To me, just getting off reading stuff that a new ‘libertarian" “scholar” is spewing out,
manipulating the facts, pasting on labels, rather then looking at the substance of an issue, and screaming fraud as often as he can,
(one Jose’ ‘It’s a Fraud’ Duarte),
has got my blood thumping again with his childish self-centered obliviousness to the real physical world,
instead substituting some daydream image of reality, in place of rational revaluation.
What is libertarianism, if not a dressed up version of the worst of the Hippy generation “all about me being happy” mentality.
Accepting all sorts of benefits from society, yet pretending they are islands onto themselves, and owe nothing to no one.
Seems to me their spiritual inspiration and brain trust is the juvenile, when not down right infantile, writings of Ayn Rand,
the spoiled child that never recovered from the emotional shock of the Bolsheviks’ robbing her family of their wealth.
(I can sort of relate, given my growing with the story of my quite wealthy Great-grandfather having his textile business and huge estate and fruit tree orchard outside of Budapest (Budakeszi) confiscated during WWII, and the deprivations my mother experienced as a teenager fleeing one impossible situation after another.)
It happens. War sucks, but that’s no reason to turn your back on society and social structure, or the rational evaluation of information.
Escaping to America Ayn discovered the high life again and fell in love with America’s fledgling obsession with celebrities, becoming an inspiration for the likes of Warhol I’m sure.
Was that a rant, sorry - I was trying to describe what I see when I read/listen to “libertarians” pontificating.
What do you think libertarians are all about?
What do you think libertarians are all about?I've got mine. It sucks to be you.
To me, just getting off reading stuff that a new 'libertarian" "scholar" is spewing out, manipulating the facts, pasting on labels, rather then looking at the substance of an issue, and screaming fraud as often as he can, (one Jose' 'It's a Fraud' Duarte), has got my blood thumping again with his childish self-centered obliviousness to the real physical world, instead substituting some daydream image of reality, in place of rational revaluation. What is libertarianism, if not a dressed up version of the worst of the Hippy generation "all about me being happy" mentality. Accepting all sorts of benefits from society, yet pretending they are islands onto themselves, and owe nothing to no one. Seems to me their spiritual inspiration and brain trust is the juvenile, when not down right infantile, writings of Ayn Rand, the spoiled child that never recovered from the emotional shock of the Bolsheviks' robbing her family of their wealth. (I can sort of relate, given my growing with the story of my quite wealthy Great-grandfather having his textile business and huge estate and fruit tree orchard outside of Budapest (Budakeszi) confiscated during WWII, and the deprivations my mother experienced as a teenager fleeing one impossible situation after another.) It happens. War sucks, but that's no reason to turn your back on society and social structure, or the rational evaluation of information. Escaping to America Ayn discovered the high life again and fell in love with America's fledgling obsession with celebrities, becoming an inspiration for the likes of Warhol I'm sure. Was that a rant, sorry - I was trying to describe what I see when I read/listen to "libertarians" pontificating. What do you think libertarians are all about?First off, libertarianism has nothing to do with hippie cuilture. Hippies were liberals and socialists--the exact oppoite of libertarianism. You're getting your rants confused. Libertarianism is all about having the smallest government possible, allowing the wealthy to exploit anyone they can find to exploit, no social programs, no controls on runaway wealth, as few taxes as possible, every man, woman and child for him and herself. No government controls on anything. Libertarians think "society" would take care of itself, like magic. They do believe in a strong military, a strong "justice" system for anyone who is not wealthy, and strong police, who can presumably keep the poor from stealing from the rich or from demanding anything from government. They would end government controls and everything would fall into place with the wealthy exploiting the lower classes--the way god intended it. Lois
There is something very important that Libertarians and hippies have in common that cc pointed out, and that’s the “do what you want mentality”. I think it is pretty obvious that hippies could not have done what they did without there first having been a free country with good policing and plenty of open space and parks. They only clashed with these things when they took it too far and got publicly intoxicated and felt that stealing was justified. I realize they helped to end the Vietnam war, but they did it by manipulating the existing political system, not by breaking commonly accepted laws of decency and good behavior. There is a big difference between civil disobedience and revolution or anarchy.
They share this similarity with communism too. Marx has been criticized because he talked about taking over the means of production, but he didn’t have much to say about building infrastructure. He didn’t have an equivalent for creating capital. This is why America is socialist. It’s the middle road solution to all of this.
I think Libertarianism has the same problem. It’s biggest problem is that they admit the value of some government. They want a national defense and to control interstate commerce. Well, why those two things? Why shouldn’t they have to make deals with every foreign government to make sure their intellectual property is not stolen? Why shouldn’t they have to raise an army if they want to open a factory in Mexico? Obviously, because then they would have a lot less of their so-called personal gains that they could keep.
Anarchy in the closet?
I’m attracted to Libertarianism in a sort of romantic sense, but I can’t find any societies where Libertarianism works in a big way. The main problem with Libertarianism is that it considers the individual to be the keystone of society. This is fundamentally wrong, because the interactions between people are the keystone of society, and it’s not something we can escape.
Another big flaw is the idea of a market that runs itself somehow; no, it can’t. This probably stems from the Libertarian concept that there is an objective (beneficial) order we can tap into.
That said, Libertarianism does have some interesting ideas, and it can be used as a weapon against the current system.
Anarchy in the closet? I'm attracted to Libertarianism in a sort of romantic sense, but I can't find any societies where Libertarianism works in a big way.There aren't any. That should tell you something. This guy disagrees, but my guess is he is not only reaching way back in history, he is stretching the definition]
To me, just getting off reading stuff that a new 'libertarian" "scholar" is spewing out, manipulating the facts, pasting on labels, rather then looking at the substance of an issue, and screaming fraud as often as he can, (one Jose' 'It's a Fraud' Duarte), has got my blood thumping again with his childish self-centered obliviousness to the real physical world, instead substituting some daydream image of reality, in place of rational revaluation. What is libertarianism, if not a dressed up version of the worst of the Hippy generation "all about me being happy" mentality. Accepting all sorts of benefits from society, yet pretending they are islands onto themselves, and owe nothing to no one. Seems to me their spiritual inspiration and brain trust is the juvenile, when not down right infantile, writings of Ayn Rand, the spoiled child that never recovered from the emotional shock of the Bolsheviks' robbing her family of their wealth. (I can sort of relate, given my growing with the story of my quite wealthy Great-grandfather having his textile business and huge estate and fruit tree orchard outside of Budapest (Budakeszi) confiscated during WWII, and the deprivations my mother experienced as a teenager fleeing one impossible situation after another.) It happens. War sucks, but that's no reason to turn your back on society and social structure, or the rational evaluation of information. Escaping to America Ayn discovered the high life again and fell in love with America's fledgling obsession with celebrities, becoming an inspiration for the likes of Warhol I'm sure. Was that a rant, sorry - I was trying to describe what I see when I read/listen to "libertarians" pontificating. What do you think libertarians are all about?A Pew Poll last month confirmed what most of us already know. The results: few libeterians have any idea what the word actually means. Personally, the few people I know calling themselves libeterians are nothing but far right arm chair conservatives wearing tin foil hats who think libeterian makes them sound a bit like a rebel so they like the word. Most actually don't even vote libeterian like in the 2012 Presidential election when vast majority didn't even vote for their candidate.
To me, just getting off reading stuff that a new 'libertarian" "scholar" is spewing out, manipulating the facts, pasting on labels, rather then looking at the substance of an issue, and screaming fraud as often as he can, (one Jose' 'It's a Fraud' Duarte), has got my blood thumping again with his childish self-centered obliviousness to the real physical world, instead substituting some daydream image of reality, in place of rational revaluation. What is libertarianism, if not a dressed up version of the worst of the Hippy generation "all about me being happy" mentality. Accepting all sorts of benefits from society, yet pretending they are islands onto themselves, and owe nothing to no one. Seems to me their spiritual inspiration and brain trust is the juvenile, when not down right infantile, writings of Ayn Rand, the spoiled child that never recovered from the emotional shock of the Bolsheviks' robbing her family of their wealth. (I can sort of relate, given my growing with the story of my quite wealthy Great-grandfather having his textile business and huge estate and fruit tree orchard outside of Budapest (Budakeszi) confiscated during WWII, and the deprivations my mother experienced as a teenager fleeing one impossible situation after another.) It happens. War sucks, but that's no reason to turn your back on society and social structure, or the rational evaluation of information. Escaping to America Ayn discovered the high life again and fell in love with America's fledgling obsession with celebrities, becoming an inspiration for the likes of Warhol I'm sure. Was that a rant, sorry - I was trying to describe what I see when I read/listen to "libertarians" pontificating. What do you think libertarians are all about?A Pew Poll last month confirmed what most of us already know. The results: few libeterians have any idea what the word actually means. Personally, the few people I know calling themselves libeterians are nothing but far right arm chair conservatives wearing tin foil hats who think libeterian makes them sound a bit like a rebel so they like the word. Most actually don't even vote libeterian like in the 2012 Presidential election when vast majority didn't even vote for their candidate. For which we can be eternally grateful. Lois
For which we can be eternally grateful. LoisYup, hold that thought. Though we (I) may have tons of grips about the Democrats - we are stuck with a two party system And had better get out there and vote for them… they may be failing, but they are still the rationalist, as opposed to being lost in the clouds. I believe it's no longer voting for the lesser of two evils - not voting is a resounding yes vote for the clear and present dangers of the unhinged, disconnected Republican/libertarians cavalcade of hubris and self-destructive choices.
For which we can be eternally grateful. LoisYup, hold that thought. Though we (I) may have tons of grips about the Democrats - we are stuck with a two party system And had better get out there and vote for them… they may be failing, but they are still the rationalist, as opposed to being lost in the clouds. I believe it's no longer voting for the lesser of two evils - not voting is a resounding yes vote for the clear and present dangers of the unhinged, disconnected Republican/libertarians cavalcade of hubris and self-destructive choices. Yes, not voting gives tacit approval to the status quo. Anyone who doesn't vote should be held up as an example of a failing system. Sometimes we're better off when the idiots don't vote, though. Lois
I disagree. We should all vote for the most tea party/right wing nutjob we can find. They need to take total control, drive the country into the ground so bad, that everyone, and I mean everyone, can’t even mouth the words “tea party” or “conservative”. It sucks, and it would be very painful for many many people, but that’s the only way I see to rid the US of the disease of conservatism.
Anarchy in the closet? I'm attracted to Libertarianism in a sort of romantic sense, but I can't find any societies where Libertarianism works in a big way. The main problem with Libertarianism is that it considers the individual to be the keystone of society. This is fundamentally wrong, because the interactions between people are the keystone of society, and it's not something we can escape. Another big flaw is the idea of a market that runs itself somehow; no, it can't. This probably stems from the Libertarian concept that there is an objective (beneficial) order we can tap into. That said, Libertarianism does have some interesting ideas, and it can be used as a weapon against the current system.A weapon, yes, a self-defeating one. Lois
That said, Libertarianism does have some interesting ideas, and it can be used as a weapon against the current system.Your complete quote above is thoughtful and thought provoking. I'm curious would you list some of those "interesting ideas" ? it would be fun to see it reduced to it's basics.
Anarchy in the closet? I'm attracted to Libertarianism in a sort of romantic sense, but I can't find any societies where Libertarianism works in a big way. The main problem with Libertarianism is that it considers the individual to be the keystone of society. This is fundamentally wrong, because the interactions between people are the keystone of society, and it's not something we can escape.I dont know much about libertarianism, but isnt that what a good chunk of modern people believe. For example, denying the holocaust is illegal in Europe but legal in the US. I personally know many Americans who would just pull the "freedom of speech" card regardless of how harmful or disastrous their sayings may become http://www.ushmm.org/confront-antisemitism/holocaust-denial-and-distortion On that note, its sad the Elie Wiesel lives in the US. For his sake, one would think that there should be some laws against public holocaust denial.
Anarchy in the closet? I'm attracted to Libertarianism in a sort of romantic sense, but I can't find any societies where Libertarianism works in a big way. The main problem with Libertarianism is that it considers the individual to be the keystone of society. This is fundamentally wrong, because the interactions between people are the keystone of society, and it's not something we can escape.I dont know much about libertarianism, but isnt that what a good chunk of modern people believe. For example, denying the holocaust is illegal in Europe but legal in the US. I personally know many Americans who would just pull the "freedom of speech" card regardless of how harmful or disastrous their sayings may become http://www.ushmm.org/confront-antisemitism/holocaust-denial-and-distortion On that note, its sad the Elie Wiesel lives in the US. For his sake, one would think that there should be some laws against public holocaust denial. We have freedom of speech in the US. No one is prevented from voicing his or her opinion. It's better to have a legal system where people can say anything they wish to say instead of one that shuts down free speech. Shut down speech and you get oppression. Not having a law that prevents people from denying the holocaust has done the US no harm. Intelligence wins out. In the US people are allowed to make fools of themselves vocally. Other people, also with free speech rights, will shout them down. They usually get their comeuppance one way or another. There are laws against actions, not thoughts or spoken words. It would be very dangerous and oppressive to have thought police. Lois
Anarchy in the closet? I'm attracted to Libertarianism in a sort of romantic sense, but I can't find any societies where Libertarianism works in a big way. The main problem with Libertarianism is that it considers the individual to be the keystone of society. This is fundamentally wrong, because the interactions between people are the keystone of society, and it's not something we can escape. Another big flaw is the idea of a market that runs itself somehow; no, it can't. This probably stems from the Libertarian concept that there is an objective (beneficial) order we can tap into. That said, Libertarianism does have some interesting ideas, and it can be used as a weapon against the current system.A weapon, yes, a self-defeating one. LoisYou're only speaking for yourself.
I disagree. We should all vote for the most tea party/right wing nutjob we can find. They need to take total control, drive the country into the ground so bad, that everyone, and I mean everyone, can't even mouth the words "tea party" or "conservative". It sucks, and it would be very painful for many many people, but that's the only way I see to rid the US of the disease of conservatism.:lol: Is this a Liberal being honest?
That said, Libertarianism does have some interesting ideas, and it can be used as a weapon against the current system.Your complete quote above is thoughtful and thought provoking. I'm curious would you list some of those "interesting ideas" ? it would be fun to see it reduced to it's basics.In general, the combination of right wing and left wing concepts is fascinating - although mostly not practical, it seems. Increased personal freedom and less government is attractive, IMO, but few people can actually live that way. Some Libertarian concepts of the environment, e.g. "Georgism" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism are interesting.
In general, the combination of right wing and left wing concepts is fascinating - although mostly not practical, it seems.Yet the key to the economic survival of this country is IMO exactly that, a mixed economy with governmental controls to keep it that way. Instead of being pulled to the wings, e.g. The Tea party we should be working more to the middle. That's how a representative democracy is supposed to work. It's been skewed by the uber wealthy. and dropping all of the past failed economic experiments, Socialism, Communism, Laissez Faire capitalism, and the move to an Oligarchy (most say we already gave one) will help. It also wouldn't hurt to train citizens to know just how their government and it's economic system works. Cap't Jack
The problem with libertarianism is that in order for it to be put into force, democracy would have to be removed. Libertarianism is very unfair to anyone who is not at the top of the economic scale. It is only advantageous to those who have already garnered a great desl of wealth. In a democratic system the people who are not wealthy have as much right to change laws that keep them from being exploited and annihilated as the people at the top who want to maintain a libertarian society and exploit those who have less. How do libertarians think they would prevent the power of the people, which is what democracy is all about, from passing laws and electing people who want social programs and a taxation system that requires the wealthy to be taxed at rates that would create a fairer society?
The only way a libertarian government could survive is if it were a dictatorship, where only wealthy libertarians can affect legislation. Libertarianism is undemocratic and dictatorial. That’s one reason it has never succeeded anywhere in the world. It is blind utopianism.
Lois