand dollars every time a prostitute is arrested. Let's respect people's right to control their own bodies.
Decriminalize sex, and let it be a private affair.
http://www.theadvocates.org/library/libertarian-faq.html#Lib.FAQ.6a (http://www.theadvocates.org/library/libertarian-faq.html#Lib.FAQ.6a)
OK I"M SOLD LOL
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Libertarian --> No government control over their lives whatsoever.
Republican --> Only as much government control as needed.
Moderate --> In the middle.
Democrat --> Want a large amount of goverment control.
Communist (another term, forgot) --> Want complete governmental control.
That's an easy way to look at it. How the other topics surfaced and stemmed is a completely different subject.
Republican, and Democrat could be the same when it comes to govt. control.
Both advocate legal restraints on alternative view points, ie. gun control...abortion.
The amount is completely subjective to whether that "control" inhibits their own personal wants.
Tronsky
-
Miko is an avowed Libber, and as such, I draw the conclusion that they are a party of pissers and moaners, those who spend all their time and efforts to run down and condem our country.
Probably be best to avoid them like a syphlatic old hooker.
dago
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Seriously....what is a libertarion? I'm kinda curious cause I'm fed up with the republicans and hate the librals. If possible keep the replys to a serious and constructive.
Ask a serious question and you'll get a serious answer.
You need to put some scope on what you're looking for.
there was a gay liberation... a woman's liberation...
These were individuals who were persecuted for who they were, oppressed, shamed, and shut out from main stream society...
They fought back through the court system, public education, peaceful demonstration, and social reform... in order to change the moreys of conventional wisdom.
-
Originally posted by Dago
Miko is an avowed Libber, and as such, I draw the conclusion that they are a party of pissers and moaners, those who spend all their time and efforts to run down and condem our country.
Probably be best to avoid them like a syphlatic old hooker.
dago
Fair enough but after checking their website I find that alot of their goals and beleifs match that of mine. I am for:
smaller govt
less gun control
Better Economy
less wealthfare
end to foriegn aid
less taxes
alot of these arent the wacked out hippie ideas that some on this board have described. I think the idea of more than a 2 party system is just too shocking for some to beleive in.
-
Gunslinger: Fair enough but after checking their website I find that alot of their goals and beleifs match that of mine...
Be prepared to listen to a lot of crap of what a bad person you are for not supporting someone's oppressive and redstributive inclinations.
miko
-
Originally posted by Dago
Miko is an avowed Libber, and as such, I draw the conclusion that they are a party of pissers and moaners, those who spend all their time and efforts to run down and condem our country.
Probably be best to avoid them like a syphlatic old hooker.
dago
What a wonderfully open minded view! Off in Dago land, I guess everyone fits into one of two molds: Democrat or Republican. Any third party is un-american, because, well, the Democratic and Republican parties were the only ones laid out in the Constitution!
That was sarcasm, in case you missed it. Try not to let your personal feelings get in the way of your ability to think.
-
possible sig material coming up:
Screw the republicans and democrats. They both suck! I had an epiphany I am now a libertarion. But not a miko libertarion I still think there's hope!
-
I thought they organized books. ;)
-
Originally posted by AKIron
I thought they organized books. ;)
LOL Ya beat me to it. :)
-
Tarmac,
That was sarcasm, in case you missed it
I sure hope the whooshing sound didnt make you look up.
dago
-
Actually, the Libertarians aren't all bad, and it's easy to agree with them in many areas.
I just hate to pass up any chance to slam one of our nations enemys, in this case Miko. He has made his hatred and disrespect for the United States so blatantly obvious, it is a forgone conclusion he should be regarded as an enemy of the state. Probably should be investigated by the FBI now that I think of it.
dago
-
Dago: ...one of our nations enemys, in this case Miko. He has made his hatred and disrespect for the United States so blatantly obvious, it is a forgone conclusion he should be regarded as an enemy of the state. Probably should be investigated by the FBI now that I think of it.
Wow! I managed to piss off soviet commies, muslim fundamentalists and american fascists in one lifetime!
Why don't you call FBI, Dago! I am sure they are eager to spend their time investigating anyone who disagrees with you. Not like they need to look for real terrorists. :rolleyes:
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Wow! I managed to piss off soviet commies, muslim fundamentalists and american fascists in one lifetime!
Why don't you call FBI, Dago! I am sure they are eager to spend their time investigating anyone who disagrees with you.
miko
actually at one point or another im sure youve pissed off or been in complete and utter disagreement with everyone who uses this board...
-
Before this spirals out of control into a 'I hate miko' thread, does anyone else have any thoughts/questions about being Libertarian? I bet that party represents more of your views on issues then y'all think.
-
miko
I am sure they are eager to spend their time investigating anyone who disagrees with you.
The issue doesnt have anything to do with me or who disagrees with me. If you were the intellectual you have deluded a few into thinking you are, you would realize that. But, since you actually aren't that bright, let me point out the obvious:
1) A lot of people disagree with me
2) I dont care if they disagree, I respect their right to their own opinion, and I am aware that I make mistakes sometimes in my opinions or conceptions
3) I never said anyone should be investigated for disagreeing with me including you
4) My issue with you is the pure and simple fact that you hate this country and constantly are tryng to paint our nation, past and present, in the worst possible light you can
I regret you lacking the most basic powers of observation and comprehension such that these facts weren't as obvious to you as I suspect they were to the rest of the people who read this board.
But, I am not surprised. Dealing with reality isn't really your strong suit. Hate and attempting to bewilder with delusion is.
BTW, I think you take too much credit, I doubt any communists, muslim fundamentalists or anyone else of any consequence have a clue who you are nor do I suspect anyone particularly cares.
dago
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Before this spirals out of control into a 'I hate miko' thread, does anyone else have any thoughts/questions about being Libertarian? I bet that party represents more of your views on issues then y'all think.
not me...on all the "tests" ive scored just on the authoritarian side of a couple points off the farthest left you can be...
in view of libertarians the Constitution is still a flawed document
that may be...but at least it "knows" that its flawed because there is no way to make a "ideal" society work...not unless you only allow people who agree with your ideal in and keep everyone else out...
-
I don't think it's accurate to say that Libertarians think the constitution is a flawed document at all. In fact, I think that we believe the Constitution is perfect and that our nation has strayed from it.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
I don't think it's accurate to say that Libertarians think the constitution is a flawed document at all. In fact, I think that we believe the Constitution is perfect and that our nation has strayed from it.
:aok
-
Left-Liberal
Left-Liberals prefer self-government in personal matters and central decision-making on economics. They want government to serve the disadvantaged in the name of fairness. Leftists tolerate social diversity, but work for economic equality.
woot go me. Government control that economy but stay out of my pants. thats for funkyboy
-
Originally posted by Frogm4n
Left-Liberal
Left-Liberals prefer self-government in personal matters and central decision-making on economics. They want government to serve the disadvantaged in the name of fairness. Leftists tolerate social diversity, but work for economic equality.
woot go me. Government control that economy but stay out of my pants. thats for funkyboy
bro you didnt make one bit of sense....put the bottle down. we are not talking about librals here we are talking about libertarions
-
Gunslinger, he was talking about his score results from the test on self-gov.org.
-
If your goal is personal freedom then you will vote libertarian but....
ONLY if the race is a landslide for the republican candidate... if there is any chance that the democrat/socialist will win then you need to forget ideals and vote republican.
It does no good to vote libertarian and allow som gun grabbing democrat tax and spend democrat get into power. No matter what a democrat says.....
he will vote with his socialist buds whenever things get tough.
lazs
-
vorticon: actually at one point or another im sure youve pissed off or been in complete and utter disagreement with everyone who uses this board...
Somehow almost every single person believes that there are some good causes - in their subjective opinion - that justify coercion, theft and slavery. Their goals may vary widly but their means are the same.
So a fella like me that opposes coersion altogether is bound to disagree with everyone, even if I approve most of their goals.
Chairboy: I don't think it's accurate to say that Libertarians think the constitution is a flawed document at all. In fact, I think that we believe the Constitution is perfect and that our nation has strayed from it.
Many libertarians - with small 'l' - believe - or rather know - that the Constituton is a flawed documant because it violates the basic principles of libertarianism. It just does. We may believe that it is as good as we may hope to get and consider it good enough, but calling it "perfect" is just not correct.
First, the Constitution allows the government to violate many rights it should not.
Second, by overturning the Articles of Confederation it laid foundation for eventual inevitable raise of the power of the central government.
Of course any libertarian would be happy to return to the original constitutional order as a practical matter - provided it could stay that way.
Paring down the last 1% of the government may be a facinating academic issue but hardly of the same practical improtance as paring down the first and worst 99%.
If I were guaranteed 5% taxation and no state interference with economy - which is still more intrusion than caused the Colonies to rebel - I would stop spending time on libertarianism in favor of more practical pursuits.
lazs2: there is any chance that the democrat/socialist will win then you need to forget ideals and vote republican.
If you condone this kind of stratigic voting, the best that could be done is to have the Congress and the President to belong to the different parties.
Frogm4n: Left-Liberals prefer self-government in personal matters and central decision-making on economics.
That is just totally impossible. Even if the economy could be operated by central planning - which is impossible as well - how would you be free to pursue any private personal causes if you do not have any resources at your disposal?
You would have to persuade a government bureaucrat to release resources for any campaign you would want to conduct.
What kind of personal matters would you be able to make choice in when the government is running the economy?
Not what to buy and where to live and which cause to invest in.
miko
-
miko... I condone this kind of thinking as a matter of practicality. I do not want to waste my vote in a protest vote... I will leave that to the greenie losers.
No libertarian that I know of has ever had a chance at any major office. If I believed he had a chance I would vote for him... if not... I certainly do not want to aid some socialist democrat.
It is a matter of lesser evils. liberals and democrats are the great evil. Stoping them is the most important thing. If they are assured of not being a viable candidate then I have the luxury of making my protest vote to libertarian.
frogm... if the government is taking a gun out of my pants then they are getting into my pants too. There is nothing tolerant about taking away my right to defend myself or making me hire people I don't want to or making me rent to people who will destroy my property or making me pay for people to sit on their lawns with the boom boxes going all day long in houses that I could not afford to rent.
lazs
-
No libertarian that I know of has ever had a chance at any major office. If I believed he had a chance I would vote for him..
That's a self-fulfilling prophecy Lazs. With that kind of thinking we will never get anywhere.
-
lazs2 : No libertarian that I know of has ever had a chance at any major office.
Neither should they aspire to it. The basic principle is the locality of the government, so the libertarians should try to get elected into the local offices.
But mostly it is not a political movement but a worldview (about acceptability of aggression) - so educating people is what's important, not trying to impose our views on them. If most people in some locality share libertarian views, they will have a libertarian mayor or representative. If they don't - then a libertarian has no business being elected there.
Most libertarians I know are not political. The "beltway libertarians" often make a wrong impression about the rest. The libertarian political initiatives should be local - like Free State Project.
miko
-
Duverger's law really keeps the Libertarian party from being a more active player in American politics, even if it wanted to. (here's where Levi talks about subotimum results).
It would take a pretty catostrophic event to shake up the US Political system to such a degree that one GOP or DEMs would get replaced by the LIBs in the two party system.
-Sik
-
I agree that libertarians should not aspire to political office... I also agree that being a libertarian is simply a way of thinking.
I vote republican in most /allmost all cases because their idea of big government is less distasteful than the democrat/socialist one.
probably even more important than getting the socialist/democrats out of power tho is ending womens suffrage.. We will allways have oppressive government so long as we let our mommies tell us what we can and can't do. You can move out of moms house but it's hard to move out of the country.
lazs
-
Heh, 'end womens suffrage'. Beautiful! I bet if you asked people to sign a petition to end womens suffrage, you'd get a lot of signatures from well meaning but clueless people.
I disagree with the assertion that libertarians shouldn't run for political office. The rampant growth of government ensures that there are MANY spots that can be filled, national, statewide, and local. I would encourage those of you who feel our government is too invasive to consider voting for a libertarian candidate on those smaller races where there isn't the clear 2 party system that the presidential races have.
Plenty of Liberatarians have been elected to office nationwide and have made strides towards redefining the role of government in limited terms.
My personal presidential vote may be for a libertarian candidate anyways, not just as a protest vote, but also as a method for helping the LP reach the minimum percentage needed to get the type of coverage our issues deserve. You all may not agree with me on everything, but I hope you'll consider the strength of my convictions and those who represent my views.
PS, please don't mix libertarians and greens together. We may be a small party like they are, but unlike them, we are not 'wacked out on goofballs', to use the technical term.
Best regards,
Chairboy
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Heh, 'end womens suffrage'. Beautiful! I bet if you asked people to sign a petition to end womens suffrage, you'd get a lot of signatures from well meaning but clueless people.
actually adam and jimmy on the man show did this on a college campus or somthing and they did get quite a few signatures. Only a hand full caught the fact that they were trying to take away womans rights! was funny!:rofl
-
Libertarians should run for political office - but not start with "major" ones. We have one consistantly libertarian congressman - Ron Paul. We could use more.
But mostly we need libertarians on school boards, municipal councils, as mayors. Maybe governors in libertarian-friendly states. Get some local influence, bring some economic sanity, refuse cooperation with federal government on those issues where it is possible - even if it means foregoing grants paid from taxes already collected - get the results and use them as an example.
Running in a presidential campaign or for a governor fo a major liberal state is just counter-productive and would not do any good if by some miracles succeeded.
What would a libertarian president do? Veto every single law? Abandon taxes? Nullify all legislation enacted since 1830? That would be ridiculous.
Doing anything else would be granting legitimacy to the current system.
miko
-
"I do not want to waste my vote in a protest vote... I will leave that to the greenie losers.
No libertarian that I know of has ever had a chance at any major office. If I believed he had a chance I would vote for him... if not... I certainly do not want to aid some socialist democrat. "
Arrrrrgggghhhh! Why do people concern themselves with whether a candidate can win? You cannot waste your vote, as long as you vote and vote your conscience.
This aint a game where you want to bet on the winning team!
-
Agreed. If I had to compare two people, I would respect the one who voted their convictions more then one who just tried to guess who the winner would be so they could be 'part of the team'.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I lean more toward libertarian than anything. I am most definitely not an old hippy. Hippies love government when it is "their" government... libertarians want less government.
Libertarians are basicaly constitutionalists... They want the government to have no more power than it was originaly designed to have by OUR constitution. I have no idea what dowding is talking about because he is talking about libertarians from a british point of view apparently.
las
That is a Conservative
-
Unfortunately neither of the major parties is conservative.