Libertarian Discussion Thread

[Washington Resistance Army]

"far right" i'm sure libertarians are up there with hitler and mussolini.

No idea how you come to this conclusion. All we advocate is that people should be able to make a living without the government harassing them. There is nothing radical about that compared to trying to abolish property rights and usher in an entirely new society.

True freedom, is derived from one's selfless contribution to society.

Individualism is a very negative philosophy. If everyone put society before themselves, they wouldn't have to worry about their own petty 'self-interest'.

Your opinion does not objective truth make.

[The Liberated Territories]

"far right" i'm sure libertarians are up there with hitler and mussolini.

No idea how you come to this conclusion. All we advocate is that people should be able to make a living without the government harassing them. There is nothing radical about that compared to trying to abolish property rights and usher in an entirely new society.

It does seem the height of ignorance to equate Libertarianism, which promotes limited government involvement in peoples lives and the economy, with National Socialism, which promoted absolute Government control of the economy.

Well, Stalinism promoted absolute Government control of the economy, fascists at least tolerate property rights, although I'd say this is only in theory because if property rights conflicted with the will of the state, the state would defy it. Fascism on the other hand promoted absolute war and total intrusion into a citizen's private affairs, which besides economics are the other two things that really, really jibe libertarians (Ron Paul ran on a whole anti-war, anti-Fed advocacy.)

[The balkens]

"far right" i'm sure libertarians are up there with hitler and mussolini.

No idea how you come to this conclusion. All we advocate is that people should be able to make a living without the government harassing them. There is nothing radical about that compared to trying to abolish property rights and usher in an entirely new society.

True freedom, is derived from one's selfless contribution to society.

Individualism is a very negative philosophy. If everyone put society before themselves, they wouldn't have to worry about their own petty 'self-interest'.

no.

[Geilinor]

"far right" i'm sure libertarians are up there with hitler and mussolini.

No idea how you come to this conclusion. All we advocate is that people should be able to make a living without the government harassing them. There is nothing radical about that compared to trying to abolish property rights and usher in an entirely new society.

True freedom, is derived from one's selfless contribution to society.

Individualism is a very negative philosophy. If everyone put society before themselves, they wouldn't have to worry about their own petty 'self-interest'.

Fascists are against individualism. Do you know what fascism is?

[Exxosia]

Gary Johnson is not the best Libertarian candidate, but he is the most palatable to the majority.

I think that the job of the Libertarian party is less actually getting elected (since one goal of a libertarian is essentially no state offices to be elected to), but rather getting people to think about the evils of the state and how we can all be better off with less or none of it.

Johnson has a foot in both Republican and Democrat camps, so he would likely be able to communicate and appeal to the widest number of people without the kneejerk dismissals someone like Ron Paul gets. You want someone who is hard to ignore, deny, or flat out write off to get people thinking and acting. If it's via a Libertarian Lite figure, so be it.

[Ardoki]

"far right" i'm sure libertarians are up there with hitler and mussolini.

No idea how you come to this conclusion. All we advocate is that people should be able to make a living without the government harassing them. There is nothing radical about that compared to trying to abolish property rights and usher in an entirely new society.

I despise libertarian economics, but they're a pretty far cry from anything related to fascism. That word has a specific meaning that doesn't apply to libertarians.
I find it really upsetting when people misuse the word fascist. Largely because of those peoples tendency to accuse me of being that variety of revolutionary modernist, but still.

Fascism supported state control over businesses, for the benefit of the state. <- That isn't actually bad, it's good, however the rest of fascism is bad.

Libertarianism supports business controlling the government, for the benefit of corporate profits.

.: Libertarianism is reverse fascism.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Libertarianism supports business controlling the government, for the benefit of corporate profits.

I think you need to go back and read up on what libertarianism is.

[The Liberated Territories]

"far right" i'm sure libertarians are up there with hitler and mussolini.

No idea how you come to this conclusion. All we advocate is that people should be able to make a living without the government harassing them. There is nothing radical about that compared to trying to abolish property rights and usher in an entirely new society.

True freedom, is derived from one's selfless contribution to society.

Individualism is a very negative philosophy. If everyone put society before themselves, they wouldn't have to worry about their own petty 'self-interest'.

That's great! Libertarians aren't opposed to that. Furthermore, it makes sense that some people would contribute to society by say, donating to charity - or perhaps starting a much needed business in their neighborhood by securing the money and rights in order to make that possible.

I disagree with you, individualism can benefit society- the rights and freedom of the individual are the cornerstone that make society possible. How could we as a society move forward without the great and vast number of visionaries, inventors, and creative people who left to their own devices have found their niche in society to benefit themselves while selling themselves or a part of their labor to society? What would we be without Mozart's dedication to music, a venture he primarily pursued not to benefit society, but primarily to make a living?

[Jute]

You could at least have the decency to say "Right-Libertarian Discussion Thread", unless you want to put yourself in the ranks of "Third Positionists".

Why split the labels when there is only one true type of libertarian?

Besides, if you were as quick to read the OP as to post, you'd realize I also invited "left" libertarians, although I am focusing on libertarians of the market liking variety since communism and socialism can be more adequately by the Left Wing discussion thread, and because we are more numerous.

Johnson, should I vote Libertarian

Why though, what makes him so special? Why not vote for one of the major parties due to the "lesser evil" factor?

There is also such a thing as left-wing market anarchism, among other things. Left-wing doesn't mean anti-market.

[The Liberated Territories]

Gary Johnson is not the best Libertarian candidate, but he is the most palatable to the majority.

I think that the job of the Libertarian party is less actually getting elected (since one goal of a libertarian is essentially no state offices to be elected to), but rather getting people to think about the evils of the state and how we can all be better off with less or none of it.

Johnson has a foot in both Republican and Democrat camps, so he would likely be able to communicate and appeal to the widest number of people without the kneejerk dismissals someone like Ron Paul gets. You want someone who is hard to ignore, deny, or flat out write off to get people thinking and acting. If it's via a Libertarian Lite figure, so be it.

Well Johnson tried that - he tried to run as a Republican but was flatly ignored. Ron Paul's message on the other hand, even if a good chunk of people merely jumped on the bandwagon, in the end benefitted the party and libertarianism as a whole - I think without Ron Paul, the LP would of never scored those million votes in 2012, since it forced people to research who we are.

[The Liberated Territories]

Why split the labels when there is only one true type of libertarian?

Besides, if you were as quick to read the OP as to post, you'd realize I also invited "left" libertarians, although I am focusing on libertarians of the market liking variety since communism and socialism can be more adequately by the Left Wing discussion thread, and because we are more numerous.



Why though, what makes him so special? Why not vote for one of the major parties due to the "lesser evil" factor?

There is also such a thing as left-wing market anarchism, among other things. Left-wing doesn't mean anti-market.

That's true. I'm sympathetic to that actually, I have C4SS on my bloglist, but whenever I lean too far left or try to build bridges, it's some edgy ancom bad mouthing libertarians pushes me back to the "right" again. I of course invite all respectable left market libertarians to this thread under the belief that there is more similarities between "left" and "right" than say, libertarians and conservatives or liberals or any other ideology.

[Kanzaki Ranko]

Libertarianism supports business controlling the government, for the benefit of corporate profits.

I think you need to go back and read up on what libertarianism is.

Hitler was basically a libertarian, he supported the libertarian ideology of social Darwinism.

[Nationalist Gold Union]

What's everyone's opinion on private businesses refusing service to certain groups of people?

I personally don't like it but honestly a person isn't entitled to somebody else's product or service, so a businessesowner naturally shouldn't have to sell to them if they don't want to.

Libertarianism supports business controlling the government, for the benefit of corporate profits.

You're thinking of cronyism, not libertarianism.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I think you need to go back and read up on what libertarianism is.

Hitler was basically a libertarian, he supported the libertarian ideology of social Darwinism.

I feel the sudden urge to drink copious amounts of alcohol.

What's everyone's opinion on private businesses refusing service to certain groups of people?

I personally don't like it but honestly a person isn't entitled to somebody else's product or service, so a businessesowner naturally shouldn't have to sell to them if they don't want to.

I'm kinda in the same boat as you, I don't like it but I kinda feel like a business owner should be able to refuse whoever they want.

[Nationalist Gold Union]

I feel the sudden urge to drink copious amounts of alcohol.

What's everyone's opinion on private businesses refusing service to certain groups of people?

I personally don't like it but honestly a person isn't entitled to somebody else's product or service, so a businessesowner naturally shouldn't have to sell to them if they don't want to.

I'm kinda in the same boat as you, I don't like it but I kinda feel like a business owner should be able to refuse whoever they want.

Naturally if you put up a sign saying "No Blacks" outside your store, you might see a decline in customers and profits and other things, but you kinda deserve it. But nobody should really force you to sell anything.

[The Liberated Territories]

What's everyone's opinion on private businesses refusing service to certain groups of people?

I personally don't like it but honestly a person isn't entitled to somebody else's product or service, so a businessesowner naturally shouldn't have to sell to them if they don't want to.

I've defended Gary Johnson on the belief that there might be areas where disallowing the refusal of service may be beneficial, e.g. large corporations like Wal-Mart whose existence/dominance isn't because of any free market but a lot of privileges and subsidies into the system.

On the other hand, it seems disingenuous to continue to make so much special caveats for big businesses that undermine the rule of law, it would be also against my beliefs to punish a select privileged group or to punish another. Equality under the law, and all that.

[Zurkerx]

My god, what has this thread become already. Libertarianism does not equate fascism.

What's everyone's opinion on private businesses refusing service to certain groups of people?

I personally don't like it but honestly a person isn't entitled to somebody else's product or service, so a businessesowner naturally shouldn't have to sell to them if they don't want to.

Libertarianism supports business controlling the government, for the benefit of corporate profits.

You're thinking of cronyism, not libertarianism.

I don't believe they should and yet I feel the same way. However, why would any business deny their product/services to certain groups of people? A policy like that will have you out of business in a heart beat. Everyone's money is equal to me.

[The Liberated Territories]

My god, what has this thread become already. Libertarianism does not equate fascism.

What's everyone's opinion on private businesses refusing service to certain groups of people?

I personally don't like it but honestly a person isn't entitled to somebody else's product or service, so a businessesowner naturally shouldn't have to sell to them if they don't want to.


You're thinking of cronyism, not libertarianism.

I don't believe they should and yet I feel the same way. However, why would any business deny their product/services to certain groups of people? A policy like that will have you out of business in a heart beat. Everyone's money is equal to me.

Furthermore if I might add, why would you want businesses that are racist/sexist/et cetera to become richer? I certainly do not.

[Zurkerx]

My god, what has this thread become already. Libertarianism does not equate fascism.



I don't believe they should and yet I feel the same way. However, why would any business deny their product/services to certain groups of people? A policy like that will have you out of business in a heart beat. Everyone's money is equal to me.

Furthermore if I might add, why would you want businesses that are racist/sexist/et cetera to become richer? I certainly do not.

I have to agree as well. No parties benefit in this where one doesn't sell their product/service to the consumer and the other refuses to buy that product/service on the image of the business. I think it can relate to what Milton Friedman once said:

Milton Friedman Wrote:
The most important single central fact about a free market is that no exchange takes place unless both parties benefit.

[Jute]

There is also such a thing as left-wing market anarchism, among other things. Left-wing doesn't mean anti-market.

That's true. I'm sympathetic to that actually, I have C4SS on my bloglist, but whenever I lean too far left or try to build bridges, it's some edgy ancom bad mouthing libertarians pushes me back to the "right" again. I of course invite all respectable left market libertarians to this thread under the belief that there is more similarities between "left" and "right" than say, libertarians and conservatives or liberals or any other ideology.

Why would what some people with other views say about it bother you so much? What about right-wing politics do you find appealing?

[Major-Tom]

I do enjoy it when libertarian socialists try to claim libertarianism as only their own. We get it, you're pissed that the term is used by those who are for free markets and civil liberties, sue us.

[The Liberated Territories]

That's true. I'm sympathetic to that actually, I have C4SS on my bloglist, but whenever I lean too far left or try to build bridges, it's some edgy ancom bad mouthing libertarians pushes me back to the "right" again. I of course invite all respectable left market libertarians to this thread under the belief that there is more similarities between "left" and "right" than say, libertarians and conservatives or liberals or any other ideology.

Why would what some people with other views say about it bother you so much? What about right-wing politics do you find appealing?

Anarcho-communists and similar friends dump the entirety of libertarian philosophical thought in favor of some nihilistic rage that in practice, makes it no better than the same violence employed by the state. There's nothing libertarian about say, burning down local businesses in protest (whom I might add employ people and harm the wage laborers when the businesses profits are redirected into repairing the damage that these anarchists cause to it.) Fine, I can understand that there are systematic inequalities in the system, but. If you want to convince people that your ideology is superior, 1.) don't come off as an arrogant asshole, 2.) don't actively deride the people you are trying to win over 3.) don't advocate threats, or support the state when it does something that you like, like some "anarchists" who support the state enacting laws against hate speech because it satisfies your jollies on seeing our opposition (generally fascists) similarly oppressed as they would oppress you. I cannot support an ideology where for every 1 honest Carson/Long market libertarian intellectual, there are 9 of the above. Finally, my experiences with RevLeft convinced me that instead of being open to the idea of free(d) markets, they put their faith into what I see as an unrealistic, unobtainable system that defies much of the laws of economics. Finally, the whole putting quotes in front of "anarcho" capitalism is immature and exhausting, and I'm not even an ancap.

As for purely market anarchism...

There are also some economic problems I have with some forms of left-libertarianism, although this isn't universal. And finally, much of my political thought had been solidified by the late Robert Nozick who shown many ways that a market anarchist society would revert back to a state. The only form of left-libertarianism I can see happening is a Henry George style geo-libertarianism, although I ultimately would rather see taxation abolished.

Should I care? Probably not, as an ardent individualist. But I see a lot of massive holes, e.g. while some parts of the left-libertarian ideology are well thought out, it doesn't seem to advocate for anything substantial or isn't particularly pragmatic, which leaves left-libertarianism into some odd sort of rut.

[Aclion]

I feel as though the Libertarians really need wins at the state level - Representatives, Senators, and even a Governor - if they want to be considered. It's a stepping-stone approach, and building upwards from below provides a solid platform. That being said, if this Presidential run goes well I could see parties like the Greens and Libertarians picking up a lot of support and attention. Although one can't get too hopeful - Jill Stein was illegally detained for trying to participate in a debate...

This. And as cynical as it sounds, if you want to do well in elections consistently you need a need a say in the redistricting and election process. That requires a presence in the state legislature.

[Idzequitch]

Barring a miracle where John Kasich somehow wins the GOP nomination, I'll be voting for whoever the Libertarian candidate is. Gary Johnson is my preference, but they're all better than Clinton and Trump.

[Stormaen]

As evidenced in my sig, I'm a Johnson supporter.

However, being British, I'll have no vote. Whilst some might say that this election won't affect the UK, it will. What the US does affects everything.

Currently, it's hawkish Hillary vs terrible Trump. The US is being asked which it least hates and vote for that. I sincerely think Johnson offers another path. He's the type of Republican that could make inroads into places like New England (NH) or even the Pacific Northwest (OR).

Realistically, he's not going to win any states, etc. but hopefully, he makes a breakthrough and draws in a big share of the vote. I'd love it if he won similar numbers to Ross Perot in the 90s, but - again, realistically - it'll be great if he can just double the Libertarian vote base to 2%.