Libertarian David Boaz on Obama and McCain

[JohnColt]

fantastic analysis!

[jtizz711]

Scary shit....

[Yanirakarola]

OL DIRTY BASTARD 2012!!!!!

[madderbass]

Fuck the mainstream left and right political mechanism! We need more of a third party to run more in the mainstream as well. It should be libertarianism but maybe the reform party might be a good idea as well. I'm just sick of the mainstream political rhetoric, they're basically saying the same thing right now. It's like a huge stalemate.

[Libertarian87R]

I'm from Poland, but I really hope that Ron Paul would achieve some great success. Death of socialism and interventionism are my biggest dreams.

Freedom or death!

Libertarian 4 life.

[RepublicanAtheists]

libertarians are the best

[undeadarsenal]

@RepublicanAtheists only 42 thumbs up? -_-' come on we can do better than that...

[Silam81]

That national service program gives me the creeps. Sounds like a compulsory draft going by another name.

Another war against individual rights.

[gregvs3]

Interesting. Most of the anti-big government rhetoric I heard railed hard against Obama. It really comes as no surprise to me that Mccain was somewhat similar.

The problem comes from the fact that the parties indicate they are different, when in many respects they are not. They are both to the right of the political spectrum - that is imposing regulations and measures to keep the status quo in power [banks, insurance companies, etc.]. To them this status quo is more important than liberty.

[Ashiman12]

I agree with him on both candidates. America picked Obama, so now it's time to see what he does. I don't like what I'm seeing so far.

[shanklinmike]

Boaz is the MAN!!!!!

[jankren]

Im a supporter of Mike Gravel.

However, it is a fact Obama is the lesser evil of the two candidates. Americans have made the right choice.

Anyway, LIBERTARIANISM NOW!

[garett69]

The fact that anyone would vote for a "lesser of two evils" speaks loudly to the problems with democracy in the US. It amazes me how so many people can go to the polls with such a philosophy and continue to sleep at night. If only people would drop this idea that they should vote for who they dislike the least and start voting on their principles then we would start to see *real* change.

[jankren]

Its called minimizing losses.

As I said I support Mike Gravel but he didnt make it so instead I need to make sure the guy who will create more damages doesnt win.

[urkle06]

while we may not be perfect i'd much rather live in america than france...(yes, have lived in both).

funny how all the doom n gloom libs say capitalism is failed while we are the most powerful county in the world. how the hell do you think we got here?

if you don't like freedom move to france and quite fucking with our future.

[whiff1962]

We are now the most powerful because of our military.

[CountArtha]

Not really. The reason we can have a powerful military is because we own 1/5 of the world's capital.

[whiff1962]

It can be argued that every Empire that has come and gone has had a military to back up its interests abroad, and this is no less true with the U.S. You are free to disagree with this notion on any level, but look at the number of military bases the U.S. still maintains abroad.

[CountArtha]

I'm not disagreeing - our navy in particular has a lot to do with our superpower status. It's just that that wouldn't be possible if it weren't for our prosperity at home. Let's not forget that!

[whiff1962]

That is a tautological argument: that our capital makes for our super power status. Our foreign policy and realpolitik is what makes us a great power, not our capital per se.

[CountArtha]

I'd say our arguments meet halfway. Neither can be brought to bear without the other.

[whiff1962]

I get so tired of ignorant Americans always using France as an example of failed Socialism. News flash: France is not a failed Socialist system, America's capitalist system is, and needs repairing. Underread, undereducated Americans really are not the source of credibility.

[Aristotle100]

France is not a failed Socialist system, America's capitalist system is....

This is not a failure of capitalism it is a failure of corporatism.

[garett69]

While I do agree that our current economic situation is not the failure of laissez faire capitalism (we haven't seen laissez faire in a long time, if ever at all), I wouldn't call it a failure of corporatism. I think that corporatism is succeeding wonderfully at doing what it is designed to do. Which is to move all of the world's hard assets into the hands of the ultra rich. We can also thank the fiat dollar, fractional reserve banking and central banking for aiding and abetting in this crime.

[Aristotle100]

SO basically I'm saying this to you whiff1962 "Defining Capitalism; you're doing it wrong."

[whiff1962]

Yes, I see your point made about corporatism being the root problem. Still, I think that that capitalism and corporatism are really intricately intertwined. What happens when a male Mantis looses its head?

[enomarekim]

According to the U.S. constitution, corporatism is illegal. Bush needs to be impeached for being a criminal, and allowing these two to become intertwined. If the constitution were followed, we would not be having any artificial manipulation of the economy

[garett69]

Corporatism has nothing to do with capitalism. There are a couple of issues at play: 1) corporations are legally given all of the benefit of profit without the burden of accountability and 2) government has too much control over the markets, which leaves it open to corporate lobbying and influence. In a truly free market, monopolies could not exist because they would not have the support of government. Consequently everyone would reap the benefits introduced by strong competition in the markets.

[whiff1962]

I must aver that my background in economics and political science is unreliable. However, I am of the opinion-from my scant understanding-that an unfettered free market would not necessarily translate into greater good for "everyone". I have recently completed my reading of Naomi Klein's more recent offering, concerning Friedmanite economics(University of Chicago shock economics) and its complicity in destabilizing otherwise flourishing economies, and it was a most sobering read.

[garett69]

I haven't read Klein's work so I can't comment directly. Yet I assume "Friedmanite" refers to Milton Friedman. I would strongly recommend reading his work for some balance. The evidence against interventionism and protectionism is stronger today than ever, considering it's all we've had since 1913. Deregulating does mean short-term suffering for the small groups who benefit from the regulations. However, it's the utilitarian view of focusing on short-term consequences that is so detrimental.

[whiff1962]

"Deregulating does mean short-term suffering for the small groups who benefit from the regulations."

I likewise would urge you to round out your weltanshauung by reading Klein's much acclaimed book.

There has been much suffering in the world because of the well intentioned-giving the benefit of the doubt for some- economic transformation sought out by Friedmans acolytes.

[whiff1962]

Many coutries, notably in south America, which in the 1950s and 1960s, had enviable social infrastructures-and who, to the dismay of plutocrats, and foreign investor, were nationalized-which were to become the proverbial golden goose. I am not inclined to read up on a libertarian economic theory akin to shock and awe...very devastating

[enomarekim]

exactly, failed "socialism." Bush tried corporate socialism and negativley affected the economy. Is that the kind of economics they teach in french schools, because if so, you are extremely under read. What kind of warped view of history is being taught in french schools? Capitalism does not fail because it is always moving towards a more perfect structure. On the other hand, socialism and structured economies do not work because of the chaos theory.

[Spazman173]

I honestly think the Libertarian party is going to replace the Republican party in the next 20 years if the Republicans don't get take the reigns away from the neo-cons.

[hayesism]

Hmm, interesting thought, Spaz. I suppose that's pretty feasible. Middle of last century the Republican and Democratic parties basically just switched sides to the point that little had changed apart from the names of the liberal and conservative parties. Could be that the Libertarians will become the reasonable-minded Republicans of 20 years ago but with a different name.

[TonyaTko]

Nice Video!

I did one too about this whole debacle. I will send it to you. Tell me what you think.

-TonyaTko

[hayesism]

I'd never heard of Boaz before watching this, but dude, I am on all fours for this man.

[eshfemme]

Very good critiques of both Obama and McCain. Even though I support Obama, I'm very sympathetic to third parties and I kinda wish that the ridiculousness of the two party system might have room for them so that maybe there wouldn't be such immature antics. We'll see how things go this year though.

[kerouacbukowski]

badass...boaz is the man, thanks

[FreeAgain2]

Neither Boaz or Barr will do a single thing in DC. Neither can pull the levers of power. Neither is on the inside.

Don't waste your vote.

Would you vote for MICKEY MOUSE? about the same chance of winning.

[texanpilot23]

the libertarian party is on the rise and 8-20 years it will become a major party or it will replace the republican party all together. neo-con ideology that runs the republican party will be out dated soon as my generation gets older and more powerful and the older generations move on. the gop will be forced to change to a RON PAUL type ideology and if it does not all conservatives will shift to the LP. LP/ron paul are the only true agents for change. Obama nor the gop have ne plans 4 change

[0lord0kinbote0]

"So you are just going to post some vague claims and still claim that there is some barrier to being able to pass progressive legislation.

Cite something specific."

Lol, such a statement is the big hurdle for every libertarian.

Hint; american libertarian party and cato are nothing more than a lobbying front and neocon think-tank. they can only speak in evangelical and rhetorical methods.

Here is another fun thing to do; Ask a libertarian what is wrong with the libertarian ideology.

[goldoche800]

WOW! I'm a canadian libertarian who'd rather have hands in his pockets than eyes in his bed...And this guy is the shizzit! NICE! Go Boaz!

[Evilspock666]

I hate to say it, but Mr. Boaz makes imformative arguments to both sides. To be honest, neither McCain or Obama will bring any real change to America, since both are to use to politics as usual in DC. I love this country, but most of the world hates it. We need a leader that worries more on this country; instead of being a "World police". All I am saying is this: Before you vote, do some research; do not let the media decide for you.

[rottenegg0]

christianlonelyheart.

forumotion.

net

on yahoo!

[augustin09]

aahh go fuck urself McCain lovers

[TimeWarp66]

As to that last bit: That is not what McCain thinks he is, don't over analyze it. McCain IS the best choice of the two. Far from perfect, but never the less i'll gladly take him over Barack Obama's socialist self.

McCain 08!

[DoctorMurky]

BOB BARR!

[MooseOfReason]

Barr of soap! He'll clean up Washington!

[side1981]

Please list the specific policies Obama endorses that make him a socialist.

[OgeronimonominoregO]

"Please list the specific policies Obama endorses that make him a socialist."

Universal healthcare, for one. But they're all socialists, so it hardly matters.

[MooseOfReason]

He supports "Universal pre-K".

And his website says: "Obama will also provide affordable and high-quality child care".

Child care provided by the government. I think France has that.

[GrownupPhan]

I'm not what most would consider a Libertarian myself, though I agree with some libertarian ideas. But for those who are "all in" I'd say McCain definitely has to be the worse of the two major party candidates.

[side1981]

Libertarian and neocons are exactly what is wrong with this country. I wish this country was smart enough to elect people as progressive of Ralph Nader, I personally am voting for Obama in hopes that he can help undo some of the Reagan revolution and begin us on more progressive path and be more like western Europe

[JohnR22926]

side1981: why don't you move to Europe? I'm not being snide; I mean it. Everything you desire and want is there. Go get it. Or if it's too far, move to Canada...it's basically the same thing.

European style socialism would be a disaster in this country. Our culture is fundamentally different than Europe and our federal govt (the civil service responsible for providing services to the people) is grossly incompetent compared to European models.

[side1981]

Please explain how culture is an impassable barrier.

[JohnR22926]

side: Many people are unaware of how important culture is. IMO culture is the foundation on which everything else (laws/political parties, etc.) is built. Culture is a nation/people's core beliefs, myths, prejudices, etc. And there are many, many moving parts to it which make it difficult to understand and virtually impossible to influence. Like trying to control the weather...simply too complex and not fully understood.

Read up on culture. Experts believe it's very difficult to control.

[side1981]

So you are just going to post some vague claims and still claim that there is some barrier to being able to pass progressive legislation.

Cite something specific.

[JohnR22926]

side: Fine. IMO our culture is such that we have a poltical mentality that's Center-Right. This explains why progressive legislation has been stymied time and again. How else to explain the programs that every european country has (the cultures our nation grew out of and that we most closely resemble)...but that we continue to resist? Here are examples:

-No universal health care.

-extreme gun ownership laws.

-high levels of homophobia and racism.

-our isolationist streak.

[theguybehindtheguys]

JohnR22026, gov't has forced managed care on us and it only benefits middle people. we need a free market solution, not socialism.

gun ownership is part of the constitution. it is in place to allow us to fight a tyrannical govt if need be. ak47's are perhaps a different conversation.

Europe, not racist? having lived in europe, the US is more open to diff. races/ethn.s/relig.s than europe!

isolationism is noninterventionism + protectionism.

protectionism = bad. nonintervention = good.

[JohnR22926]

theguy: I agree with everything you said. My earlier post was just explaining why we continue to reject european style socialism. Leftists think it's because we're stupid and because the Reps have effective propaganda. The truth is we reject it because we fully understand what it is and we don't trust our govt to handle it.

BTW, I do think the US is more racist (at least with respect to blacks) and homophobic than europe. But we're making huge progress here and I'm optimistic.

[theguybehindtheguys]

got it - i shoulda gone back more re: comments. there's still a lot of racism here for sure, but i think we do it a lot better than europe on the whole.

when i came back from living in eastern europe, i flew into JFK and was surrounded by asians, africans, jews, muslims, and everything else! only here can we 'peacefully' coexist...

-V (son of an immigrant with a multiracial family)

[whiff1962]

I generally do not agree with much of American Libertarian's(modern engenderment)political and economic tenents, save for the notion of greater personal freedom(at what cost?). I am circumspect about a govt. that is little more than a paper tiger, as some hardcore Libertarians would have it. We have government for a reason, and regardless of what role it plays out, it is still an important body.

[happymyster]

The greater personal freedom comes at the cost of providing for ourselves, bearing our own burdens and living within our means. Gee, what a concept.

[Aristotle100]

lol I know what a revolutionary concept.

[Keylimedelight]

Good comentary.

[humanist7117]

Baloney!

[farmboy1008]

variablast, first u say that u think government without taxes is ineffective but then say we should leagalize pot its our chioce. More government will give u less chioces not more. Any argument for more government is an argument already used by the likes france and other socialistic countries. What u want is socialism which is a proven failure. We are a great country because we are rewarded with making good decisions on our own and not because the government rewards mediacrocy.

[farmboy1008]

If u look at the history behind socialism u will see that these countries turned this way when the country was going through tough times and one or more parties use this to as a platform for more government. Im not a big McCain fan but oboma is scary. if they had youtube in the late 1800s u would no why because his argument are all the same used by parties to what inevetibly bogged down almost every european country. US and UK are the least taxed countries in world and the best.

[farmboy1008]

Do u want to be like France?

[1samothrace77]

actually, uk is a socialist country at least economically.

[GOPsithlord]

In less than 4 minutes, David Boaz has stated why I am not engaged in this election, but entirely unenthused over my candidate as well as the opposition. I don't like the feeling, but there it is. Very eloquent.

[meandogsarescary]

vote third party then

[BadAzVLo]

YES!  This guy is hilarious

[Rahab111222]

Libretarians FTW~!

[Plutonwolf]

As a stand alone, I have no problem with legalization, your body, your choice and quite possibly, evolution in action. Prostitution? Tricky, real tricky. Many checks need to be in place to safeguard against indentured service.

[Plutonwolf]

Lots of guns, everyone has a few, no taxes, no regulatory agencies, totally open trade and of course, legal dope. Yeah, great party platform.