Page 1 of 9 [ 134 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9  Next

Geekonychus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,929

10 Oct 2013, 12:31 pm

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/1 ... rtarianism

A great article and I agree with every point.

Don't get me wrong, I'm an unabashedly hedonistic and aknowlege that humans are selfish creatures by nature (Ayn Rand is definetly right there) so there are some aspects of the libertarian philosophy I can get behind. My main issue is that the libertarian version of freedom is vaguely sociopathic.

Not to mention, I fail to understand how Aspies could survive in a libertarian "utopia." I can't see how a society structured around Social Darwinism is going to be any better for us........ Care to enlighten me?



RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,238
Location: Minnesota, United States

10 Oct 2013, 1:34 pm

Some of the reasons why I reject what is often called 'libertarianism' in the angolosphere.

Austrian 'economics' completely rejects empirical evidence, but still calls itself a science.

The belief that voluntary action is the only thing sufficient for liberty, and that there is no such thing as situational coercion.

Their philosophy also ignores the violent coercion that happens in property related circumstances.

Those last two points might not sound like a big deal, but they are. These are factors that make HUGE differences in the real world.

The thought that perfect competition and knowledge in a market is possible.

The belief that relative income inequality is not harmful to societys.

I often here from 'libertarians' and other capitalist apologists that income inequality is natural and without it everyone would have to be the same. Equal outcome =/= same abilities, personality etc.

Private property is the source of income inequality, and competitive external reward based systems have been proven to smash creative thinking.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc[/youtube]



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

10 Oct 2013, 2:39 pm

Geekonychus wrote:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/17/1055627/-Four-Reasons-to-Reject-Libertarianism

A great article and I agree with every point.

Don't get me wrong, I'm an unabashedly hedonistic and aknowlege that humans are selfish creatures by nature (Ayn Rand is definetly right there) so there are some aspects of the libertarian philosophy I can get behind. My main issue is that the libertarian version of freedom is vaguely sociopathic.

Not to mention, I fail to understand how Aspies could survive in a libertarian "utopia." I can't see how a society structured around Social Darwinism is going to be any better for us........ Care to enlighten me?


Are we then expect to think a neo-Fascist Progressive Welfare State will actually work?

We already have one and it has made us nearly bankrupt.

ruveyn



Geekonychus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,929

10 Oct 2013, 3:20 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Geekonychus wrote:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/17/1055627/-Four-Reasons-to-Reject-Libertarianism

A great article and I agree with every point.

Don't get me wrong, I'm an unabashedly hedonistic and aknowlege that humans are selfish creatures by nature (Ayn Rand is definetly right there) so there are some aspects of the libertarian philosophy I can get behind. My main issue is that the libertarian version of freedom is vaguely sociopathic.

Not to mention, I fail to understand how Aspies could survive in a libertarian "utopia." I can't see how a society structured around Social Darwinism is going to be any better for us........ Care to enlighten me?


Are we then expect to think a neo-Fascist Progressive Welfare State will actually work?

We already have one and it has made us nearly bankrupt.

ruveyn
Neither would work........Only a mindless sheep on either side would think thier political philosophy is the only right one.........

The US and most other western countries are made up of amalgamation of several political systems and philosophies including democracy, republicanism, facism, conservatism, progressivism, socialism, communism and capitalism each at varying levels and combinations. Trying to categorize America as a "neo-Fascist Progressive Welfare State" is super nieve and just reveals your mindless demagoguery.

A strictly capitalist society would be just as much of a disaster as a strictly socialist one and deep down you all know that.........



redriverronin
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 23 Dec 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 299

10 Oct 2013, 3:45 pm

RushKing wrote:
Some of the reasons why I reject what is often called 'libertarianism' in the angolosphere.

Austrian 'economics' completely rejects empirical evidence, but still calls itself a science.

The belief that voluntary action is the only thing sufficient for liberty, and that there is no such thing as situational coercion.

Their philosophy also ignores the violent coercion that happens in property related circumstances.

Those last two points might not sound like a big deal, but they are. These are factors that make HUGE differences in the real world.

The thought that perfect competition and knowledge in a market is possible.

The belief that relative income inequality is not harmful to societys.

I often here from 'libertarians' and other capitalist apologists that income inequality is natural and without it everyone would have to be the same. Equal outcome =/= same abilities, personality etc.

Private property is the source of income inequality, and competitive external reward based systems have been proven to smash creative thinking.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc[/youtube]


I understand and agree with a lot of what you are saying except when it comes to private property whats wrong with me being able to plant my own crops and raise live stock. That is one of my biggest problems with progressive politics taking away my ability to chose self reliance. I have seen more people who have their own little private space make some of the most useful and creative things in the privacy of their own home.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,434
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

10 Oct 2013, 3:48 pm

redriverronin wrote:

I understand and agree with a lot of what you are saying except when it comes to private property whats wrong with me being able to plant my own crops and raise live stock. That is one of my biggest problems with progressive politics taking away my ability to chose self reliance. I have seen more people who have their own little private space make some of the most useful and creative things in the privacy of their own home.


No-one said here yet you shouldn't be able to own your own land or have self reliance. The issue is that Libertarians want to take that principle to its ridiculous extreme conclusions, up to the point that you have huge companies that can ride roughshod over workers, reduce wages to a bare minimum and have a large volume of people working for the profits of a tiny elite with no mutuality or reciprocity of benefit.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,238
Location: Minnesota, United States

10 Oct 2013, 3:56 pm

redriverronin wrote:
I understand and agree with a lot of what you are saying except when it comes to private property whats wrong with me being able to plant my own crops and raise live stock. That is one of my biggest problems with progressive politics taking away my ability to chose self reliance. I have seen more people who have their own little private space make some of the most useful and creative things in the privacy of their own home.

I don't think there is anything wrong with deciding to build and live in your own house, growing and eating your own food. If you are referring to personal possessions as private property, than that's not what I'm against. In non-capitalist theories private property and personal possession are not the same thing.



RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,238
Location: Minnesota, United States

10 Oct 2013, 4:25 pm

thomas81 wrote:
redriverronin wrote:

I understand and agree with a lot of what you are saying except when it comes to private property whats wrong with me being able to plant my own crops and raise live stock. That is one of my biggest problems with progressive politics taking away my ability to chose self reliance. I have seen more people who have their own little private space make some of the most useful and creative things in the privacy of their own home.


No-one said here yet you shouldn't be able to own your own land.

Well land ownership to me becomes a problem, though it is absentee land ownership that's private property no matter what anarchist, socialist etc. you ask. I believe individuals should be able to own crops on land but not land itself. But I ultimately believe the communities should decide weather individuals should have exclusionary rights to land they occupy.



redriverronin
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 23 Dec 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 299

10 Oct 2013, 4:50 pm

Geekonychus wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Geekonychus wrote:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/17/1055627/-Four-Reasons-to-Reject-Libertarianism

A great article and I agree with every point.

Don't get me wrong, I'm an unabashedly hedonistic and aknowlege that humans are selfish creatures by nature (Ayn Rand is definetly right there) so there are some aspects of the libertarian philosophy I can get behind. My main issue is that the libertarian version of freedom is vaguely sociopathic.

Not to mention, I fail to understand how Aspies could survive in a libertarian "utopia." I can't see how a society structured around Social Darwinism is going to be any better for us........ Care to enlighten me?


Are we then expect to think a neo-Fascist Progressive Welfare State will actually work?

We already have one and it has made us nearly bankrupt.

ruveyn
Neither would work........Only a mindless sheep on either side would think thier political philosophy is the only right one.........

The US and most other western countries are made up of amalgamation of several political systems and philosophies including democracy, republicanism, facism, conservatism, progressivism, socialism, communism and capitalism each at varying levels and combinations. Trying to categorize America as a "neo-Fascist Progressive Welfare State" is super nieve and just reveals your mindless demagoguery.

A strictly capitalist society would be just as much of a disaster as a strictly socialist one and deep down you all know that.........


Yes I agree every ideology has its bad side progressives bad side has to do the problems it bring to societies social problems which I think libertarianism helps to solves. Conservatism causes problems by not wanting to help people less fortunate progressivism helps to solve these problem. I would keep going further on but I have better things to do than to ponder the ills of philosophy and politics.



zacb
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 May 2012
Age: 25
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,187

10 Oct 2013, 6:48 pm

Why not just increment ultra localism or panarchism? That way, everyone can do what they want, without forcing it on others.



RandyG
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2013
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 256
Location: Ohio, USA

10 Oct 2013, 9:11 pm

A complete straw man from beginning to end. Rather than referring to, you know, actual libertarian literature, the author constructs a caricature of libertarianism out of whole cloth, then smears that.

The result is as if I were to write a critique of, say, Zoroastrianism, using as my sole reference a description of that faith written by a devout member of a sect which thinks Zoroaster was the devil.



Cyanide
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,267
Location: The Pacific Northwest

10 Oct 2013, 11:54 pm

Libertarians don't believe in freedom; they believe in the state. Even "Anarcho-Capitalists" want the state, except they want it privatized.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 115
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,800

11 Oct 2013, 6:45 am

ruveyn wrote:
Are we then expect to think a neo-Fascist Progressive Welfare State will actually work?
ruveyn


It beats the alternative.



thewhitrbbit
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,271

11 Oct 2013, 9:14 am

A neo-facist progressive welfare state and a radical libertarian state are both horrible. Any political system in extreme will be terrible. Neither is any better than the other.

There is a legit role for government. I am a libertarian but I do reject the belief that we don't' need a government. Government must exist to enforce basic standards, to enforce contracts, settle disputes, protect fundamental rights, etc.

That said, a government does not and should not reach into every aspect of our lives. We have a government now that regulates behaviors, monitors our every move and communication, and is generally out of control.

What amazes me about libertarian haters is those who hate social libertarianism. I can understand disagreeing on the economic side, but what's there to disagree with about promoting personal freedom. Isn't that what the freaking Democrats used to be about? I remember being a Democrat and being about personal freedom. Now it's "do what government says is best."



sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,672
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

11 Oct 2013, 9:25 am

ruveyn wrote:
Are we then expect to think a neo-Fascist Progressive Welfare State will actually work?
ruveyn


I'm am a little unclear as to how the words "neo-fascist" and "progressive welfare state" can be used together to describe a single aspect of anything.
The same goes for those who label the government as "intrusive" and "overstepping" while supporting a vast military and foreign military intervention.


_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche