NATION

PASSWORD

Libertarians - Anarchists, Freedom Lovers, or Corporatists?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)
User avatar
Elwher
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9216
Founded: May 24, 2012
Capitalizt

Libertarians - Anarchists, Freedom Lovers, or Corporatists?

Postby Elwher » Sat Mar 02, 2024 11:17 am

To me, the heart of Libertarianism is that old bugaboo, bodily autonomy.

To start with, all the below concern adults capable of giving consent. Children and the mentally incompetent are in a different class.

I own my body. Therefore, I control what goes into it and what comes out of it. I also control the outputs of my efforts.

No one should have the right to tell me what I choose to ingest, whether medicinally or for my personal pleasure. Also, no one has the right to tell me who I may allow into my body or who I may consensually enter into.

No one should have the right to determine my medical procedures. I should have the right to any procedure I can get voluntary participation from any others who need to be involved, be they doctors, nurses, or faith healers.

It should be my right to set the level of compensation I am willing to accept for my efforts. If I am solely responsible for the creation of something, or I have acquired it legally from the previous owner, it should be my decision as to what I want to sell or rent it for. If I want a service from someone, the two of us should be the sole deciders on the value of that service.

All of these are the natural outcome of the concept of bodily autonomy; I don't get to tell you what to do with your body and you don't get to tell me what to do with mine.

Other opinions are welcome, of course.
CYNIC, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision.
Ambrose Bierce

User avatar
The Black Forrest
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 59091
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Black Forrest » Sat Mar 02, 2024 11:20 am

Hmmm? No. When it comes to contagious disease. Your “bodily autonomy” means nothing.

If you want to be anti-vaxx, then you don’t get to fully partake in society. Your right to choose, doesn’t win over people who can’t choose.
*I am a master proofreader after I click Submit.
* There is actually a War on Christmas. But Christmas started it, with it's unparalleled aggression against the Thanksgiving Holiday, and now Christmas has seized much Lebensraum in November, and are pushing into October. The rest of us seek to repel these invaders, and push them back to the status quo ante bellum Black Friday border. -Trotskylvania
* Silence Is Golden But Duct Tape Is Silver.
* I felt like Ayn Rand cornered me at a party, and three minutes in I found my first objection to what she was saying, but she kept talking without interruption for ten more days. - Max Barry talking about Atlas Shrugged

User avatar
Limitata
Envoy
 
Posts: 202
Founded: Nov 16, 2023
Anarchy

Postby Limitata » Sat Mar 02, 2024 11:23 am

Elwher wrote:To me, the heart of Libertarianism is that old bugaboo, bodily autonomy.

To start with, all the below concern adults capable of giving consent. Children and the mentally incompetent are in a different class.

I own my body. Therefore, I control what goes into it and what comes out of it. I also control the outputs of my efforts.

No one should have the right to tell me what I choose to ingest, whether medicinally or for my personal pleasure. Also, no one has the right to tell me who I may allow into my body or who I may consensually enter into.

No one should have the right to determine my medical procedures. I should have the right to any procedure I can get voluntary participation from any others who need to be involved, be they doctors, nurses, or faith healers.

It should be my right to set the level of compensation I am willing to accept for my efforts. If I am solely responsible for the creation of something, or I have acquired it legally from the previous owner, it should be my decision as to what I want to sell or rent it for. If I want a service from someone, the two of us should be the sole deciders on the value of that service.

All of these are the natural outcome of the concept of bodily autonomy; I don't get to tell you what to do with your body and you don't get to tell me what to do with mine.

Other opinions are welcome, of course.

You should make that a song, I heard it in my head as one.

Libertarians are not Corporatists or Corporatocrats. I would like to request that you change the Last word to "corporatocrat," as in Corporatocracy. Corporatism is a type of socialistic economic system used by Nazi Germany, which I know you meant to put it as a society ruled by corporations. I make the mistake between the two all the time.
The Serene Republics of Limitata
Tier: 9
Type: 6
Class: 1.16
Yeah, You!
I made a new region and you can join it!
It's called Zavalya, and I need you to help me make it.

_[' ]_
(-_Q) If you support Capitalism put this in your Signature

User avatar
Elwher
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9216
Founded: May 24, 2012
Capitalizt

Postby Elwher » Sat Mar 02, 2024 11:23 am

The Black Forrest wrote:Hmmm? No. When it comes to contagious disease. Your “bodily autonomy” means nothing.

If you want to be anti-vaxx, then you don’t get to fully partake in society. Your right to choose, doesn’t win over people who can’t choose.


I agree. The owners of any property, public or private, have the right to refuse entry without proof of vaccination if they so choose, and that policy (either way) should be prominently displayed.
CYNIC, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision.
Ambrose Bierce

User avatar
Elwher
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9216
Founded: May 24, 2012
Capitalizt

Postby Elwher » Sat Mar 02, 2024 11:25 am

Limitata wrote:
Elwher wrote:To me, the heart of Libertarianism is that old bugaboo, bodily autonomy.

To start with, all the below concern adults capable of giving consent. Children and the mentally incompetent are in a different class.

I own my body. Therefore, I control what goes into it and what comes out of it. I also control the outputs of my efforts.

No one should have the right to tell me what I choose to ingest, whether medicinally or for my personal pleasure. Also, no one has the right to tell me who I may allow into my body or who I may consensually enter into.

No one should have the right to determine my medical procedures. I should have the right to any procedure I can get voluntary participation from any others who need to be involved, be they doctors, nurses, or faith healers.

It should be my right to set the level of compensation I am willing to accept for my efforts. If I am solely responsible for the creation of something, or I have acquired it legally from the previous owner, it should be my decision as to what I want to sell or rent it for. If I want a service from someone, the two of us should be the sole deciders on the value of that service.

All of these are the natural outcome of the concept of bodily autonomy; I don't get to tell you what to do with your body and you don't get to tell me what to do with mine.

Other opinions are welcome, of course.

You should make that a song, I heard it in my head as one.

Libertarians are not Corporatists or Corporatocrats. I would like to request that you change the Last word to "corporatocrat," as in Corporatocracy. Corporatism is a type of socialistic economic system used by Nazi Germany, which I know you meant to put it as a society ruled by corporations. I make the mistake between the two all the time.


I used corporatists because Corporate shills, what I wanted to use, made the title too long to be accepted.
CYNIC, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision.
Ambrose Bierce

User avatar
Limitata
Envoy
 
Posts: 202
Founded: Nov 16, 2023
Anarchy

Postby Limitata » Sat Mar 02, 2024 11:28 am

Elwher wrote:
Limitata wrote:You should make that a song, I heard it in my head as one.

Libertarians are not Corporatists or Corporatocrats. I would like to request that you change the Last word to "corporatocrat," as in Corporatocracy. Corporatism is a type of socialistic economic system used by Nazi Germany, which I know you meant to put it as a society ruled by corporations. I make the mistake between the two all the time.


I used corporatists because Corporate shills, what I wanted to use, made the title too long to be accepted.

Ahh, OK.
The Serene Republics of Limitata
Tier: 9
Type: 6
Class: 1.16
Yeah, You!
I made a new region and you can join it!
It's called Zavalya, and I need you to help me make it.

_[' ]_
(-_Q) If you support Capitalism put this in your Signature

User avatar
Floofybit
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8726
Founded: Sep 11, 2020
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Floofybit » Sat Mar 02, 2024 12:02 pm

Misguided.

But about the bodily autonomy thing, if it puts yourself or others at risk, such as consuming drugs not as prescribed, not being vaccinated, and not showering, it must be restricted.
Compass: Northwest
Reformative Authoritarian Pacifist
Pro: Socialism, Authoritarianism, The Right To Life, Environment, Public Services, Government, Equity and Equality, Surveillance, Police, Religion, Pacifism, Fruit
Anti: Capitalism, Liberalism, Abortion, Anarchy, Inequality, Crime, Drugs, Guns, Violence, Fruit-Haters
Religious ace male furry who really, really, really loves fruit.
Broadcasting From Foxlington
Safety & Equality > Freedom
If I CTE hold a funeral because I'm dead :)
My political test results
Telegram me your favourite colour, I'm doing a survey

User avatar
Risottia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 55254
Founded: Sep 05, 2006
Democratic Socialists

Postby Risottia » Sat Mar 02, 2024 12:02 pm

Elwher wrote:I own my body.


Not quite. You don't own your body in the same way you own your pencil. You can sell your pencil, but you can't sell your own body.
Statanist through and through.
Evilutionist Atheist Crusadjihadist. Egli/Lui.
"Darwinu Akhbar! Dawkins vult!"
Founder of the NSG Peace Prize Committee. Should I restart the bugger?
SUMMER, BLOODY SUMMER!

User avatar
Floofybit
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8726
Founded: Sep 11, 2020
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Floofybit » Sat Mar 02, 2024 12:04 pm

Risottia wrote:
Elwher wrote:I own my body.


Not quite. You don't own your body in the same way you own your pencil. You can sell your pencil, but you can't sell your own body.

You can technically "sell" your body, temporarily at least, but it's a disgusting act for both parties.
Compass: Northwest
Reformative Authoritarian Pacifist
Pro: Socialism, Authoritarianism, The Right To Life, Environment, Public Services, Government, Equity and Equality, Surveillance, Police, Religion, Pacifism, Fruit
Anti: Capitalism, Liberalism, Abortion, Anarchy, Inequality, Crime, Drugs, Guns, Violence, Fruit-Haters
Religious ace male furry who really, really, really loves fruit.
Broadcasting From Foxlington
Safety & Equality > Freedom
If I CTE hold a funeral because I'm dead :)
My political test results
Telegram me your favourite colour, I'm doing a survey

User avatar
The Apollonian Systems
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 497
Founded: Mar 01, 2024
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Apollonian Systems » Sat Mar 02, 2024 12:06 pm

Risottia wrote:
Elwher wrote:I own my body.


Not quite. You don't own your body in the same way you own your pencil. You can sell your pencil, but you can't sell your own body.

Eh depends on local laws.

User avatar
Risottia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 55254
Founded: Sep 05, 2006
Democratic Socialists

Postby Risottia » Sat Mar 02, 2024 12:10 pm

Floofybit wrote:
Risottia wrote:
Not quite. You don't own your body in the same way you own your pencil. You can sell your pencil, but you can't sell your own body.

You can technically "sell" your body, temporarily at least, but it's a disgusting act for both parties.

Nope, "selling one's body" isn't "temporarily allowing sexual intercourse in exchange of money". That's "using your body to give a service".
"Selling" means "transferring ownership permanently in exchange of money". People can't legally sell their own body, and the point of that is forbidding slavery.

The Apollonian Systems wrote:
Risottia wrote:
Not quite. You don't own your body in the same way you own your pencil. You can sell your pencil, but you can't sell your own body.

Eh depends on local laws.

Find me a country whose laws allow people to transfer the ownership of their own body permanently for money.
Statanist through and through.
Evilutionist Atheist Crusadjihadist. Egli/Lui.
"Darwinu Akhbar! Dawkins vult!"
Founder of the NSG Peace Prize Committee. Should I restart the bugger?
SUMMER, BLOODY SUMMER!

User avatar
Inner Albania
Diplomat
 
Posts: 935
Founded: Jul 21, 2022
Democratic Socialists

Postby Inner Albania » Sat Mar 02, 2024 12:23 pm

Obviously freedom lovers. Anarchists are way different than libertarians. As for corporatists, this suits liberalists more.
A Class 0.857 Civilization according to this index.
YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@pabblo1 Proud member of the South Pacific

My time on NS may be limited.

User avatar
BEEstreetz
Envoy
 
Posts: 222
Founded: May 28, 2022
Capitalist Paradise

Postby BEEstreetz » Sat Mar 02, 2024 12:56 pm

Elwher wrote:To me, the heart of Libertarianism is that old bugaboo, bodily autonomy.

To start with, all the below concern adults capable of giving consent. Children and the mentally incompetent are in a different class.

I own my body. Therefore, I control what goes into it and what comes out of it. I also control the outputs of my efforts.

No one should have the right to tell me what I choose to ingest, whether medicinally or for my personal pleasure. Also, no one has the right to tell me who I may allow into my body or who I may consensually enter into.

No one should have the right to determine my medical procedures. I should have the right to any procedure I can get voluntary participation from any others who need to be involved, be they doctors, nurses, or faith healers.

It should be my right to set the level of compensation I am willing to accept for my efforts. If I am solely responsible for the creation of something, or I have acquired it legally from the previous owner, it should be my decision as to what I want to sell or rent it for. If I want a service from someone, the two of us should be the sole deciders on the value of that service.

All of these are the natural outcome of the concept of bodily autonomy; I don't get to tell you what to do with your body and you don't get to tell me what to do with mine.

Other opinions are welcome, of course.


I don't understand what this has to do with the title. Anyway, misguided.

This dilemma has been covered already, some 400 years ago, by Locke. So, bodily autonomy is in the corner-stone of liberal thought, which in contemporary US terminology could be classified as libertarian thought but I will not get into that.

Bodily autonomy, or the right to ones own body, is a freedom limited by participation in responsibility to ones own life and lives of those around them.
Medicinal procedures would not classify under involuntary forebearance, unlike restrictions to pleasure, which you grouped together.
Useful links: Most Important Dispatch of Mine | Website rules | NS Guide | List of NSCodes | GA Rules | Personal help | Reppy's sig workshop | Script Rules | NS API Doc
-
OOC Info: | F;She/Her/They. | Orientation: ACE Umbrella.| Profession: (Current) Operational Crisis Management ;Social worker;Bureaucrat| Religion: Pan-Abrahamic | Education: PolSci -> IR -> IntSec. | Ideology: (A) InfValue Results For more Info.

User avatar
The Black Forrest
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 59091
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Black Forrest » Sat Mar 02, 2024 1:09 pm

Risottia wrote:
Elwher wrote:I own my body.


Not quite. You don't own your body in the same way you own your pencil. You can sell your pencil, but you can't sell your own body.


Then what are hookers doing?
*I am a master proofreader after I click Submit.
* There is actually a War on Christmas. But Christmas started it, with it's unparalleled aggression against the Thanksgiving Holiday, and now Christmas has seized much Lebensraum in November, and are pushing into October. The rest of us seek to repel these invaders, and push them back to the status quo ante bellum Black Friday border. -Trotskylvania
* Silence Is Golden But Duct Tape Is Silver.
* I felt like Ayn Rand cornered me at a party, and three minutes in I found my first objection to what she was saying, but she kept talking without interruption for ten more days. - Max Barry talking about Atlas Shrugged

User avatar
Neutraligon
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 42328
Founded: Oct 01, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Neutraligon » Sat Mar 02, 2024 1:12 pm

The Black Forrest wrote:
Risottia wrote:
Not quite. You don't own your body in the same way you own your pencil. You can sell your pencil, but you can't sell your own body.


Then what are hookers doing?


Selling a service, just like construction workers.
If you want to call me by a nickname, call me Gon...or NS Batman.
Mod stuff: One Stop Rules Shop | Reppy's Sig Workshop | Getting Help Request
Just A Little though

User avatar
Elwher
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9216
Founded: May 24, 2012
Capitalizt

Postby Elwher » Sat Mar 02, 2024 2:17 pm

The Black Forrest wrote:
Risottia wrote:
Not quite. You don't own your body in the same way you own your pencil. You can sell your pencil, but you can't sell your own body.


Then what are hookers doing?


Renting, not selling.
CYNIC, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision.
Ambrose Bierce

User avatar
Elwher
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9216
Founded: May 24, 2012
Capitalizt

Postby Elwher » Sat Mar 02, 2024 2:24 pm

BEEstreetz wrote:
Elwher wrote:To me, the heart of Libertarianism is that old bugaboo, bodily autonomy.

To start with, all the below concern adults capable of giving consent. Children and the mentally incompetent are in a different class.

I own my body. Therefore, I control what goes into it and what comes out of it. I also control the outputs of my efforts.

No one should have the right to tell me what I choose to ingest, whether medicinally or for my personal pleasure. Also, no one has the right to tell me who I may allow into my body or who I may consensually enter into.

No one should have the right to determine my medical procedures. I should have the right to any procedure I can get voluntary participation from any others who need to be involved, be they doctors, nurses, or faith healers.

It should be my right to set the level of compensation I am willing to accept for my efforts. If I am solely responsible for the creation of something, or I have acquired it legally from the previous owner, it should be my decision as to what I want to sell or rent it for. If I want a service from someone, the two of us should be the sole deciders on the value of that service.

All of these are the natural outcome of the concept of bodily autonomy; I don't get to tell you what to do with your body and you don't get to tell me what to do with mine.

Other opinions are welcome, of course.


I don't understand what this has to do with the title. Anyway, misguided.

This dilemma has been covered already, some 400 years ago, by Locke. So, bodily autonomy is in the corner-stone of liberal thought, which in contemporary US terminology could be classified as libertarian thought but I will not get into that.

Bodily autonomy, or the right to ones own body, is a freedom limited by participation in responsibility to ones own life and lives of those around them.
Medicinal procedures would not classify under involuntary forebearance, unlike restrictions to pleasure, which you grouped together.


I undergo medical procedures to make me feel better. I take recreational drugs to make myself feel better. Both are actions that I decide to undergo, with the possible (probable) assistance of other practitioners. As long as my and their participation is voluntary, the actions should be allowed.

I can choose to limit my bodily autonomy over responsibilities to others. Others have no claim on me except for those I voluntarily agree to.
CYNIC, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision.
Ambrose Bierce

User avatar
Kalaron
Senator
 
Posts: 4175
Founded: Jun 20, 2015
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Kalaron » Sat Mar 02, 2024 3:57 pm

Left Libertarians are based. Left Anarchists are based. Right Libs are pretty misguided, and in my experience advocate for things that would hurt people.
Last edited by Kalaron on Sat Mar 02, 2024 3:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
BEEstreetz
Envoy
 
Posts: 222
Founded: May 28, 2022
Capitalist Paradise

Postby BEEstreetz » Sat Mar 02, 2024 4:01 pm

Elwher wrote:
BEEstreetz wrote:I don't understand what this has to do with the title. Anyway, misguided.

This dilemma has been covered already, some 400 years ago, by Locke. So, bodily autonomy is in the corner-stone of liberal thought, which in contemporary US terminology could be classified as libertarian thought but I will not get into that.

Bodily autonomy, or the right to ones own body, is a freedom limited by participation in responsibility to ones own life and lives of those around them.
Medicinal procedures would not classify under involuntary forebearance, unlike restrictions to pleasure, which you grouped together.


I undergo medical procedures to make me feel better. I take recreational drugs to make myself feel better. Both are actions that I decide to undergo, with the possible (probable) assistance of other practitioners. As long as my and their participation is voluntary, the actions should be allowed.

I can choose to limit my bodily autonomy over responsibilities to others. Others have no claim on me except for those I voluntarily agree to.


You undergo medical procedures to ensure continuation of your life. I don't find most actions which medicine as a field performs to be pleasurable towards patients rather needed instead. However, if you find pleasure in that, I'm not judging either; Just stating it's not the case with most people nor the reason why they go to the doctors.
You can limit your bodily autonomy responsibilities to others in the context of that responsibility endangering yours or others lives (military mobilisation coming to mind as an example). Not outside that context, such as endangering other peoples lives, while also keeping such autonomy.

If you mean conceptually, then yes, everything is possible. Conceptually, sure, that would be an ideal world for me as well. If your question is which framework this would fall under, some maximalist perspectives of Anarchism, Egoism-as-written is coming to mind first. However, I don't see its practice being feasible in this contemporary world.
If you believe application doesn't matter in this topic, alright then, though that's contradictory to Egoism (and most other maximalist perspectives) itself.
Useful links: Most Important Dispatch of Mine | Website rules | NS Guide | List of NSCodes | GA Rules | Personal help | Reppy's sig workshop | Script Rules | NS API Doc
-
OOC Info: | F;She/Her/They. | Orientation: ACE Umbrella.| Profession: (Current) Operational Crisis Management ;Social worker;Bureaucrat| Religion: Pan-Abrahamic | Education: PolSci -> IR -> IntSec. | Ideology: (A) InfValue Results For more Info.

User avatar
Sarduri
Envoy
 
Posts: 350
Founded: Dec 09, 2023
Democratic Socialists

Postby Sarduri » Sat Mar 02, 2024 4:41 pm

they're conservatives who don't like to call themselves 'conservative' because they like smoking weed.

User avatar
Port Carverton
Minister
 
Posts: 2996
Founded: Sep 27, 2023
New York Times Democracy

Postby Port Carverton » Sat Mar 02, 2024 4:49 pm

Sarduri wrote:they're conservatives who don't like to call themselves 'conservative' because they like smoking weed.

In what way are libertarians conservative?

If anything, they're liberals.

User avatar
Sarduri
Envoy
 
Posts: 350
Founded: Dec 09, 2023
Democratic Socialists

Postby Sarduri » Sat Mar 02, 2024 4:55 pm

Port Carverton wrote:
Sarduri wrote:they're conservatives who don't like to call themselves 'conservative' because they like smoking weed.

In what way are libertarians conservative?

If anything, they're liberals.


no, they're not. liberals have an entirely different worldview.

'libertarianism' is a made up self-euphemizing label generated by people who are conservative in worldview, but quibble on conservatism's moral stance on just a few select things - like weed.

or generated by people who are conservative, but who move in liberal social circles and want to continue being invited to all the right dinner parties in the Hamptons and so take on the label as way to deflect from conservatism's bad vibes.

User avatar
Uiiop
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8154
Founded: Jun 20, 2012
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Uiiop » Sat Mar 02, 2024 4:59 pm

Sarduri wrote:
Port Carverton wrote:In what way are libertarians conservative?

If anything, they're liberals.


no, they're not. liberals have an entirely different worldview.

'libertarianism' is a made up self-euphemizing label generated by people who are conservative in worldview, but quibble on conservatism's moral stance on just a few select things - like weed.

or generated by people who are conservative, but who move in liberal social circles and want to continue being invited to all the right dinner parties in the Hamptons and so take on the label as way to deflect from conservatism's bad vibes.

Both of y'all are kinda in denial of liberalism broad tent tbh. conservatives are libs. Libs are libs. Therefore libertarians(minus the "An-cap" and socialists) are libs.
Last edited by Uiiop on Sat Mar 02, 2024 5:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#NSTransparency

User avatar
Port Carverton
Minister
 
Posts: 2996
Founded: Sep 27, 2023
New York Times Democracy

Postby Port Carverton » Sat Mar 02, 2024 5:00 pm

Sarduri wrote:
Port Carverton wrote:In what way are libertarians conservative?

If anything, they're liberals.


no, they're not. liberals have an entirely different worldview.

'libertarianism' is a made up self-euphemizing label generated by people who are conservative in worldview, but quibble on conservatism's moral stance on just a few select things - like weed.

or generated by people who are conservative, but who move in liberal social circles and want to continue being invited to all the right dinner parties in the Hamptons and so take on the label as way to deflect from conservatism's bad vibes.

This is actual gobbledygook. Like you're making stuff up about your political opponents in your head. In what world are 'conservative' and 'libertarian' the same thing?

Liberalism is generally defined by limited government, free markets and free trade. These are all things libertarians want. Actually they carry liberal values more than self-described American liberals. I'm not even sure why in America it's called that way, because it's very statist compared to social-liberal theory.

User avatar
Sarduri
Envoy
 
Posts: 350
Founded: Dec 09, 2023
Democratic Socialists

Postby Sarduri » Sat Mar 02, 2024 5:01 pm

Uiiop wrote:
Sarduri wrote:
no, they're not. liberals have an entirely different worldview.

'libertarianism' is a made up self-euphemizing label generated by people who are conservative in worldview, but quibble on conservatism's moral stance on just a few select things - like weed.

or generated by people who are conservative, but who move in liberal social circles and want to continue being invited to all the right dinner parties in the Hamptons and so take on the label as way to deflect from conservatism's bad vibes.

Both of y'all are kinda in denial of liberalism broad tent tbh. conservatives are libs. Libs are libs. Therefore libertarians(minus the "An-cap" and socialists) are libs.


they're all liberals inasmuch as everyone post 1848 is a liberal. there are no reactionary absolute monarchists around anymore, everyone is descendant from the same 'classical liberal' root stock.

that doesn't mean calling them all 'liberals' is a useful way to understand modern politics or describe the people who operate within it.
Last edited by Sarduri on Sat Mar 02, 2024 5:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aadhiris, Ancientania, Artaxiad Dynasty, Bagong Timog Mindanao, Deblar, El Lazaro, Ethel mermania, Google Adsense [Bot], Kyrusia, Maximum Imperium Rex, New Temecula, Pale Dawn, Plan Neonie, The Kharkivan Cossacks, The Vooperian Union, Tiami, Tungstan

Advertisement

Remove ads