Ask a Libertarian

[The Coup]

Seeing as the Communist thread was such a hit, I figure we should give the most vocal groups on BF their own thread where they can answer any questions regarding their political ideology and policy they would like to see implicated.

I'll get the ball rolling:

1. Libertarians are fans of allowing guns to be owned by private citizens for the purpose of defending property against criminals and the government (the minimalist government Libertarians envisage would have to be a rather small threat, but still). In a country like Australia that has had such successful gun control in recent years it might be unrealistic to allow full scale open carry permits. But how would Libertarians feel about "community weapons caches" similar to what existed in Spain at the time of the revolution? Essentially, this would be a reasonably large collection of weaponry maintained and contained within each community, that citizens have access to in case of emergency. It keeps the citizenry armed en masse in case of calamity, but doesn't allow for rogue psychopaths to go on shooting sprees. Kind of the best of both worlds. I'm just wondering if this kind of Community focused solution could work under Libertarianism?

 

[Fire]

Libetarianism is such a board ideology that its stupid to use the term really. You have the US tea party and the linked of Bill Maher who share the label.

If libertarianism is socially liberal and economically conservative, then I'm somewhat of a libertarian. And I'm not a fan of guns. Neither is the likes of Bill Maher. So your premise is flawed.

 

[evo]

Why did they choose the Dewey decimal system?

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Why do they pretend they're not conservative and/or selfish assholes?

 

[Pie eyed]

Do you have a reference section?





OOOh Sorry, thread title comprehension fail.

 

[The Coup]

Libetarianism is such a board ideology that its stupid to use the term really. You have the US tea party and the linked of Bill Maher who share the label.

If libertarianism is socially liberal and economically conservative, then I'm somewhat of a libertarian. And I'm not a fan of guns. Neither is the likes of Bill Maher. So your premise is flawed.

You could say the same of Communism, but there is still something at the heart of each political theory.

I'm hoping a Libertarian here can give their opinion and describe their thoughts. You don't seem willing to look into it in depth, but you are happy to accept the label nonetheless because of pop culture (based on your own post, not a judgement). I mean you just said you're socially liberal but anti gun ownership, that's the epitome of "meh".

I have my own understanding of it, but obviously this a thread for the Libertarians to take control of rather than a Communist.

 

[The Coup]

I have a follow up question, how does Libertarianism deal with systemic corruption like this, without a significant state apparatus and with significantly more power granted to corporations than people:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...ed-the-biggest-financial-scandal-yet-20130425

 

[Long Live HFC]

without a significant state apparatus

many libertarians still see a role for the state. depends on who you're reading. i think 'significant' is in the eyes of the beholder, too.

 

[medusala]

I have a follow up question, how does Libertarianism deal with systemic corruption like this, without a significant state apparatus and with significantly more power granted to corporations than people:

The state was involved. See BOE and British banks. Easiest way to rig a market is to have participants excluded via government interference.

As for regulators see article by the same source.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/is-the-sec-covering-up-wall-street-crimes-20110817

Matt Taibbi: A whistle blower says the agency has illegally destroyed thousands of documents, letting financial crooks off the hook.

 

[The Coup]

The state was involved. See BOE and British banks. Easiest way to rig a market is to have participants excluded via government interference.

As for regulators see article by the same source.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/is-the-sec-covering-up-wall-street-crimes-20110817

Matt Taibbi: A whistle blower says the agency has illegally destroyed thousands of documents, letting financial crooks off the hook.

but corporate influence in government is part of capitalism, and libertarianism is inherently capitalist.

So how do you fight it?

 

[manboob]

but corporate influence in government is part of capitalism, and libertarianism is inherently capitalist.

So how do you fight it?

I was under the impression libertarianism stood was for "minimal government" that provided the security for individuals to undertake free market exchanges.


Most of what today is dubbed libertarianism is definitely not that.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

 

[Gus Poyet]

Why do they pretend they're not conservative and/or selfish assholes?

Why do you pretend to know what you're talking about?

If they are so "conservative" why is the only elected Libertarian politician in Australia introducing a bill and calling for Gay Marriage to be recognised and calling for Pot to be legalized?

Ponder that Einstein.

 

[Gus Poyet]

Libetarianism is such a board ideology that its stupid to use the term really. You have the US tea party and the linked of Bill Maher who share the label.

If libertarianism is socially liberal and economically conservative, then I'm somewhat of a libertarian. And I'm not a fan of guns. Neither is the likes of Bill Maher. So your premise is flawed.

Well said.

It's about individualism and a rejection of the idea that we need large governments to dictate to us through laws and regulation in so many aspects of our lives.

As it's about individualism you can difer from other Libertarians on certain issues because you're not subscribing to a catch all political belief system.

As has been pointed out by David Leyonhjelm in regards to the gay marriage issue. You don't have to like it or agree with it, all that's asked is you tolerate others life choice decisions.

 

[PACatter]

Libetarianism is such a board ideology that its stupid to use the term really. You have the US tea party and the linked of Bill Maher who share the label.

If libertarianism is socially liberal and economically conservative, then I'm somewhat of a libertarian. And I'm not a fan of guns. Neither is the likes of Bill Maher. So your premise is flawed.

Libertarianism is not a broad ideology, it's actually very narrow and very simple. A minimally invasive government, with administration done at a local level, where natural rights are respected.

Unfortunately, tools like Maher and the Tea Party (neither of whom are even close to being truly libertarian) co-opt and confuse the ideology. Maher is a Democrat who wants a bigger audience, while the Tea Party are just nut jobs. They can claim to be libertarians or leaning towards it, but they aren't.

 

[Gus Poyet]

The Tea Party haven't been Libertarian for a long time now. They were infiltrated and high jacked by the Koch bothers.

People who claim the Tea party are a representation on the Libertarians in the US and in General are just as big a nutjobs as the Tea Party itself.

 

[PACatter]

I have a follow up question, how does Libertarianism deal with systemic corruption like this, without a significant state apparatus and with significantly more power granted to corporations than people:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...ed-the-biggest-financial-scandal-yet-20130425

Here's a quote from the article: "Two of America's top law-enforcement officials, Attorney General Eric Holder and former Justice Department Criminal Division chief Lanny Breuer, confessed that it's dangerous to prosecute offending banks because they are simply too big. Making arrests, they say, might lead to "collateral consequences" in the economy."

There is a significant state apparatus as it is, and it refuses to act. The power is already in the hands of the banks, they can't get much more powerful than the AG looking and shrugging his shoulders while saying his hands are tied. As medusala pointed out, some facets of government have even helped them out.

To answer the question, a Libertarian would deal with this by allowing those who feel they were wronged pursue civil suits.

And maybe would also look the other way if the offended citizen decided that shooting the bankers was the appropriate way to go about fixing it.

 

[The Coup]

Here's a quote from the article: "Two of America's top law-enforcement officials, Attorney General Eric Holder and former Justice Department Criminal Division chief Lanny Breuer, confessed that it's dangerous to prosecute offending banks because they are simply too big. Making arrests, they say, might lead to "collateral consequences" in the economy."

There is a significant state apparatus as it is, and it refuses to act. The power is already in the hands of the banks, they can't get much more powerful than the AG looking and shrugging his shoulders while saying his hands are tied. As medusala pointed out, some facets of government have even helped them out.

To answer the question, a Libertarian would deal with this by allowing those who feel they were wronged pursue civil suits.

And maybe would also look the other way if the offended citizen decided that shooting the bankers was the appropriate way to go about fixing it.

That corruption is an effect of capitalism though, not the fact that the state apparatus exists.

If you remove the watchdog, even corrupt ones, it doesn't make the corruption go away. It just hides it even better.

 

[Gus Poyet]

To answer the question, a Libertarian would deal with this by allowing those who feel they were wronged pursue civil suits.

And maybe would also look the other way if the offended citizen decided that shooting the bankers was the appropriate way to go about fixing it.

And lastly, Libertarians turn cash into gold and bury it on their property some where.

 

[The Coup]

So between a fictional character meant to make fun of libertarians, and south park, Gus Poyet has gained a political ideology.

good for you Gus.

 

[Gus Poyet]

Ron Swanson talks more sense than you ever have Coup. And you're supposed to be a real non-fiction character.

 

[The Coup]

Who needs university when you have comedies paid for by massive media organisations like NewsCorp to provide you with all the political ideology you need huh?

I can see why you're anti-intellectual.

 

[The Coup]

I was under the impression libertarianism stood was for "minimal government" that provided the security for individuals to undertake free market exchanges.


Most of what today is dubbed libertarianism is definitely not that.

So how does a libertarian system stop corruption of the kind outlined in the article?

 

[Gus Poyet]

Who needs university when you have comedies paid for by massive media organisations like NewsCorp to provide you with all the political ideology you need huh?

I can see why you're anti-intellectual.

You see very little. That much is obvious.

Are you a university graduate by chance?

 

[mellowyellow]

If Paul is the high watermark of libertarian thinking and policy reformation then God help us all. I mean just ask the family of Kent Snyder...