Christianity and Libertarianism?
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:27 pmby Grand Calvert
Hello NS! I was thinking about this for awhile and the question is; what do you guys think about Christianity and Libertarianism? Do they go together? Or does Christianity preach Socialism instead?
As a Reformed Baptist who is also a conservative libertarian, my answer is obviously that Christians should be libertarians. That isn't to say that the Bible's point is to preach libertarianism (I'd never say that), but just that things like obeying God, charity, etc. aren't things that humans should coerce each other into doing via government, but should do voluntarily. The God commands us to do good and guide others to Him, not that we should coerce people to obey Him and force people to "accept" Him. But enough about me: what do you think?
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:34 pmby Mysterious Stranger
Well, socialism and libertarianism aren't mutually exclusively. For example, I'm a
libertarian socialist.
(Edit: and a nondenominational evangelical.)
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:36 pmby Grand Calvert
But wouldn't socialism require too much government power to be libertarian?
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:40 pmby Mysterious Stranger
Grand Calvert wrote:But wouldn't socialism require too much government power to be libertarian?
No, because socialism is just workplace democracy- the company being owned by the workers. It's really just an extension of libertarianism to economics- not allowing one class (whether the political elite or the economic elite) to coercively control the entire society, but instead spreading power out by severely limiting the capacity for coercion and restructuring society into horizontal, decentralized, free associations.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:41 pmby Prussia-Steinbach
Grand Calvert wrote:Hello NS! I was thinking about this for awhile and the question is; what do you guys think about Christianity and Libertarianism? Do they go together? Or does Christianity preach Socialism instead?
As a Reformed Baptist who is also a conservative libertarian, my answer is obviously that Christians should be libertarians. That isn't to say that the Bible's point is to preach libertarianism (I'd never say that), but just that things like obeying God, charity, etc. aren't things that humans should coerce each other into doing via government, but should do voluntarily. The God commands us to do good and guide others to Him, not that we should coerce people to obey Him and force people to "accept" Him. But enough about me: what do you think?
Libertarianism should describe anarchism/hard left liberalism, not some bullshit fucking arachno-capitalism Rand-Paul-worshipping idiocy.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:43 pmby Mysterious Stranger
But the 1% only owns most of the country because the government says they do.
I just want the government to stop doing that and let the people who create things control them.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:44 pmby Prussia-Steinbach
Grand Calvert wrote:Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Libertarianism should describe anarchism/hard left liberalism, not some bullshit fucking arachno-capitalism Rand-Paul-worshipping idiocy.
Why?
Because that is what it originated as. That's what libertarianism still means outside America. It sure as hell doesn't mean God, Guns, and Glory, which is what America seems to have twisted it into. What you most likely are is a neoconservative who thinks maybe there should be medical marijuana.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:45 pmby Grand Calvert
Mysterious Stranger wrote:But the 1% only owns most of the country because the government says they do.
I just want the government to stop doing that and let the people who create things control them.
That's the right-libertarian argument.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:46 pmby Liberusy
Mysterious Stranger wrote:Grand Calvert wrote:But wouldn't socialism require too much government power to be libertarian?
No, because socialism is just workplace democracy- the company being owned by the workers. It's really just an extension of libertarianism to economics- not allowing one class (whether the political elite or the economic elite) to corrosively control the entire society, but instead spreading power out by severely limiting the capacity for coercion and restructuring society into horizontal, decentralized, free associations.
wrong libertarianism requires property rights. Under a socialist society, where everyone who works at Walmart or the Deli down the road owns that business then property rights are gone. Not to mention how wrong it is to take from those who worked there way up to the top [admittedly some did so corruptly [and we can find a legal, just and moral way to punish them for it]] and give it to those who are less fortunate [and more often then not don't work as hard].
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:47 pmby Grand Calvert
Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Because that is what it originated as. That's what libertarianism still means outside America. It sure as hell doesn't mean God, Guns, and Glory, which is what America seems to have twisted it into. What you most likely are is a neoconservative who thinks maybe there should be medical marijuana.
Well libertarianism definitely does mean different things in different places, but I actually am a libertarian because I advocate for small government.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:49 pmby Prussia-Steinbach
Grand Calvert wrote:Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Because that is what it originated as. That's what libertarianism still means outside America. It sure as hell doesn't mean God, Guns, and Glory, which is what America seems to have twisted it into. What you most likely are is a neoconservative who thinks maybe there should be medical marijuana.
While libertarianism definitely does mean different things in different places, but I actually am a libertarian because I advocate for small government.
Then how the hell do you oppose abortion? And liberalism in its entirety?
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:50 pmby Prussia-Steinbach
Liberusy wrote:Mysterious Stranger wrote:No, because socialism is just workplace democracy- the company being owned by the workers. It's really just an extension of libertarianism to economics- not allowing one class (whether the political elite or the economic elite) to corrosively control the entire society, but instead spreading power out by severely limiting the capacity for coercion and restructuring society into horizontal, decentralized, free associations.
wrong libertarianism requires property rights. Under a socialist society, where everyone who works at Walmart or the Deli down the road owns that business then property rights are gone. Not to mention how wrong it is to take from those who worked there way up to the top [admittedly some did so corruptly [and we can find a legal, just and moral way to punish them for it]] and give it to those who are less fortunate [and more often then not don't work as hard].
Kurt Cobain would be ashamed he's in your sig.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:50 pmby Liberusy
Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Grand Calvert wrote:Hello NS! I was thinking about this for awhile and the question is; what do you guys think about Christianity and Libertarianism? Do they go together? Or does Christianity preach Socialism instead?
As a Reformed Baptist who is also a conservative libertarian, my answer is obviously that Christians should be libertarians. That isn't to say that the Bible's point is to preach libertarianism (I'd never say that), but just that things like obeying God, charity, etc. aren't things that humans should coerce each other into doing via government, but should do voluntarily. The God commands us to do good and guide others to Him, not that we should coerce people to obey Him and force people to "accept" Him. But enough about me: what do you think?
Libertarianism should describe anarchism/hard left liberalism, not some bullshit fucking arachno-capitalism Rand-Paul-worshipping idiocy.
Assuming you are Christian, that seems a little un-Christian to be calling anyone who disagrees with you idiots.
Hard left liberalism would be taking from the rich and giving to the poor, that would be theft, when did Jesus ever condone theft?
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:51 pmby Mysterious Stranger
Grand Calvert wrote:Mysterious Stranger wrote:But the 1% only owns most of the country because the government says they do.
I just want the government to stop doing that and let the people who create things control them.
That's the right-libertarian argument.
How is a system in which I work eight hours a day, every day, producing books, and then see a fraction of a fraction of the value of those books, while the vast majority of the value goes to an owner who produced nothing, a system which lets me control what I have created? Who owns a factory? Is it the person who ordered it built alone, or is it all the people who put work into its creation and continue to put work into its operation?
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:51 pmby Grand Calvert
Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Grand Calvert wrote:While libertarianism definitely does mean different things in different places, but I actually am a libertarian because I advocate for small government.
Then how the hell do you oppose abortion? And liberalism in its entirety?
Government's basic role is to stop individuals from harming one another. A fetus is a human being, thus it should be illegal to kill one. And when I say liberalism, I mean modern American liberalism.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:52 pmby Mysterious Stranger
Liberusy wrote:Mysterious Stranger wrote:No, because socialism is just workplace democracy- the company being owned by the workers. It's really just an extension of libertarianism to economics- not allowing one class (whether the political elite or the economic elite) to corrosively control the entire society, but instead spreading power out by severely limiting the capacity for coercion and restructuring society into horizontal, decentralized, free associations.
wrong libertarianism requires property rights. Under a socialist society, where everyone who works at Walmart or the Deli down the road owns that business then property rights are gone. Not to mention how wrong it is to take from those who worked there way up to the top [admittedly some did so corruptly [and we can find a legal, just and moral way to punish them for it]] and give it to those who are less fortunate [and more often then not don't work as hard].
I don't know what any of that has to do with workers' ownership of the means of production. I just want Walmart to be owned by the workers of Walmart, rather than structured like a financial dictatorship.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:53 pmby Prussia-Steinbach
Liberusy wrote:Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Libertarianism should describe anarchism/hard left liberalism, not some bullshit fucking arachno-capitalism Rand-Paul-worshipping idiocy.
Assuming you are Christian, that seems a little un-Christian to be calling anyone who disagrees with you idiots.
Hard left liberalism would be taking from the rich and giving to the poor, that would be theft, when did Jesus ever condone theft?
I haven't the slightest clue why you'd assume I'm a Christian, because I absolutely am not.
And I haven't the slightest sympathy for wealthy fuckers that get their shit stolen.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:54 pmby Grand Calvert
Mysterious Stranger wrote:Grand Calvert wrote:That's the right-libertarian argument.
How is a system in which I work eight hours a day, every day, producing books, and then see a fraction of a fraction of the value of those books, while the vast majority of the value goes to an owner who produced nothing, a system which lets me control what I have created? Who owns a factory? Is it the person who ordered it built alone, or is it all the people who put work into its creation and continue to put work into its operation?
Whoever owns the business is obviously the one who calls the shots. Your average worker isn't the owner.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:54 pmby Prussia-Steinbach
Grand Calvert wrote:Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Then how the hell do you oppose abortion? And liberalism in its entirety?
Government's basic role is to stop individuals from harming one another. A fetus is a human being, thus it should be illegal to kill one. And when I say liberalism, I mean modern American liberalism.
It can be argued that allowing discrimination is harmful. Which is something right-wing American libertarians fully support. Not giving to the poor, unable to find a job, is harmful. Allowing evil to continue is a form of violence.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:54 pmby Soufrika
I myself am a Christian libertarian, so I'd say yes, they are quite compatible.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:55 pmby Prussia-Steinbach
Grand Calvert wrote:Mysterious Stranger wrote:How is a system in which I work eight hours a day, every day, producing books, and then see a fraction of a fraction of the value of those books, while the vast majority of the value goes to an owner who produced nothing, a system which lets me control what I have created? Who owns a factory? Is it the person who ordered it built alone, or is it all the people who put work into its creation and continue to put work into its operation?
Whoever owns the business is obviously the one who calls the shots. Your average worker isn't the owner.
Yes, and we need to change that.
Posted:
Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:55 pmby Mysterious Stranger
Liberusy wrote:Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Libertarianism should describe anarchism/hard left liberalism, not some bullshit fucking arachno-capitalism Rand-Paul-worshipping idiocy.
Assuming you are Christian, that seems a little un-Christian to be calling anyone who disagrees with you idiots.
Hard left liberalism would be taking from the rich and giving to the poor, that would be theft, when did Jesus ever condone theft?
Taking? The claim "I own everything that you produce" is insane. The rich don't own the country, we should stop acting like they do.
