The left was using the word Libertarian as in libertarian socialist or libertarian communist long before the US libertarian party took the word to mean "capitalists who want a smaller government."
edit: And in response to your edit: "how can be someone free without economic freedom in a egualitarian world?"
Egalitarian means equality, non hierarchy. Capitalism (in most forms) requires hierarchy and inequality.
UnhealthyTruthseeker wrote:I read Encyclopedia Dramatica and 4chan, bitch.
Wow, you even make reference to yo' momma' jokes in an intellectual manner. You, my friend, are truly phenomenal. ~ Rhodmhire I actually have a grin from ear to ear. You just internet-smacked him so hard the first human just devolved back into an ape. ~ TAI
The left was using the word Libertarian as in libertarian socialist or libertarian communist long before the US libertarian party took the word to mean "capitalists who want a smaller government."
Which they only use Liberterian because the left hijacked the word liberal. Liberal was orginally used to describe concepts that are now considered Libertarian.
Playing NS since Jan of 2006
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
They obviously exist, since some people claim to be left-libertarians. Political terminology is a strange thing. I can claim to be an anarcho-fascist, and so long as I provide a reasonable justification for why I am using that term to explain my views, there's no reason I can't start the Anarcho-Fascist Party of America.
Also, if anarcho-fascism doesn't exist already, I'm totally suing you guys if you steal the idea. <.<
"We are the seatbelts of humanity, our dire warnings the clicking sound as the clasp locks, and sometimes if you pull us too hard, something locks up, and we go limp, and you have to sort of jiggle us for a minute to make us work right." ~Overleef, on survivalists
The left was using the word Libertarian as in libertarian socialist or libertarian communist long before the US libertarian party took the word to mean "capitalists who want a smaller government."
Which they only use Liberterian because the left hijacked the word liberal. Liberal was orginally used to describe concepts that are now considered Libertarian.
Hay the so called "Liberals" are no friend of mine. Here is a good song about liberals:
Love Me, I'm A Liberal by Phil Ochs (click spoiler to view lyrics)
http://www.ocap.ca/songs/lovemeim.html
I cried when they shot Medgar Evers Tears ran down my spine I cried when they shot Mr. Kennedy As though I'd lost a father of mine But Malcolm X got what was coming He got what he asked for this time So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
I go to civil rights rallies And I put down the old D.A.R. I love Harry and Sidney and Sammy I hope every colored boy becomes a star But don't talk about revolution That's going a little bit too far So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
I cheered when Humphrey was chosen My faith in the system restored I'm glad the commies were thrown out of the A.F.L. C.I.O. board I love Puerto Ricans and Negros as long as they don't move next door So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
The people of old Mississippi Should all hang their heads in shame I can't understand how their minds work What's the matter don't they watch Les Crain? But if you ask me to bus my children I hope the cops take down your name So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
I read New republic and Nation I've learned to take every view You know, I've memorized Lerner and Golden I feel like I'm almost a Jew But when it comes to times like Korea There's no one more red, white and blue So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
I vote for the democratic party They want the U.N. to be strong I go to all the Pete Seeger concerts He sure gets me singing those songs I'll send all the money you ask for But don't ask me to come on along So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
Once I was young and impulsive I wore every conceivable pin Even went to the socialist meetings Learned all the old union hymns But I've grown older and wiser And that's why I'm turning you in So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
Last edited by Natapoc on Mon Nov 02, 2009 11:51 am, edited 2 times in total.
Vittos Ordination wrote:Libertarians are basically followers of the non-aggression principle.
The various left-right groups vary on their opinion concerning what forms of property are the results of coercion.
I would imagine that few non-libertarians believe in some aggression principle. Rather they too have different opinions concerning what constitutes aggression.
Brogavia wrote:Which they only use Liberterian because the left hijacked the word liberal. Liberal was orginally used to describe concepts that are now considered Libertarian.
The usage of the word liberal for some left wing ideas has quite a bit of history to it. Its not like there was liberalism that stood for one thing and another group stole the term. It was simply those who called themselves liberals came to accept more and more intervention or state welfare provision.
How can one believe in personal freedom if they do not accept the personal freedom of enterprise?
"Upon waking, the dinosaur was still there". -Augusto Monterroso's seven-word story 'El Dinosaurio'
Political Compass Results: Economic Left/Right 7.88, Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.67. OK Cupid Politics Test Results: Economic Conservative (76% Permissive), Social Liberal (66% Permissive).
Vittos Ordination wrote:Libertarians are basically followers of the non-aggression principle.
The various left-right groups vary on their opinion concerning what forms of property are the results of coercion.
I would imagine that few non-libertarians believe in some aggression principle. Rather they too have different opinions concerning what constitutes aggression.
They believe in greater ends that justify aggressive means.
Libertarians take non-aggression to be an ultimate end.
Vittos Ordination wrote:They believe in greater ends that justify aggressive means.
Libertarians take non-aggression to be an ultimate end.
What do you mean by that? I mean Social democrats generally don't think taxes are aggressive actions, not any that I know or have read. Hell, if taxes are aggression then most libertarians, who believe in low taxes not no taxes, believe in greater ends that justify aggressive means,
Czardas wrote:They obviously exist, since some people claim to be left-libertarians. Political terminology is a strange thing. I can claim to be an anarcho-fascist, and so long as I provide a reasonable justification for why I am using that term to explain my views, there's no reason I can't start the Anarcho-Fascist Party of America.
Also, if anarcho-fascism doesn't exist already, I'm totally suing you guys if you steal the idea. <.<
There are some so called anarcho-nationalists which are pretty much nazis who claim to be anarchists. This is the problem of people thinking anarchism just means "no state." It means much more then that.
edit: Seriously though anarcho-fascist party would be the biggest contradiction possible. First of all anarchists don't think political parties are legitimate (as they imply a state...) and of course so does fascist. Anarcho-nationalists are the same.
Last edited by Natapoc on Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.
how can be someone free without economic freedom in a egualitarian world?
Whiskey, Tango, Fox trot!
Here we have left libertarians since decades ago. there are no right wing nut...Libertarians. Only the lefty kind. They are a good kind, although too many are old punks.
NEWS REPORT:
- The US doesn't cover the entire world. - The parts of the world that aren't the US work sometimes under different premises. - Foreign people not from the US sometimes think in a different system of thought - Ursids evacuate around forested areas - Ratzinger Z is Catholic.
Aelosia is ranked 1st in the region and 20th in the world for Largest Defense Forces (per capita). Aelosia is ranked 1st in the region and 32nd in the world for Most Subsidized Industry. Aelosia is ranked 1st in the region and 33rd in the world for Fastest-Growing Economies. Aelosia is ranked 1st in the region and 47th in the world for Largest Public Transport Department. Aelosia is ranked 1st in the region and 72nd in the world for Most Armed. Aelosia is ranked 1st in the region and 87th in the world for Largest Information Technology Sector. Aelosia is ranked 1st in the region and 94th in the world for Largest Arms Manufacturing Sector.
left/right is the economic scale libertarian/Authoritarian is the social scale left/right refer to economic freedoms whilst libertarian/Authoritarian refers to personal freedoms. A free market doesn't increase personal freedoms hence not an oxymoron
how can be someone free without economic freedom in a egualitarian world?
How can somebody be truly free when they're living from paycheck to paycheck, giving all their money to landlords, electric companies, grocery stores just to get by? That's assuming someone can even do that. For many, it's only one short step above the Truck system. For economic freedom to be true freedom, there also has to be economic security.
Last edited by Lunatic Goofballs on Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sometimes as I'm flying through space after a flying tackle that has propelled my best friend and me off a bridge over a stretch of dark chest-deep estuarial mud I take the time to wonder if there is more to life than mud, tacos, groin kicks, pies, theoretical physics, clowning, teaching my children all I know about mischief and personal self-destruction. Then shortly before we all but disappear in the black muck, I remember wedgies.
Tech-gnosis wrote: What do you mean by that? I mean Social democrats generally don't think taxes are aggressive actions, not any that I know or have read. Hell, if taxes are aggression then most libertarians, who believe in low taxes not no taxes, believe in greater ends that justify aggressive means,
Do they not believe taxation necessary to fund government opposition to private aggression?
by Martaz » Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:46 am 
