What does "Libertarian" mean to you?

[Norstal]

Why can't he appeal to history? Its been proven time and time again that what Grave_n_idle has been saying its true. Its in the Wild West (the criminals can be considered to be dictators and so can the sheriffs), its in colonial times (the Virginia colony under John Smith when they didn't have much governance), French revolution, English civil war. Hell, even Somalia is a perfect example of power vacuum.

It's not gonna happen, because I won't let it happen. I refuse to live as a slave, whether it be a slave of the state, or a slave of another man.
If I died in defense of my ideals, well, then I will have truly lived for them. At the end of the day, that is all a man should ever need.

In that case, you're a slave as long as there are other people than yourself.

[GeneralHaNor]

It's not gonna happen, because I won't let it happen. I refuse to live as a slave, whether it be a slave of the state, or a slave of another man.
If I died in defense of my ideals, well, then I will have truly lived for them. At the end of the day, that is all a man should ever need.

In that case, you're a slave as long as there are other people than yourself.

I have no problem with voluntary collectivism
Therefore you are wrong

[Norstal]

In that case, you're a slave as long as there are other people than yourself.

I have no problem with voluntary collectivism
Therefore you are wrong

Collectivism is any philosophic, political, economic or social outlook that emphasizes the interdependence of every human in some collective group and the priority of group goals over individual goals.

Voluntaryism, or voluntarism,[1] is a philosophy according to which all forms of human association should be voluntary as far as possible.

So you want to become a slave by choice rather than being forced to be a slave. How cute.
Going with Trot's definition of (classical?) libertarianism, that means:

1. You don't support the murder of anyone.
2. Yet you support the ability to murder anyone.

Ok. You just chose the lesser of two evils. But its still evil.

[GeneralHaNor]

You clearly don't understand

I choose my groups, "Freedom of Association"

if I chose it, I am not a slave. Slavery is Involuntary Servitude.

[Grave_n_idle]

I'm not entirely ignorant of history?

If the only thing you are capable of doing is making an appeal to history, then this conversation is rather pointless
we aren't discussing history, we are making history

Even things that are yet to happen are history- they are just the history we don't know yet.

If you don't learn the lessons of history, you're doomed to repeat the same mistakes.

In other words - you ARE doomed to repeat the same mistakes.

[Grave_n_idle]

Why can't he appeal to history? Its been proven time and time again that what Grave_n_idle has been saying its true. Its in the Wild West (the criminals can be considered to be dictators and so can the sheriffs), its in colonial times (the Virginia colony under John Smith when they didn't have much governance), French revolution, English civil war. Hell, even Somalia is a perfect example of power vacuum.

It's not gonna happen, because I won't let it happen. I refuse to live as a slave, whether it be a slave of the state...

Unless you're posting this from your own private island, I think you're full of it.

[GeneralHaNor]

If the only thing you are capable of doing is making an appeal to history, then this conversation is rather pointless
we aren't discussing history, we are making history

Even things that are yet to happen are history- they are just the history we don't know yet.

If you don't learn the lessons of history, you're doomed to repeat the same mistakes.

In other words - you ARE doomed to repeat the same mistakes.

I don't prescribe to pre-determinism
I find it lacking

[GeneralHaNor]

It's not gonna happen, because I won't let it happen. I refuse to live as a slave, whether it be a slave of the state...

Unless you're posting this from your own private island, I think you're full of it.

I would love to do so, but all land is currently owned, claimed by one statist group or another "Freedom of Movement" is a myth to make people like me "Feel" better about being beholden to groups that claim legitimacy via force. (whether that be force of arms, or men, or majority)

[Grave_n_idle]

Even things that are yet to happen are history- they are just the history we don't know yet.

If you don't learn the lessons of history, you're doomed to repeat the same mistakes.

In other words - you ARE doomed to repeat the same mistakes.

I don't prescribe to pre-determinism
I find it lacking

No one mentioned pre-determinism. Merely the fact that those who won't learn from mistakes will keep making them.

[Melkor Unchained]

to me it means delusional people who think that a country of 300million+ people can have a small government.

I hate to walk in on like the 16th page and respond to the first post, but I just have to ask...

...small compared to what exactly? Tacitus (centuries before there was anything resembling a 'libertarian' ideology) once said "The more corrupt a state, the more numerous its laws." To put a finer point on it, I suspect (since I'm one and I'm saying this now) many libertarians would contend that the government as it ought to be should be smaller than it is now. This doesn't necessarily mean we're advocating anything near anarchy, it just means we think the government is in the habit of doing more than it ought. Just throwing that out there.

[Norstal]

You clearly don't understand

I choose my groups, "Freedom of Association"

if I chose it, I am not a slave. Slavery is Involuntary Servitude.

Which means it would then be voluntary servitude. Which is still servitude.

Even things that are yet to happen are history- they are just the history we don't know yet.

If you don't learn the lessons of history, you're doomed to repeat the same mistakes.

In other words - you ARE doomed to repeat the same mistakes.

I don't prescribe to pre-determinism
I find it lacking

You are so right. Why bother to learn about history? People will just make the same mistakes over and over again.

[Grave_n_idle]

Unless you're posting this from your own private island, I think you're full of it.

I would love to do so, but all land is currently owned...

Then, for all your talk, you're either willingly complicit, or you're not. If you're willingly complicit, your rhetoric is a lie. If you're not willingly complicit, it's hollow.

Which is it?

[Grave_n_idle]

to me it means delusional people who think that a country of 300million+ people can have a small government.

I hate to walk in on like the 16th page and respond to the first post, but I just have to ask...

...small compared to what exactly? Tacitus (centuries before there was anything resembling a 'libertarian' ideology) once said "The more corrupt a state, the more numerous its laws." To put a finer point on it, I suspect (since I'm one and I'm saying this now) many libertarians would contend that the government as it ought to be should be smaller than it is now. This doesn't necessarily mean we're advocating anything near anarchy, it just means we think the government is in the habit of doing more than it ought. Just throwing that out there.

Indeed. And yet, you notice the things government does that it shouldn't... vary according to the political ideals of the person involved. So it's not about reducing government, or making it more efficient, or any of the other hundreds of pretenses that get erected - it's about seeing one person's agenda pushed at the expense of everyone else. (Let's be fair, and say it's that way 9 times out of 10, rather than as a universal rule. I hate to pretend to be able to speak to absolutes).

[GeneralHaNor]

I would love to do so, but all land is currently owned...

Then, for all your talk, you're either willingly complicit, or you're not. If you're willingly complicit, your rhetoric is a lie. If you're not willingly complicit, it's hollow.

Which is it?

No and no
False dichotomy

I am forced to live in a society that is not my choosing. my options consist of choosing another society (practically identical to the one I live in) or creating my own (practically impossible because of the state monopoly on violence)

I have the option of living as a slave, or dying as a slave. That is the modern world
The secret third option (Revolution) will not come to till I either convince people of the correctness of my truth, or they learn it themselves.

[Grave_n_idle]

I am forced to live in a society...

Sorry, had to stop you there, since you were already being dishonest.

[GeneralHaNor]

You clearly don't understand

I choose my groups, "Freedom of Association"

if I chose it, I am not a slave. Slavery is Involuntary Servitude.

Which means it would then be voluntary servitude. Which is still servitude.

I receive fair compensation for my servitude, if I didn't, I would refuse to serve. Having a choice is completely different then having no choice
I have no choice in regards to being beholden to an oppressive police state against my will.

[GeneralHaNor]

I am forced to live in a society...

Sorry, had to stop you there, since you were already being dishonest.

No, you just saw the rest of my post, and decided that since it didn't fit your dogma, you would cut it out

I'm not interested in your theology
I'm only interested in my Liberty.

[Norstal]

Which means it would then be voluntary servitude. Which is still servitude.

I receive fair compensation for my servitude, if I didn't, I would refuse to serve. Having a choice is completely different then having no choice
I have no choice in regards to being beholden to an oppressive police state against my will.

And like what Trots said, you're the extreme case of libertarianism where you believe people should be given the choice to murder others.
Otherwise, this just means you want to be king of your own castle.

[Grave_n_idle]

Sorry, had to stop you there, since you were already being dishonest.

No, you just saw the rest of my post, and decided that since it didn't fit your dogma...

You're not 'forced' to live anywhere.

Unless you're being held against your will in someone's basement of course, in which case I guess we can contact the authorities for you.

Although that seems unlikely, since it would suggest surprsingly lenient kidnappers.

So I have to assume there's no actual 'force' holding you anywhere. Hence the snip.

[Melkor Unchained]

I hate to walk in on like the 16th page and respond to the first post, but I just have to ask...

...small compared to what exactly? Tacitus (centuries before there was anything resembling a 'libertarian' ideology) once said "The more corrupt a state, the more numerous its laws." To put a finer point on it, I suspect (since I'm one and I'm saying this now) many libertarians would contend that the government as it ought to be should be smaller than it is now. This doesn't necessarily mean we're advocating anything near anarchy, it just means we think the government is in the habit of doing more than it ought. Just throwing that out there.

Indeed. And yet, you notice the things government does that it shouldn't... vary according to the political ideals of the person involved. So it's not about reducing government, or making it more efficient, or any of the other hundreds of pretenses that get erected - it's about seeing one person's agenda pushed at the expense of everyone else. (Let's be fair, and say it's that way 9 times out of 10, rather than as a universal rule. I hate to pretend to be able to speak to absolutes).

I'm not entirely sure I understand what you're getting at, but unless I miss my guess the underlined portion is (a component of?) your thesis on the issue.

Who's agenda are we talking about exactly? Aren't you describing more a mechanism of general human interaction rather than that of any (or even your) political ideology? I would dispute that the libertarian agenda is achieved "at the expense of everyone else," but assuming that's your view, how is turnabout not fair play?

...please for the love of God please answer one of those at least....

[GeneralHaNor]

I receive fair compensation for my servitude, if I didn't, I would refuse to serve. Having a choice is completely different then having no choice
I have no choice in regards to being beholden to an oppressive police state against my will.

And like what Trots said, you're the extreme case of libertarianism where you believe people should be given the choice to murder others.
Otherwise, this just means you want to be king of your own castle.

Actually I'm an anarchist, therefore no man should be king of anything, other then himself (and I where I differ from the left, King of his own property)

[GeneralHaNor]

No, you just saw the rest of my post, and decided that since it didn't fit your dogma...

You're not 'forced' to live anywhere.

Unless you're being held against your will in someone's basement of course, in which case I guess we can contact the authorities for you.

Although that seems unlikely, since it would suggest surprsingly lenient kidnappers.

So I have to assume there's no actual 'force' holding you anywhere. Hence the snip.

I suppose if I had infinite funds to buy an island and move anywhere I wanted to, then this would be true
But it's not

It's not true, regardless of your belief
I'm not interested in your theology.

[Grave_n_idle]

Indeed. And yet, you notice the things government does that it shouldn't... vary according to the political ideals of the person involved. So it's not about reducing government, or making it more efficient, or any of the other hundreds of pretenses that get erected - it's about seeing one person's agenda pushed at the expense of everyone else. (Let's be fair, and say it's that way 9 times out of 10, rather than as a universal rule. I hate to pretend to be able to speak to absolutes).

I'm not entirely sure I understand what you're getting at, but unless I miss my guess the underlined portion is (a component of?) your thesis on the issue.

Who's agenda are we talking about exactly? Aren't you describing more a mechanism of general human interaction rather than that of any (or even your) political ideology? I would dispute that the libertarian agenda is achieved "at the expense of everyone else," but assuming that's your view, how is turnabout not fair play?

...please for the love of God please answer one of those at least....

Who's agenda? Well, in the context of the thread, probably Joe Average 'libertarian'. Pry around a little and you'll likely rapidly find an issue that their appeal to liberty falls short on - commonly, it seems to be sexual/gender equality... but there could be others.

As to whether or not it's a general mechanism - I'd have to say no. Communism, for example, is at least theoretically exactly NOT that - indeed, one might argue it's the pushing of everyone else's agenda at the expense of your own. But communism is just one model that supports the not-a-general-mechanism theory. There are many forms of altruism.

Concerning the idea that a libertarian model wouldn't be 'at the expense of everyone else'... how could it not be? We're all interconnected.

[Grave_n_idle]

You're not 'forced' to live anywhere.

Unless you're being held against your will in someone's basement of course, in which case I guess we can contact the authorities for you.

Although that seems unlikely, since it would suggest surprsingly lenient kidnappers.

So I have to assume there's no actual 'force' holding you anywhere. Hence the snip.

I suppose if I had infinite funds to buy an island and move anywhere I wanted to, then this would be true
But it's not

It's not true, regardless of your belief
I'm not interested in your theology.

I like the fact you're trying to use my own approach, but you're making a pig's breakfast of it - since your claim that you're being 'forced' to do anything is not opinion or belief, it's a simple statement of (in this case, lack of) objective fact.

[GeneralHaNor]

I suppose if I had infinite funds to buy an island and move anywhere I wanted to, then this would be true
But it's not

It's not true, regardless of your belief
I'm not interested in your theology.

I like the fact you're trying to use my own approach, but you're making a pig's breakfast of it - since your claim that you're being 'forced' to do anything is not opinion or belief, it's a simple statement of (in this case, lack of) objective fact.

Show me free land, devoid of sovereignty claims, where I can live and build a society of my choosing, then you'll be objectively correct

Until then, the only one lacking facts here is you.