oh and there are there is the other type of libertarian which we can call either anarcho-capitalists or anti-statists but all that stuff is still pretty much new and isn't really much different than voluntarism. Don't ask me the differences, I'm bias and will tell you anti-statists just hate the state because its called a state.
Libertarianism is a paradigm. Instead of left, center and right Authoritarianism, there should be left, center and right Libertarianism. There exists such animals as Libertarian Socialism or Capitalism. Libertarianism is not an economic system. It is a liberty-based social philosophy which serves as the basis for the foundation of a society.
Objectivism is the veneration of selfishness, greed, ego and property. Ayn Rand rejected Libertarianism.
Libertarians have No knowledge of the Social Justice Struggles, Labor Battles or Health & Safety Strides. All they know is “Free Market”.
Lack of Government Regulations is the reason we are in this mess. Counties with more Socialist policies, like European Nations and Canada have the Best Schools, Best Healthcare, Best Labor Protection, and the Least Poverty, while producing the strongest middle class!! They have highly regulated markets which reduces corruption.
@RBLA818 Well interesting battle freedom vs restriction or freedom vs fear.. You want freedom but you don't trust your fellow man nor your trust in your own ability to build your own empire with out the governments help.. One side wants to be left alone and the other side wants to be protected. We human beings can be very interesting and complex sometimes.. We can all win at the sametime if we stop listening to the control freaks and the ones that want Empire rather than freedom
@grownman455 One side wants to live in the Wild West, the other side wants to live in a Civilizes Society!
READ: Counties with more Socialist policies, like European Nations and Canada have the Best Schools, Best Healthcare, Best Labor Protection, and the Least Poverty, while producing the strongest middle class!! They have highly regulated markets which reduces corruption.
@RBLA818 Wow strong and so much passion.. What does them living in the Wild West have to do with you ?? Do you really believe you have to stop the so called other side to get what you want ?? That is the problem with people in America they believe in this Good VS Evil thing that hollywood sold them haha. "I have to fight evil!!!!!!!" haha When its really not that serious.. Both sides can win how about instead of fighting with the other side find away to get what you want without a battle.
Libertarians who disregard social justice, etc., are essentially frustrated conservatives who don't want to pay taxes.
The right to life includes education, health care and freedom from poverty. But these are not federal issues to be paid for by theft of property such as income tax. These require local solutions with local funding. An objective set of laws with emphasis on individual rights would be implemented to curtail corruption (theft) with the threat of prison terms.
@GeneralGrove 'Wouldn't it be nice if everyone just chipped in on a local level' yeah, and it'll work right up until Walkmart turns up, and undercuts all the local businesses prices then gives nothing back to the local community.
.
Corporations are required by law to put profit above all other motives - if you give them the choice of not paying anything they won't - which is why Federal taxes are required. Many people are similarly selfish.
@neverfearchrisishere Libertarianism is still just an idea. Actually, if the Federal Reserve was taxed at 0.006% and provided the US gov't with no interest loans (as per the constitution), income tax wouldn't be necessary.
@GeneralGrove Or you could just nationalize it outright. All interest paid by the government on it's loans to the fed would be returned to it in dividends (well a tiny bit less given some expenses on the part of the fed).
@GeneralGrove 100% agreed. i personally think "free" health care( would have to be paid by taxes) would be a good thing. but its not a federal responsibility and should be handled at State Level.
I am an Independent Libertarian. I practice Disclosure and Transparency, so people on planet Earth are encouraged to Google or use their favorite to research Max Rafael Waller.
I hate to spoil the fun of the idea of FREEDOM, FREEDOM is only possible when the sun spits on us and cuts our ELECTRICITY from us FOR GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD.
Because the people who view them selves as LEADERS are pretty stupid in regards to the whole of existence.
In their eyes Nothing else matters but THEIR OWN FREEDOM.
INREGARDS TO ISRAEL, MY family member had a COUNTRY 8 and a half thousand years ago should i go and start wars because i want that land BACK.
@Spacew12 Nope i was talking about the surge that happened in the late 18 when all lines of morse code were burnt buy the solar flare. if that same magnitude were to hit us TODAY we would be sent back to the stone age.
In regards to israel i was being sarchastic, ONE day you will understand. Because of land that no one will end up inheriting people MUST DIE because of human GREED.
Does it not piss you off that the demons are running a mock, only because WE ARE STANDING BY
@TwinFlameify a solar flare is really no more than a temporary setback, although more densely populated areas will probably experience a bit of rioting. There are lots of places that hardly use any electronics at all using technologies far beond the stone age.
I dont really consider Israel to be important. If they were not fighing over Israel they would be fighting over something else.
as for that bit about demons, that fight is not for us to fight, stay away from them.
Firstly NO ELECTRICITY NO GAS NO WATER BEING PUMPED in first 2 weeks half the population will die from thurst, 2 months after that for those who live in suburbia they will parish from malnutrition.
NO BUSINESS WILL BE OPEN. "that would be the last thing on peoples mind.
No hospitals as there would be no electricity
Who knows the complications the surge will put on the nuclear industry.
My friend you really have not grasped the whole situation.
@Spacew12 Yes that is true for all those who live on large acreage of lands but dont forget over 90% of the population depends on supermarkets and the whole infrastructure of the food industry.
Of course there will be survivors but not as many as you think. Depending where you are situated and wether the platonic plates move and buy what magnetude.
This planet will shake of the virus.
I personally am set.
I cant say the same for the suburban civilization who are cramped like sheep
@Spacew12 Not to mention all the diseases that will engulf the planet as there would be no one to perform the funerals as all will be in a state os panic...
Get you some decent guns, some ammo, and a product place to farm. Then, you might take a minute to look back to the times of fair vote counting, and politics based on verbal promises...
A real Libertarian respects other's rights to hold their own opinion(s) - right or wrong; and doesn't degrade his or her argument by falling into the kindergarten trap of name calling.
If you cannot say: "I disagree with what you have said, but I will defend to my death your right to say it", then you're not a Libertarian.
Socialists assume the worst in people, so they have to be controlled. Libertarians see the best. So if you are screaming about "those" people, you're not a Libertarian.
@GeneralGrove That is just simply being a human being that understands freedom and cares about humanity three things most of the world has forgot. Honestly that should go for everyone not just Libertarians but sadly you guys are the only ones left that believe in it.. People are so busy stuck in their own interest, their own one sided religions and their own self righteousness they forgot about what it means to be a human being... I have not once heard anybody talk about loving each other.
Lao Tzu was probably the first philosopher who wrote about the absolute necessity of liberty, said, about 2,500 years ago (roughly translated), that any ruler should rule without ruling and to let people go about their affairs and they will find more happiness and love.
The Left/Right Paradigm is FAKE.There is no left and right and people who place themselves into one of the other camps is very dillusional and needs to be ignored because they are unaware at how both these parties are of the same elk and they are playing with the American people. Every election cycle the coins flips to the other party and the same policies only intensify, meanwhile the sheep are jumping from election cycle to the next with false hope of some politician who will save us all. Plz
beware! as soon as a movement that threatens the ruling elite begins to gain momentum. they will co-opt it-or try to. the tea party is already co-opted at the national level...ex. sarah palin. anyway people need to amp up their discernment or we will have another shill that began as a legit movement to break the elite's control of society. the elite will wear any mask & espouse any platform, but in truth they are sophists. those with discernment & true principles can see through the deception!
@PatriotTrueAmerican Employment is the IMMORAL THEFT of the true value of someone's labor, otherwise known as "profit." Our society is a HUGE compromise between those on the one side who lose liberty by being told what to do, when to do it and how to do it by having their hand forced with the backing of government force to accept unfavorable employment contracts, and taxes which take something back from those on the other side who benefit the most from these unfair arrangements.
WND looks to me like a flaming neo-con rag and therefore their emails end up in my spam box. I feel like they're trying to define libertarianism with their own brand of fascism and even when, on occasion, they get certain things right, I no longer trust them.
@riethc Not all Libertarians are like that. I myself have some Libertarian ideals. I think the major flaw of anyone is that they categorize themselves as something when they don't fully agree with it. I think it's a bad idea to just say you're this even though you have some ideas that are from a different part of the spectrum.
@Trickishismael360 Of course we all have some "libertarian" ideals, in that we want more freedoms rather than less, but Libertarianism just hands power over to the rich all the more. If the currency collapses than it'll be about gold wealth, and who has the most gold? THE BANKSTERS!
@riethc And that's where my problem lies here. A lot of these guy like the Kochs and the Tea Party call themselves Libertarians but all they talk about is about economy. I mean if they truly were then they would fight to legalize drugs, Prostitution, gay marriage, and are for Pornography. But these guys talk about banning all those things and the only thing they like is guns and Corporatism.
@Trickishismael360 You were defending pure Libertarianism, against the Kochs and Tea Party brand of Libertariansim, were you not?
"And that's where my problem lies here. A lot of these guy like the Kochs and the Tea Party call themselves Libertarians but all they talk about is about economy."
@riethc The point is that labels don't always talk about the ideals. You can't make assumptions on a person's ideals if they call themselves Libertarians. I'm actually more progressive than Libertarian. The problem we see today is that people say that they are conservative, Liberal, Libertarian, or moderate but act a totally different way.
@ImAznnn That's essentially how it would work. The only powers in markets are gov'ts and capitalists. Don't say the consumer has power, please. They consume as they are trained to consume.
@riethc Well that's the current situation under a capitalist society. If we were to establish a TRUE socialist society then the conditions would differ.
@ImAznnn Socialism, as in a government that plays a big role in people's lives. Government safety nets, regulations, infrastructure developments, etc. As an ideology, government concerned with well-being of the people.
I don't equate socialism with communism, if that's what you mean.
@riethc Well people often think socialism or communism means there is a centralization of power. It seems like you're defining Fascism. Socialism (from what I studied) is when the workers control everything not the government; the government is a tool for the workers not the other way around.
So to go back to my point, the people within a socialist society would have power to bring change since they control what goes on in society.
@riethc Socialism and capitalism are incompatible, however, socialism and free MARKETS work. Capitalism requires privatized ownership on the means of production while socialism requires private 'property' be abolished, however, markets and money do not disappear.
@Christ724 "Socialism and capitalism are incompatible, however, socialism and free MARKETS work. Capitalism requires privatized ownership on the means of production while socialism requires private 'property' be abolished, however, markets and money do not disappear."
@ImAznnn I'm talking the power of 'owning' the property (I hope we're on the same page here) by this I mean the way a business owner 'owns' the factory. These property rights, according to some socialists, should be replaced with something along the lines of 'possession rights'
@ImAznnn Well these socialists view 'private property' as state-protected monopolies of certain objects or privileges which are used to control and exploit others. "Possession," on the other hand, is ownership of things that are not used to exploit others (e.g. a car, a refrigerator, a toothbrush, etc.)." which in turn means that the 'possession' of an object is dependent on its use. Everyone owns things 'collectively' however not everything gets 'used' collectively.
@Christ724 It seems like if a stable socialist society is established then people can "possess" anything as the problem with exploitation would be mostly abolished. People would be too busy trying to fulfill their intrinsic needs rather than trying to take advantage of others to fulfill their materialistic needs.
Of course there will still be some people who still aim for profit but their negativity would be strictly limited by the government.
@ImAznnn That's what Democratic Socialists (not to be confused with Social Democrats) hope for. Those who seek to 'profit' and exploit others can be countered by the government (as a collection federalized unions or communes) whose delegates are directly voted in by the people. In a market socialist economy people have a lot easier access to quality goods but some can have more than others, this is perfectly fine, so long as it is not used to exploit other people
@Christ724 Not to mention, the irony being, that under this idea of socialism, the market would be much freer than the market we currently have today. Anyone can become a self-employed taxi driver or start a farm to help yourself and your family (and others if wishing to make a profit) if they wish without much government 'regulation' (most regulation is on the behalf of major corporations anyway, like how government regulation works in favor of corporate farms)
@ImAznnn That's the thing, it will depend on each cooperative. Some cooperatives believe that every worker be paid the same and according to how many hours worked while others think that some people deserve to be paid more. Of course the amount one receives in wages is decided by the workers themselves (democratically) and can range very much from co-op to co-op.
@Christ724 I was thinking of a equal wage for everyone in society and everyone would be paid through the government. This would not only guide people to go for their intrinsic desires but it would also make the game fair for everyone as "handicaps" are not put upon a person with a "lower" position.
@ImAznnn Alexander Berkman's take on it: "Personal possession remains only in the things you use. Thus, your watch is your own, but the watch factory belongs to the people. Land, machinery, and all other public utilities will be collective property, neither to be bought nor sold. Actual use will be considered the only title -- not to ownership but to possession."
Capitalism has become a sort of antisocial religion to some, materialists need shiny stuff to show off their "values", because they have little experience of real values and life. People use stuff to show how cool, rich, beautiful, smart, better, arrogant they are when this has little to zero impact on their personality. Even a rich asshole is an asshole and these people will only rarely be remembered in history, except for the biggest psychopaths of them.
@anon3560 The markets determine whether wars are fought and I like how your myth of freedom in the markets is lifting the 10 million east Africans that are currently dying of starvation.
Property Rights? That's is important, but the right to privacy, The right to protect yourself, to lie or deceive. The Right to Travel or migrate, to learn, and to teach the Right to Conceal, The Right to flee, The Right to Gather, The right to steal and right to protect yourself from thieves. The right to be aware, watch, see, hear,look, and react. These are the rights given from God to naturally to the birds. If humans does not have these rights, he is less than an animal.
To sum up the issue, is corporations have lobbyists that give money to congressman. If they don't accept that money they won't be elected. People vote for the best ad campaign, and generally don't seek any information outside the easily accessible propaganda. Congressman don't need to serve the interests of their constituents only the corporations who fund their ad campaigns. Most voters believe that the democrats and republicans have real ideologies. We live in a fascist country, period.
@Ohrela But I don't believe that people vote for the best ad campaign. That's letting voters off the hook. What people are really voting for is to have the government act as their agent in crime. For instance, people like their SS even though it's stolen loot. People find stealing repugnant but if the government does it for them, they can pretend to still be good people.
@pak88xbl assuming what you're saying is true, so how does libertarianism deal with what you clearly are suggesting is human nature? if people are so craven & criminal by nature, how the fuck is NOT regulating their interactions going to help?
@pak88xbl I agree with you, and the citizens of this country turning a blind eye to the evil that is done in the name of their country or choosing to be ignorant because it is easy, is the same as actively participating in my opinion. I know my own short comings in life so I try to be forgiving of those who are asleep by choice, and place the blame on those who confuse them and are close to the roots. You are right to me though.
lol wow, you're a real thinker aren't you. in order to "prove" a trojan horse you'd have to let it cause whatever destruction it's going to cause first. the whole point of the analogy is to AVOID the massive threat to democracy that paul represents.
& i don't like obama either, but the idiotic "anything is better than what we have" argument is morally retarded.
a friendly word of advice, avoid politics. & try not having an opinion. & if you must have one, try to avoid sharing it.
Libertarian is the height of selfishness. If Libertarian-ism was followed through time we would have no civilization. Libertarian-ism is a dream for the selfish, something that would never work. History proves that people will do the worst without rule or law or regulation. A Libertarian has to purposely ignore the nature of man to continue their beliefs. Ayn Rand was a sociopath and following her makes you one too.
@jw12yrsctch No, it is the vestiges of libertarianism that has created our modern age of plenty. The free markets and personal liberties have freed us from the crushing poverty, disease and starvation of the Dark Ages. Greed is good because if our well-being depended on being charitable towards each other... we'd still be living in the Dark Ages.
@pak88xbl Liberalism brought forth the age of enlightenment, those that know how to read and do so would know that. Don't try to revise history with someone that reads. Greed has brought us to where we are now. The past 100 years has been driven by imperialism and greed. Greed drives imperialism, without one there isn't the other. Common sense must be avoided at all cost to be a libertarian. History must be avoided as well, or revised to fit you beliefs as you have done.
@jw12yrsctch No, CLASSICAL liberalism brought the age of enlightenment. Classical liberalism is essentially modern libertarianism and has very little to do with modern liberalism which is more akin to Marxism. And no, the last 100 years have been driven by corrupted *government* and crony capitalism. The blame falls on government; not free markets or capitalism.
@pak88xbl Corporations aren't involved in capitalism, that's new....revising history leads to libertarian-ism. Corporations aren't to blame for anything, not moving jobs out of the country(that's the gubmens fault), not at fault for buying elections and politicians(that's the gubmens fault). Crony capitalism IS capitalism. But then, where is capitalism in our constitution? Liberalism hasn't changed, peoples views toward it have. Don't try change what a libertarian is. You are Ayn Rand.
@jw12yrsctch Corporations aren't involved in capitalism? That makes no sense. Crony capitalism is not capitalism. Crony capitalism is a product of a corrupted government. Without the collusion of politicians, corporations would be forced to compete honestly in the market place. And calling me Ayn Rand is flattering but I'll never come close to her intellect.
@pak88xbl 'And calling me Ayn Rand is flattering but I'll never come close to her intellect." and now that I know Im talking to someone so simple minded I can end this conversation knowing you'll never get any point broader than would fit the tip of a needle."corporations would be forced to compete honestly in the market place' so you believe in a heavily regulated market...that's not capitalism.
@jw12yrsctch Regulation is immoral because it presumes guilt. In a free market, if a corporation commits fraud or violates the terms of agreement for services or products it provides, a moral and uncorrupted government would permit victims to seek justice. Crony capitalism allows ethically challenged business people to enlist the force of government to essentially commit crimes legally. And just how much of Rand have you read? Or are you basing your opinion on what others have said?
@pak88xbl you keep saying crony capitalism as if it is different to capitalism. Your whole theory is based on a false pretense. And Ayn Rand lived off the government in her old age going against everything she claimed to believe in.
@jw12yrsctch "you keep saying crony capitalism as if it is different to capitalism..." Yes, because it is different. Crony capitalism is empowered by corrupt government. Capitalism is simply allowing people to freely exchange value (goods and services for money). Crony capitalism means that a corporation can bribe a politician into doing their bidding like creating regulations to prevent competition. We have crony capitalism today... a corruption of capitalism.
@dysesthesiaAethiopi1 Sadly, there has never existed a free market economy to my knowledge because the temptation to use government force immorally has been too strong for people to resist. But should We the People have a sudden attack of scruples, we could create such an economy. Admittedly, it's a long shot.
@jw12yrsctch No. I admit my beliefs are impossible so long as we have a corrupt electorate (of which I assume you are one). The government we have is reflection of the will of the people. If We the People are corrupt, there is no hope because any form of government we have (like the one we have now) will also be corrupt.
@pak88xbl Give and example of this golden age when crony capitalism never existed? What successful society has implemented the hyper laissez faire economic panacea/policies you espouse?
It's so easy to pontificate on the benefits of a system that has no history of delivering any positive outcomes to a majority of people.
@dysesthesiaAethiopi1 Before the US Constitution, there had never been a constitutional republic... What's your point? The issue is one of morality. Capitalism embodies the principles of freedom as Jefferson eloquently described as our, "unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Capitalism simply stated is a separation of Economy and State.
@pak88xbl North Korea and Iran are republics as well and america had a constitution while black people were slaves and denied citizenship up until around 50 yrs ago. So what's the point you trying to make?
@dysesthesiaAethiopi1 Huh? You made a point that there'd had never been a successful capitalistic nation in history as some kind of refutation of capitalism. My point was that there'd also never been a constitutional republic before the US.... so based on your logic the US shouldn't exist... get it? Just because there has never been a truly uncorrupted capitalistic society doesn't mean it wouldn't be successful. What's slavery have to do with anything?
@jw12yrsctch "And Ayn Rand lived off the government in her old age going against everything she claimed to believe in." Why would Rand live off the government when she was a hugely successful writer? Maybe you have proof? But you didn't respond to my question... Have you actually read any Rand yourself or are you basing you opinion secondhand? If the latter, you need to do some reading before you judge her or her ideas.
@pak88xbl so she didn't take SS? look it up, but you probably don't know how to do research, that's why you follow Psycho Rand.....you are being taken for a ride. but don't fuck up the country while you are on your ride.
@jw12yrsctch "but you probably don't know how to do research..." Attacking me is not an argument. I don't really care if she accepted SS... she probably viewed it as the government returning some of the loot they stole from her. My guess is that she paid WAY more in taxes than she might have gotten from the government. And again, you are being evasive. Have you actually read any of Rand's books? If not, you're attacking her out of ignorance.
@p though most people are introduced to ayn rand in high school (& outgrow the juvenile infatuation by sophomore year of college) i have never read one of them, nor have i ever been interested. & i can say with absolute certainty that she was an unconscionable poseur. how can i say that without ever having read one of silly anti-civilization screeds to selfishness & greed? i've heard her positions on the israel/palestine problem from her mouth (easily found on yutube). she was a racist savage.
@jw12yrsctch "Liberalism hasn't changed, peoples views toward it have." Again, that makes no sense. The modern day liberal has almost nothing in common with classical liberals. If not, today's liberals would be outraged at how much the government has strayed from the Constitution... but it's libertarians who are outraged.
@pak88xbl most libertarians i see promote policies that ultimately lead to plutocracy and monopolies subverting the greater freedom democracy is supposed to offer for all. Most seem to interpret libertarianism with he liberty to become a tyrant. At least that would be the consequence of the Tea party and the economical policies.
@annata12 Freedom can only be subverted with the complicity of the government. Even a business monopoly has no Power over you that you don't voluntarily grant it through some form of agreement. The Tea Party is not really libertarian. I see them as more conservative. There's overlap in that they claim to want small government but conservatives (like liberals) still want to use the coercive force of government to solve social problems.
@pak88xbl I agree in essence but some social issues can and must be tackled by the government, those things we can only do together as a society, most libertarians i see seem to interprete it as being entirely selfish and not owing their freedoms and success to the opportunities only a society that cooperates can offer in the first place! You can only create a true libertarian society if you apply the Rawlsian veil of ignorance, since success stands totally on it's own achievements
Names any social issue that must be provided with theft, kidnapping and murdering of those who do not comply with extortion to fund this system...name one.
@annata12 Well, I would challenge the notion that there are *any* social issues requiring government intervention. What you'll find is that one way or another, the government makes things worse (unintended consequences). But greed is good, selfishness is good... so long as no one is harmed. Our modern age of plenty is a direct consequence of greed in that people want to make money and get rich. If they do it honestly, we all benefit.
@pak88xbl Rational self interest doesn't preclude a better future for everyone, it encourages it. The better the whole of society is off, the more freedoms and opportunities everyone has to invent and create, the better of are those who are already rich. If the government fulfills it's role as sheriff and not as the whore of corporations, that would be preferencial, but there is also no instance where smaller government doesn't also lead to corporations running the show!
@annata12 It shouldn't matter if corporations become successful... even become monopolies. If the government exists only to protect my individual rights and not permit corporations, or unions, or whatever group to violate my rights, then I'm not concerned. Government today empowers would-be crooks. And regulation is simply a way to make the playing field uneven such that the highest bidders get to be successful and the upstarts get to be losers. Ultimately, voters are the crooks.
@annata12 but is dependent on inner social peace, educated and healthy workforece, readily available and maintained infrastructure, etc, Jobs that are less paid but have to be done. The tea party in my opinion is not libertarian but selfish and it's not rational self interest, but the kind that lead to societies like Somalia. Linertarianism in my opinion does not include the right to screw your fellow citizens.
Ps: the sentence should have said, no success stands totally on it's own
Somalia is a direct result of a Military / Statist society...similar to the one you speak of; nothing more.
As if education, health services and roads cannot be provided by the free market...they are already provided by "People" ... not "Government"
And god forbid we dont have government around to tell us how to interact with one another; i mean all we would do all day long is rape, pillage and kidnap people...because this is VERY productive.
@helltrackrider I don't doubt that this is possible and desirable for some people, but unfortunately i doubt that 95% of humanity posses the mental capacity to sustain such a model! Sad bu true
@pak88xbl you know not of what you speak, you act like you know anything about liberals, yet you are spouting Fox "News" propaganda about them like the rest of the conservative world. I can't talk to you any more, you are just to lost in a talking point world.
Yep...spewing the talking points without placing the talking points through the philisophical and universal ringer to see if they hold true morally...which they dont; typical though for most "Libertarians" who seek to assure that Libertarianism provides for a free society morally.
@jw12yrsctch Fox News? I have little to no respect for Fox (except FreedomWatch and Stossel). But I've been a victim of liberal government my entire life. I think I'm qualified to judge them. Liberals share 50% of the blame for our current national bankruptcy thank to entitlements. The neocons (and Obama) the other half thanks to endless wars.
You claim that a society without rule is one based on "Greed"...I ask you, look around...what is todays society based on?...Greed?...who are the "greediest" in todays society?...the ones who rule.
So...how is a society without rule based on greed and a society with plenty of rule based on greed different?...the society without rule does not pursue greed by legitimized theft and compulsion.
Individual greed is necessary to survive...theft is not.
@helltrackrider "who are the "greediest" in todays society?...the ones who rule." But greed isn't the problem; corruption is the problem. Lawful greed is good. The entrepreneur takes risks and builds a business to get rich. Call him greedy. But if he doesn't harm anyone in the process, who cares if he's greedy? The problem arises when someone chooses to hurt people to satisfy their greed. Especially when they are in league with a corrupted government... like ours.
Never claimed "Greed" was the problem...read the last few lines; Greed is a necessity; as is bigotry...but people will claim this is "evil" as well.
Dont use the term "ours" when referring to anything government - this assumes willingful association, which I have none, and ownership - which obviously I have none.
Another downfall to Libertarianism ... doesnt understand "slave speak" and the critical role it has played in todays overbearring Statist society.
@helltrackrider ahhh the classy reference to slavery to our government as it is....now you have shown how little you know and how socially backward you are
Haha...how little I know because I refer to "slavery"...I assume you are going to correct me and claim that I am not "Forced" to work - so it is not slavery.
Forced to pay a wage to an entity (Government) is slavery; of course they dont defer to direct slavery anymore --- they make it indirect as to confuse the sheeple.
Wage is earned from labor; labor is what one must do to earn wealth to provide food, shelter and necessities...so, how is taxation not slavery?
@helltrackrider just stop already. You are wrong. Greed is wrong. Greed is imperialism, you can't dispute that. Greed is domination over others. Greed is capitalism, capitalism is the corporation, the corporation is without morals or responsibility but enjoys all of the benefits and rights of the person. Greed has created this Oligarchy.
You assume that "Corporations" as they exist today would exist in pure Capitalism...they would not; as they would not have the protections of the Government.
Greed is not wrong; Greed does not harm anyone involuntarily...theft is wrong, fraud is wrong and violence is wrong - morally speaking; greed is not.
Greed isnt the domination over others...domination is acheived by force - Greed isnt force.
@helltrackrider If greed is so good why did your chief voodoo priest acknowledge it as this "............nothing more noble than a rich man wanting to be even richer, and sacrificing the health and lives of millions of workers to achieve this. Don’t even try to count how many people capitalism has killed, because not only will you not know where to begin, but also it will never end." Ludwing Von Mise
oh and there are there is the other type of libertarian which we can call either anarcho-capitalists or anti-statists but all that stuff is still pretty much new and isn't really much different than voluntarism. Don't ask me the differences, I'm bias and will tell you anti-statists just hate the state because its called a state.
MirageScience 1 month ago
voluntarist - Adam Kokesh, Rothbard, ME ( people who just want to be left the fuck alone)
liberaltarian - Ralf Nader, Glenn Greenwall ( like liberals more cause they are mean)
paleo-conservative - Barry Goldwater, Ron Paul ( don't like foreigners xD)
classical liberal - Thomas Jefferson, Peter Schiff (might be paleo) (respectable old thinkers)
Cosmotarian - John Stossel, CATO, REASON (wishy washy sell outs xD)
Who is the true libertarian? idk
MirageScience 1 month ago
Comment removed
MirageScience 1 month ago
The real question is: "Who are the real Scotsmen?"
Scientisticsoviet 6 months ago
Do not confuse Libertarianism with Objectivism.
Libertarianism is a paradigm. Instead of left, center and right Authoritarianism, there should be left, center and right Libertarianism. There exists such animals as Libertarian Socialism or Capitalism. Libertarianism is not an economic system. It is a liberty-based social philosophy which serves as the basis for the foundation of a society.
Objectivism is the veneration of selfishness, greed, ego and property. Ayn Rand rejected Libertarianism.
GeneralGrove 7 months ago 2
The empires titles and education is a classed pay off! The professional ball player and mister please; she said!
thawthepast 7 months ago
Libertarians have No knowledge of the Social Justice Struggles, Labor Battles or Health & Safety Strides. All they know is “Free Market”.
Lack of Government Regulations is the reason we are in this mess. Counties with more Socialist policies, like European Nations and Canada have the Best Schools, Best Healthcare, Best Labor Protection, and the Least Poverty, while producing the strongest middle class!! They have highly regulated markets which reduces corruption.
RBLA818 7 months ago
Comment removed
grownman455 7 months ago
@RBLA818 Well interesting battle freedom vs restriction or freedom vs fear.. You want freedom but you don't trust your fellow man nor your trust in your own ability to build your own empire with out the governments help.. One side wants to be left alone and the other side wants to be protected. We human beings can be very interesting and complex sometimes.. We can all win at the sametime if we stop listening to the control freaks and the ones that want Empire rather than freedom
grownman455 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@grownman455 One side wants to live in the Wild West, the other side wants to live in a Civilizes Society!
READ: Counties with more Socialist policies, like European Nations and Canada have the Best Schools, Best Healthcare, Best Labor Protection, and the Least Poverty, while producing the strongest middle class!! They have highly regulated markets which reduces corruption.
RBLA818 7 months ago
@RBLA818 Wow strong and so much passion.. What does them living in the Wild West have to do with you ?? Do you really believe you have to stop the so called other side to get what you want ?? That is the problem with people in America they believe in this Good VS Evil thing that hollywood sold them haha. "I have to fight evil!!!!!!!" haha When its really not that serious.. Both sides can win how about instead of fighting with the other side find away to get what you want without a battle.
grownman455 7 months ago
@grownman455 On the Left: Gandhi, Martin Luther King, JFK, RFK, Nelson Mandela, etc. etc. etc.
On the Right: Blood Sucking Corporate Lobbyists and their Puppets stealing from working people!!
They've stolen your country and you don't even know it!! Maybe you should see a Documentary at least once a year? Like: INSIDE JOB.
Or you can just go back to sleep, cause it looks like you've been asleep for a long time!
RBLA818 7 months ago
@RBLA818
Libertarians who disregard social justice, etc., are essentially frustrated conservatives who don't want to pay taxes.
The right to life includes education, health care and freedom from poverty. But these are not federal issues to be paid for by theft of property such as income tax. These require local solutions with local funding. An objective set of laws with emphasis on individual rights would be implemented to curtail corruption (theft) with the threat of prison terms.
GeneralGrove 7 months ago
@GeneralGrove 'Wouldn't it be nice if everyone just chipped in on a local level' yeah, and it'll work right up until Walkmart turns up, and undercuts all the local businesses prices then gives nothing back to the local community.
.
Corporations are required by law to put profit above all other motives - if you give them the choice of not paying anything they won't - which is why Federal taxes are required. Many people are similarly selfish.
neverfearchrisishere 6 months ago
@neverfearchrisishere Libertarianism is still just an idea. Actually, if the Federal Reserve was taxed at 0.006% and provided the US gov't with no interest loans (as per the constitution), income tax wouldn't be necessary.
GeneralGrove 6 months ago
@GeneralGrove Or you could just nationalize it outright. All interest paid by the government on it's loans to the fed would be returned to it in dividends (well a tiny bit less given some expenses on the part of the fed).
Scientisticsoviet 6 months ago
@GeneralGrove 100% agreed. i personally think "free" health care( would have to be paid by taxes) would be a good thing. but its not a federal responsibility and should be handled at State Level.
skatelongboards 6 months ago
I love that Rt anchor Cristine. So beautiful.
OldmanMaestro 7 months ago
Dennis Rodman?
justinprime1 7 months ago
This woman's thoughts are all over the place. I had to battle with myself to not zone out.
WellIAMScottish 7 months ago
LIBERTARIAN-LIBERTY!!!!!!!!!!!
ameritechdj 7 months ago
I am an Independent Libertarian. I practice Disclosure and Transparency, so people on planet Earth are encouraged to Google or use their favorite to research Max Rafael Waller.
airforcemax 7 months ago
this was boring,speak to Tom Woods or the MIses crew on anything Libertarian.
europa 7 months ago
The Tea Party is closer to being Taliban than Libertarian.
337noname 7 months ago 2
@337noname "The Tea Party is closer to being Taliban than Libertarian. " So true!!!
truevoice08 7 months ago
I hate to spoil the fun of the idea of FREEDOM, FREEDOM is only possible when the sun spits on us and cuts our ELECTRICITY from us FOR GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD.
Because the people who view them selves as LEADERS are pretty stupid in regards to the whole of existence.
In their eyes Nothing else matters but THEIR OWN FREEDOM.
INREGARDS TO ISRAEL, MY family member had a COUNTRY 8 and a half thousand years ago should i go and start wars because i want that land BACK.
TwinFlameify 7 months ago
@TwinFlameify you are talking of when the sun goes nova and whipes out all life on earh?
oh and about israel, do you really need it? you want it, shure, but do you really need it?
Spacew12 7 months ago
@Spacew12 Nope i was talking about the surge that happened in the late 18 when all lines of morse code were burnt buy the solar flare. if that same magnitude were to hit us TODAY we would be sent back to the stone age.
In regards to israel i was being sarchastic, ONE day you will understand. Because of land that no one will end up inheriting people MUST DIE because of human GREED.
Does it not piss you off that the demons are running a mock, only because WE ARE STANDING BY
TwinFlameify 7 months ago
@TwinFlameify a solar flare is really no more than a temporary setback, although more densely populated areas will probably experience a bit of rioting. There are lots of places that hardly use any electronics at all using technologies far beond the stone age.
I dont really consider Israel to be important. If they were not fighing over Israel they would be fighting over something else.
as for that bit about demons, that fight is not for us to fight, stay away from them.
Spacew12 7 months ago
@Spacew12 TEMPORARY SETBACK YOU SAY...
Firstly NO ELECTRICITY NO GAS NO WATER BEING PUMPED in first 2 weeks half the population will die from thurst, 2 months after that for those who live in suburbia they will parish from malnutrition.
NO BUSINESS WILL BE OPEN. "that would be the last thing on peoples mind.
No hospitals as there would be no electricity
Who knows the complications the surge will put on the nuclear industry.
My friend you really have not grasped the whole situation.
TwinFlameify 7 months ago
@TwinFlameify lots of people will die, a lot of infrastructure will crumble, but we wont be set as far back as the stone age unless the nukes go off.
no electricity, gas or water is surviable as long as you are ready for it. (very dependant on where you live)
There are parts of the word that really wont notice at all.
I have heard about towns being put on permanent blackout because they can no longer afford it.
Spacew12 7 months ago
@Spacew12 Yes that is true for all those who live on large acreage of lands but dont forget over 90% of the population depends on supermarkets and the whole infrastructure of the food industry.
Of course there will be survivors but not as many as you think. Depending where you are situated and wether the platonic plates move and buy what magnetude.
This planet will shake of the virus.
I personally am set.
I cant say the same for the suburban civilization who are cramped like sheep
TwinFlameify 7 months ago
@Spacew12 Not to mention all the diseases that will engulf the planet as there would be no one to perform the funerals as all will be in a state os panic...
Lets pray it goes smothly..
TwinFlameify 7 months ago
Get you some decent guns, some ammo, and a product place to farm. Then, you might take a minute to look back to the times of fair vote counting, and politics based on verbal promises...
ChezKiva 7 months ago
Ron Paul and Rand Paul are NOT TRUE Libertarians because they are pro-strict immigration laws and pro-life slavery douchebags idiots!
Shonenut213 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's the right to life, liberty and property - in that order. We cannot have one without the previous one.
GeneralGrove 7 months ago
Comment removed
GeneralGrove 7 months ago
A real Libertarian respects other's rights to hold their own opinion(s) - right or wrong; and doesn't degrade his or her argument by falling into the kindergarten trap of name calling.
If you cannot say: "I disagree with what you have said, but I will defend to my death your right to say it", then you're not a Libertarian.
Socialists assume the worst in people, so they have to be controlled. Libertarians see the best. So if you are screaming about "those" people, you're not a Libertarian.
GeneralGrove 7 months ago
@GeneralGrove That is just simply being a human being that understands freedom and cares about humanity three things most of the world has forgot. Honestly that should go for everyone not just Libertarians but sadly you guys are the only ones left that believe in it.. People are so busy stuck in their own interest, their own one sided religions and their own self righteousness they forgot about what it means to be a human being... I have not once heard anybody talk about loving each other.
grownman455 7 months ago
@grownman455
Lao Tzu was probably the first philosopher who wrote about the absolute necessity of liberty, said, about 2,500 years ago (roughly translated), that any ruler should rule without ruling and to let people go about their affairs and they will find more happiness and love.
GeneralGrove 7 months ago
03:25 You know who else put "property" above all else? Slave owners.
oolong2 7 months ago
The Left/Right Paradigm is FAKE.There is no left and right and people who place themselves into one of the other camps is very dillusional and needs to be ignored because they are unaware at how both these parties are of the same elk and they are playing with the American people. Every election cycle the coins flips to the other party and the same policies only intensify, meanwhile the sheep are jumping from election cycle to the next with false hope of some politician who will save us all. Plz
genefire 7 months ago
libertarian means involuntary statist basically.
Dysentery7885 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
All she had to say was: "For A New Liberty by Murray N. Rothbard."
Or... MISES.ORG
Would have saved six minutes of my lunch break.
05121784 7 months ago
Comment removed
05121784 7 months ago
beware! as soon as a movement that threatens the ruling elite begins to gain momentum. they will co-opt it-or try to. the tea party is already co-opted at the national level...ex. sarah palin. anyway people need to amp up their discernment or we will have another shill that began as a legit movement to break the elite's control of society. the elite will wear any mask & espouse any platform, but in truth they are sophists. those with discernment & true principles can see through the deception!
ancientwisdom2012 7 months ago
Libertarians are those that support Israel. wink wink.
projectdurden 7 months ago
I assume she is a great writer but she is not a strong public speaker.
mikfax 7 months ago
@PatriotTrueAmerican THAT'S WHY THE WORLD HATES AMERICA BECAUSE OF REDNECKS LIKE YOU!
DrShitandStank 7 months ago
Comment removed
DrShitandStank 7 months ago
@PatriotTrueAmerican Employment is the IMMORAL THEFT of the true value of someone's labor, otherwise known as "profit." Our society is a HUGE compromise between those on the one side who lose liberty by being told what to do, when to do it and how to do it by having their hand forced with the backing of government force to accept unfavorable employment contracts, and taxes which take something back from those on the other side who benefit the most from these unfair arrangements.
utinomen 7 months ago
. youtube.com/watch?v=vJ05X-Ig1IM
wwaalltthheerr 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Real Libertarians do not go on TV.
gregalabama 7 months ago
What an awful interview. That woman reminded me of Anne Elk. Are Libertarians able to get to the point?
usernametakenasusual 7 months ago
ANARCHISTS
MirageScience 7 months ago
this freedom fest, is OBVIOUSLY co opted and controlled. O
h a list of speakers.. Goody, did i put that together...no?...
did you? no?.....well WHO THE FUCK DID?
...no one asks, no one knows.
sgentlemanjack112 7 months ago
WND looks to me like a flaming neo-con rag and therefore their emails end up in my spam box. I feel like they're trying to define libertarianism with their own brand of fascism and even when, on occasion, they get certain things right, I no longer trust them.
Margaret4612 7 months ago
Libertarians: "I don't want the gov't to oppress me anymore, I want the markets to do it!"
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc Not all Libertarians are like that. I myself have some Libertarian ideals. I think the major flaw of anyone is that they categorize themselves as something when they don't fully agree with it. I think it's a bad idea to just say you're this even though you have some ideas that are from a different part of the spectrum.
Trickishismael360 7 months ago
@Trickishismael360 Of course we all have some "libertarian" ideals, in that we want more freedoms rather than less, but Libertarianism just hands power over to the rich all the more. If the currency collapses than it'll be about gold wealth, and who has the most gold? THE BANKSTERS!
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc And that's where my problem lies here. A lot of these guy like the Kochs and the Tea Party call themselves Libertarians but all they talk about is about economy. I mean if they truly were then they would fight to legalize drugs, Prostitution, gay marriage, and are for Pornography. But these guys talk about banning all those things and the only thing they like is guns and Corporatism.
Trickishismael360 7 months ago
@Trickishismael360 "I mean if they truly were then they would fight to legalize drugs, Prostitution, gay marriage, and are for Pornography."
Yeah, fuck Libertarianism. You guys are a bunch of scumbags.
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc And what makes you think I agree with everything they say.
Trickishismael360 7 months ago
@Trickishismael360 You were defending pure Libertarianism, against the Kochs and Tea Party brand of Libertariansim, were you not?
"And that's where my problem lies here. A lot of these guy like the Kochs and the Tea Party call themselves Libertarians but all they talk about is about economy."
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc Because The Kochs and the Tea Party are horrific examples of Libertarianism.
Trickishismael360 7 months ago
@Trickishismael360 Libertarianism, in itself, is horrific.
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc There is not black and white answer. Because just like Liberalism and conservatism. There are factions to it.
Trickishismael360 7 months ago
@Trickishismael360 This is going in circles now. Is there a point?
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc The point is that labels don't always talk about the ideals. You can't make assumptions on a person's ideals if they call themselves Libertarians. I'm actually more progressive than Libertarian. The problem we see today is that people say that they are conservative, Liberal, Libertarian, or moderate but act a totally different way.
Trickishismael360 7 months ago
@Trickishismael360 No disagreement here. Sounds good. Peace
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc You are aware that anarcho-capitalists are not the only libertarians right?
ImAznnn 7 months ago
@ImAznnn That's essentially how it would work. The only powers in markets are gov'ts and capitalists. Don't say the consumer has power, please. They consume as they are trained to consume.
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc Well that's the current situation under a capitalist society. If we were to establish a TRUE socialist society then the conditions would differ.
ImAznnn 7 months ago
@ImAznnn I disagree. Socialism and capitalism are not incompatible.
FDR was both pro-capitalist and pro-socialist. His main enemies were the financial elite, not the privately-owned factory.
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc LOL Who said they were compatible? Its either you have socialism or you have capitalism. You can't have both at the same time.
What is your definition of socialism? Just want to make sure we're on the same page.
ImAznnn 7 months ago
@ImAznnn Socialism, as in a government that plays a big role in people's lives. Government safety nets, regulations, infrastructure developments, etc. As an ideology, government concerned with well-being of the people.
I don't equate socialism with communism, if that's what you mean.
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc Well people often think socialism or communism means there is a centralization of power. It seems like you're defining Fascism. Socialism (from what I studied) is when the workers control everything not the government; the government is a tool for the workers not the other way around.
So to go back to my point, the people within a socialist society would have power to bring change since they control what goes on in society.
ImAznnn 7 months ago
Have you read Rosa Luxemburg?
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc No. What does she write about?
ImAznnn 7 months ago
@ImAznnn A lot of socialist ideas. She critiques Marx and Lenin.
Check out The Accumulation of Capital, Rosa Luxemburg.
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc Socialism and capitalism are incompatible, however, socialism and free MARKETS work. Capitalism requires privatized ownership on the means of production while socialism requires private 'property' be abolished, however, markets and money do not disappear.
Christ724 7 months ago
@Christ724 "Socialism and capitalism are incompatible, however, socialism and free MARKETS work. Capitalism requires privatized ownership on the means of production while socialism requires private 'property' be abolished, however, markets and money do not disappear."
If that's socialism, then what's communism?
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc Communism is the elimination of money and the state
Christ724 7 months ago
@Christ724 what do you mean by "private property"? Do you mean the power to control the property or the power to own the property?
ImAznnn 7 months ago
@ImAznnn I'm talking the power of 'owning' the property (I hope we're on the same page here) by this I mean the way a business owner 'owns' the factory. These property rights, according to some socialists, should be replaced with something along the lines of 'possession rights'
Christ724 7 months ago
@Christ724 Can you elaborate on possession rights?
ImAznnn 7 months ago
@ImAznnn Well these socialists view 'private property' as state-protected monopolies of certain objects or privileges which are used to control and exploit others. "Possession," on the other hand, is ownership of things that are not used to exploit others (e.g. a car, a refrigerator, a toothbrush, etc.)." which in turn means that the 'possession' of an object is dependent on its use. Everyone owns things 'collectively' however not everything gets 'used' collectively.
Christ724 7 months ago
@Christ724 It seems like if a stable socialist society is established then people can "possess" anything as the problem with exploitation would be mostly abolished. People would be too busy trying to fulfill their intrinsic needs rather than trying to take advantage of others to fulfill their materialistic needs.
Of course there will still be some people who still aim for profit but their negativity would be strictly limited by the government.
ImAznnn 7 months ago
@ImAznnn That's what Democratic Socialists (not to be confused with Social Democrats) hope for. Those who seek to 'profit' and exploit others can be countered by the government (as a collection federalized unions or communes) whose delegates are directly voted in by the people. In a market socialist economy people have a lot easier access to quality goods but some can have more than others, this is perfectly fine, so long as it is not used to exploit other people
Christ724 7 months ago
@Christ724 Not to mention, the irony being, that under this idea of socialism, the market would be much freer than the market we currently have today. Anyone can become a self-employed taxi driver or start a farm to help yourself and your family (and others if wishing to make a profit) if they wish without much government 'regulation' (most regulation is on the behalf of major corporations anyway, like how government regulation works in favor of corporate farms)
Christ724 7 months ago
@Christ724 Ok so in such a society how would people be paid then? Would each and every person receive the same wage? That's how I always imagined it.
ImAznnn 7 months ago
@ImAznnn That's the thing, it will depend on each cooperative. Some cooperatives believe that every worker be paid the same and according to how many hours worked while others think that some people deserve to be paid more. Of course the amount one receives in wages is decided by the workers themselves (democratically) and can range very much from co-op to co-op.
Christ724 7 months ago
@Christ724 I was thinking of a equal wage for everyone in society and everyone would be paid through the government. This would not only guide people to go for their intrinsic desires but it would also make the game fair for everyone as "handicaps" are not put upon a person with a "lower" position.
ImAznnn 7 months ago
@ImAznnn Alexander Berkman's take on it: "Personal possession remains only in the things you use. Thus, your watch is your own, but the watch factory belongs to the people. Land, machinery, and all other public utilities will be collective property, neither to be bought nor sold. Actual use will be considered the only title -- not to ownership but to possession."
Christ724 7 months ago
Reading Proudhon and Kropotkin is the best way to understand what I mean
Christ724 7 months ago
@ImAznnn Yeah I was about to say that.
Trickishismael360 7 months ago
@riethc At least the governments wouldn't be doing it... and the markets wouldn't have the power they have if the government is not involved
pdawg691 7 months ago
@pdawg691 Ever heard of the East India Company?
riethc 7 months ago
How about Voluntaryism.
Daghead 7 months ago
Libertarian = Don't Tread On Me. End of story.
Hardware952 7 months ago
Capitalism has become a sort of antisocial religion to some, materialists need shiny stuff to show off their "values", because they have little experience of real values and life. People use stuff to show how cool, rich, beautiful, smart, better, arrogant they are when this has little to zero impact on their personality. Even a rich asshole is an asshole and these people will only rarely be remembered in history, except for the biggest psychopaths of them.
leechmasterb 7 months ago
Fuck Capitalism.
VideoFreeMichael 7 months ago
Its people tired of getting raped in the ass by both parties.
nuggz503 7 months ago
@anon3560 The markets determine whether wars are fought and I like how your myth of freedom in the markets is lifting the 10 million east Africans that are currently dying of starvation.
dysesthesiaAethiopi1 7 months ago
Property Rights? That's is important, but the right to privacy, The right to protect yourself, to lie or deceive. The Right to Travel or migrate, to learn, and to teach the Right to Conceal, The Right to flee, The Right to Gather, The right to steal and right to protect yourself from thieves. The right to be aware, watch, see, hear,look, and react. These are the rights given from God to naturally to the birds. If humans does not have these rights, he is less than an animal.
btigtime2 7 months ago
The libertarian party does not agree with the tea party. The tea party just agrees with us.
They want our vote, and since the media calls them "ultra-conservative", they think they actually are/think they can make us think they are.
war=/=conservative
darris321 7 months ago
To sum up the issue, is corporations have lobbyists that give money to congressman. If they don't accept that money they won't be elected. People vote for the best ad campaign, and generally don't seek any information outside the easily accessible propaganda. Congressman don't need to serve the interests of their constituents only the corporations who fund their ad campaigns. Most voters believe that the democrats and republicans have real ideologies. We live in a fascist country, period.
Ohrela 7 months ago 2
@Ohrela But I don't believe that people vote for the best ad campaign. That's letting voters off the hook. What people are really voting for is to have the government act as their agent in crime. For instance, people like their SS even though it's stolen loot. People find stealing repugnant but if the government does it for them, they can pretend to still be good people.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl assuming what you're saying is true, so how does libertarianism deal with what you clearly are suggesting is human nature? if people are so craven & criminal by nature, how the fuck is NOT regulating their interactions going to help?
WikeddTung 7 months ago
@pak88xbl I agree with you, and the citizens of this country turning a blind eye to the evil that is done in the name of their country or choosing to be ignorant because it is easy, is the same as actively participating in my opinion. I know my own short comings in life so I try to be forgiving of those who are asleep by choice, and place the blame on those who confuse them and are close to the roots. You are right to me though.
Ohrela 7 months ago
Vote the warlord out of office ! Ron Paul 2012 !!!!
envanje 7 months ago
@envanje
ron paul is a trojan horse!
WikeddTung 7 months ago
@WikeddTung That is not proven and even if it would be so everything is better as Obama the Libyan babykiller !
envanje 7 months ago
@e
lol wow, you're a real thinker aren't you. in order to "prove" a trojan horse you'd have to let it cause whatever destruction it's going to cause first. the whole point of the analogy is to AVOID the massive threat to democracy that paul represents.
& i don't like obama either, but the idiotic "anything is better than what we have" argument is morally retarded.
a friendly word of advice, avoid politics. & try not having an opinion. & if you must have one, try to avoid sharing it.
WikeddTung 7 months ago 2
@WikeddTung same to you !
envanje 7 months ago
Comment removed
jag10 7 months ago
I wonder if Ron Paul not running again is his way of giving the finger to the RNC.
1977Melville 7 months ago
Libertarian is the height of selfishness. If Libertarian-ism was followed through time we would have no civilization. Libertarian-ism is a dream for the selfish, something that would never work. History proves that people will do the worst without rule or law or regulation. A Libertarian has to purposely ignore the nature of man to continue their beliefs. Ayn Rand was a sociopath and following her makes you one too.
jw12yrsctch 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch No, it is the vestiges of libertarianism that has created our modern age of plenty. The free markets and personal liberties have freed us from the crushing poverty, disease and starvation of the Dark Ages. Greed is good because if our well-being depended on being charitable towards each other... we'd still be living in the Dark Ages.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl Liberalism brought forth the age of enlightenment, those that know how to read and do so would know that. Don't try to revise history with someone that reads. Greed has brought us to where we are now. The past 100 years has been driven by imperialism and greed. Greed drives imperialism, without one there isn't the other. Common sense must be avoided at all cost to be a libertarian. History must be avoided as well, or revised to fit you beliefs as you have done.
jw12yrsctch 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch No, CLASSICAL liberalism brought the age of enlightenment. Classical liberalism is essentially modern libertarianism and has very little to do with modern liberalism which is more akin to Marxism. And no, the last 100 years have been driven by corrupted *government* and crony capitalism. The blame falls on government; not free markets or capitalism.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl Corporations aren't involved in capitalism, that's new....revising history leads to libertarian-ism. Corporations aren't to blame for anything, not moving jobs out of the country(that's the gubmens fault), not at fault for buying elections and politicians(that's the gubmens fault). Crony capitalism IS capitalism. But then, where is capitalism in our constitution? Liberalism hasn't changed, peoples views toward it have. Don't try change what a libertarian is. You are Ayn Rand.
jw12yrsctch 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch Corporations aren't involved in capitalism? That makes no sense. Crony capitalism is not capitalism. Crony capitalism is a product of a corrupted government. Without the collusion of politicians, corporations would be forced to compete honestly in the market place. And calling me Ayn Rand is flattering but I'll never come close to her intellect.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl 'And calling me Ayn Rand is flattering but I'll never come close to her intellect." and now that I know Im talking to someone so simple minded I can end this conversation knowing you'll never get any point broader than would fit the tip of a needle."corporations would be forced to compete honestly in the market place' so you believe in a heavily regulated market...that's not capitalism.
jw12yrsctch 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch Regulation is immoral because it presumes guilt. In a free market, if a corporation commits fraud or violates the terms of agreement for services or products it provides, a moral and uncorrupted government would permit victims to seek justice. Crony capitalism allows ethically challenged business people to enlist the force of government to essentially commit crimes legally. And just how much of Rand have you read? Or are you basing your opinion on what others have said?
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl you keep saying crony capitalism as if it is different to capitalism. Your whole theory is based on a false pretense. And Ayn Rand lived off the government in her old age going against everything she claimed to believe in.
jw12yrsctch 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch "you keep saying crony capitalism as if it is different to capitalism..." Yes, because it is different. Crony capitalism is empowered by corrupt government. Capitalism is simply allowing people to freely exchange value (goods and services for money). Crony capitalism means that a corporation can bribe a politician into doing their bidding like creating regulations to prevent competition. We have crony capitalism today... a corruption of capitalism.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
Comment removed
dysesthesiaAethiopi1 7 months ago
@dysesthesiaAethiopi1 Sadly, there has never existed a free market economy to my knowledge because the temptation to use government force immorally has been too strong for people to resist. But should We the People have a sudden attack of scruples, we could create such an economy. Admittedly, it's a long shot.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl you admit that your beliefs are impossible due to reality, hahaha, you fail, end of story
jw12yrsctch 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch No. I admit my beliefs are impossible so long as we have a corrupt electorate (of which I assume you are one). The government we have is reflection of the will of the people. If We the People are corrupt, there is no hope because any form of government we have (like the one we have now) will also be corrupt.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl Give and example of this golden age when crony capitalism never existed? What successful society has implemented the hyper laissez faire economic panacea/policies you espouse?
It's so easy to pontificate on the benefits of a system that has no history of delivering any positive outcomes to a majority of people.
dysesthesiaAethiopi1 7 months ago
@dysesthesiaAethiopi1 Before the US Constitution, there had never been a constitutional republic... What's your point? The issue is one of morality. Capitalism embodies the principles of freedom as Jefferson eloquently described as our, "unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Capitalism simply stated is a separation of Economy and State.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl North Korea and Iran are republics as well and america had a constitution while black people were slaves and denied citizenship up until around 50 yrs ago. So what's the point you trying to make?
dysesthesiaAethiopi1 7 months ago
@dysesthesiaAethiopi1 Huh? You made a point that there'd had never been a successful capitalistic nation in history as some kind of refutation of capitalism. My point was that there'd also never been a constitutional republic before the US.... so based on your logic the US shouldn't exist... get it? Just because there has never been a truly uncorrupted capitalistic society doesn't mean it wouldn't be successful. What's slavery have to do with anything?
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl Your idea of a successful capitalists economy is one where 1% of the population owns 70-90% of the all the wealth.
dysesthesiaAethiopi1 7 months ago
@pak88xbl You libertarians are a living paradox.
dysesthesiaAethiopi1 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch "And Ayn Rand lived off the government in her old age going against everything she claimed to believe in." Why would Rand live off the government when she was a hugely successful writer? Maybe you have proof? But you didn't respond to my question... Have you actually read any Rand yourself or are you basing you opinion secondhand? If the latter, you need to do some reading before you judge her or her ideas.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl so she didn't take SS? look it up, but you probably don't know how to do research, that's why you follow Psycho Rand.....you are being taken for a ride. but don't fuck up the country while you are on your ride.
jw12yrsctch 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch "but you probably don't know how to do research..." Attacking me is not an argument. I don't really care if she accepted SS... she probably viewed it as the government returning some of the loot they stole from her. My guess is that she paid WAY more in taxes than she might have gotten from the government. And again, you are being evasive. Have you actually read any of Rand's books? If not, you're attacking her out of ignorance.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@p though most people are introduced to ayn rand in high school (& outgrow the juvenile infatuation by sophomore year of college) i have never read one of them, nor have i ever been interested. & i can say with absolute certainty that she was an unconscionable poseur. how can i say that without ever having read one of silly anti-civilization screeds to selfishness & greed? i've heard her positions on the israel/palestine problem from her mouth (easily found on yutube). she was a racist savage.
WikeddTung 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch "Liberalism hasn't changed, peoples views toward it have." Again, that makes no sense. The modern day liberal has almost nothing in common with classical liberals. If not, today's liberals would be outraged at how much the government has strayed from the Constitution... but it's libertarians who are outraged.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl most libertarians i see promote policies that ultimately lead to plutocracy and monopolies subverting the greater freedom democracy is supposed to offer for all. Most seem to interpret libertarianism with he liberty to become a tyrant. At least that would be the consequence of the Tea party and the economical policies.
annata12 7 months ago
@annata12 Freedom can only be subverted with the complicity of the government. Even a business monopoly has no Power over you that you don't voluntarily grant it through some form of agreement. The Tea Party is not really libertarian. I see them as more conservative. There's overlap in that they claim to want small government but conservatives (like liberals) still want to use the coercive force of government to solve social problems.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl I agree in essence but some social issues can and must be tackled by the government, those things we can only do together as a society, most libertarians i see seem to interprete it as being entirely selfish and not owing their freedoms and success to the opportunities only a society that cooperates can offer in the first place! You can only create a true libertarian society if you apply the Rawlsian veil of ignorance, since success stands totally on it's own achievements
annata12 7 months ago
@annata12
Names any social issue that must be provided with theft, kidnapping and murdering of those who do not comply with extortion to fund this system...name one.
helltrackrider 7 months ago
@annata12 Well, I would challenge the notion that there are *any* social issues requiring government intervention. What you'll find is that one way or another, the government makes things worse (unintended consequences). But greed is good, selfishness is good... so long as no one is harmed. Our modern age of plenty is a direct consequence of greed in that people want to make money and get rich. If they do it honestly, we all benefit.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl Rational self interest doesn't preclude a better future for everyone, it encourages it. The better the whole of society is off, the more freedoms and opportunities everyone has to invent and create, the better of are those who are already rich. If the government fulfills it's role as sheriff and not as the whore of corporations, that would be preferencial, but there is also no instance where smaller government doesn't also lead to corporations running the show!
annata12 7 months ago
@annata12 It shouldn't matter if corporations become successful... even become monopolies. If the government exists only to protect my individual rights and not permit corporations, or unions, or whatever group to violate my rights, then I'm not concerned. Government today empowers would-be crooks. And regulation is simply a way to make the playing field uneven such that the highest bidders get to be successful and the upstarts get to be losers. Ultimately, voters are the crooks.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@annata12 but is dependent on inner social peace, educated and healthy workforece, readily available and maintained infrastructure, etc, Jobs that are less paid but have to be done. The tea party in my opinion is not libertarian but selfish and it's not rational self interest, but the kind that lead to societies like Somalia. Linertarianism in my opinion does not include the right to screw your fellow citizens.
Ps: the sentence should have said, no success stands totally on it's own
annata12 7 months ago
@annata12
Somalia is a direct result of a Military / Statist society...similar to the one you speak of; nothing more.
As if education, health services and roads cannot be provided by the free market...they are already provided by "People" ... not "Government"
And god forbid we dont have government around to tell us how to interact with one another; i mean all we would do all day long is rape, pillage and kidnap people...because this is VERY productive.
helltrackrider 7 months ago
@helltrackrider I don't doubt that this is possible and desirable for some people, but unfortunately i doubt that 95% of humanity posses the mental capacity to sustain such a model! Sad bu true
annata12 7 months ago
@annata12
Where does humanity get its mental capacity from...?
Compulsive government education.
So...I might agree to that; but this doesnt justify opressing anyone else due to anothers ineptness.
helltrackrider 7 months ago
@pak88xbl you know not of what you speak, you act like you know anything about liberals, yet you are spouting Fox "News" propaganda about them like the rest of the conservative world. I can't talk to you any more, you are just to lost in a talking point world.
jw12yrsctch 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch
Yep...spewing the talking points without placing the talking points through the philisophical and universal ringer to see if they hold true morally...which they dont; typical though for most "Libertarians" who seek to assure that Libertarianism provides for a free society morally.
helltrackrider 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch Fox News? I have little to no respect for Fox (except FreedomWatch and Stossel). But I've been a victim of liberal government my entire life. I think I'm qualified to judge them. Liberals share 50% of the blame for our current national bankruptcy thank to entitlements. The neocons (and Obama) the other half thanks to endless wars.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch
You claim that a society without rule is one based on "Greed"...I ask you, look around...what is todays society based on?...Greed?...who are the "greediest" in todays society?...the ones who rule.
So...how is a society without rule based on greed and a society with plenty of rule based on greed different?...the society without rule does not pursue greed by legitimized theft and compulsion.
Individual greed is necessary to survive...theft is not.
helltrackrider 7 months ago
@helltrackrider "who are the "greediest" in todays society?...the ones who rule." But greed isn't the problem; corruption is the problem. Lawful greed is good. The entrepreneur takes risks and builds a business to get rich. Call him greedy. But if he doesn't harm anyone in the process, who cares if he's greedy? The problem arises when someone chooses to hurt people to satisfy their greed. Especially when they are in league with a corrupted government... like ours.
pak88xbl 7 months ago
@pak88xbl
Never claimed "Greed" was the problem...read the last few lines; Greed is a necessity; as is bigotry...but people will claim this is "evil" as well.
Dont use the term "ours" when referring to anything government - this assumes willingful association, which I have none, and ownership - which obviously I have none.
Another downfall to Libertarianism ... doesnt understand "slave speak" and the critical role it has played in todays overbearring Statist society.
helltrackrider 7 months ago
@helltrackrider ahhh the classy reference to slavery to our government as it is....now you have shown how little you know and how socially backward you are
jw12yrsctch 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch
Haha...how little I know because I refer to "slavery"...I assume you are going to correct me and claim that I am not "Forced" to work - so it is not slavery.
Forced to pay a wage to an entity (Government) is slavery; of course they dont defer to direct slavery anymore --- they make it indirect as to confuse the sheeple.
Wage is earned from labor; labor is what one must do to earn wealth to provide food, shelter and necessities...so, how is taxation not slavery?
helltrackrider 7 months ago
@helltrackrider just stop already. You are wrong. Greed is wrong. Greed is imperialism, you can't dispute that. Greed is domination over others. Greed is capitalism, capitalism is the corporation, the corporation is without morals or responsibility but enjoys all of the benefits and rights of the person. Greed has created this Oligarchy.
jw12yrsctch 7 months ago
@jw12yrsctch
You assume that "Corporations" as they exist today would exist in pure Capitalism...they would not; as they would not have the protections of the Government.
Greed is not wrong; Greed does not harm anyone involuntarily...theft is wrong, fraud is wrong and violence is wrong - morally speaking; greed is not.
Greed isnt the domination over others...domination is acheived by force - Greed isnt force.
helltrackrider 7 months ago
@helltrackrider If greed is so good why did your chief voodoo priest acknowledge it as this "............nothing more noble than a rich man wanting to be even richer, and sacrificing the health and lives of millions of workers to achieve this. Don’t even try to count how many people capitalism has killed, because not only will you not know where to begin, but also it will never end." Ludwing Von Mise
dysesthesiaAethiopi1 7 months ago