The Instigator
SitaraMusica
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Wylted
Con (against)
Winning
20 Points

Libertarians are neither liberal nor conservative.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
Wylted
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/25/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 616 times Debate No: 67539
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (4)

 

SitaraMusica

Pro

From lp.org: Unlike liberals or conservatives, Libertarians advocate a high degree of both personal and economic liberty. For example, Libertarians advocate freedom in economic matters, so we're in favor of lowering taxes, slashing bureaucratic regulation of business, and charitable -- rather than government -- welfare. -
Wylted

Con

I believe this challenge which seems out of nowhere sparks from an earlier conversation.

I've never stated that liberalism is neither conservative or liberal but I'm happy to show my opponent how libertarians are in fact liberals despite rhetoric they use.

Definitions will be up for debate since none have been offered this far.
Debate Round No. 1
SitaraMusica

Pro

I stated the fact that Libertarians are neither liberal nor conservative, and my opponemt disputed ,e, te.lling me that I was wrong. He alone is responsible for how he communicates. what I mean so that my audience can debate accordingly.
Wylted

Con

My opponent does have the burden of proof here so I'm confused about this tactic. My opponent is the one making the assertion.

Libertarianism can be defined as either liberal or conservative, but for the sake of this debate I'll focus on the liberal aspect.

Libertarianism's roots are in what's known as classical liberalism which lead to neoclassical liberalism which is pretty much identical with modern day libertarianism (Mayne pg.124)

Classical liberalism is a branch of liberalism. (Hamowy, p. xxix)

This classic liberalism (now renamed libertarianism) believed in personal freedom, individual rights and private property rights. http://www.google.com...

This form of liberalism is called classical liberalism to distinguish it's self from the social liberalism which was popping up in the early part of the 20th century. (Richardson, p. 52)

Just because the Libertarian party doesn't look like the Democratic party of the United states which identifies it's self as liberal, doesn't mean it isn't liberal.

The term liberal is an umbrella term meant to cover an extremely broad range of ideologies.

"Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property." http://en.wikipedia.org...

I pulled that definition of liberal off Wikipedia but it uses 4 different citations to support the statement.

Guess what libertarians support all those things and fit the definition of liberal, precisely. http://www.lp.org...

I hope I satisfied my opponent that Libertarians are in fact liberal. Not only because their name and party come from and closely resemble classic and neoclassic liberalism but because it actually meets the definition of liberal.
Debate Round No. 2
SitaraMusica

Pro

SitaraMusica forfeited this round.
Wylted

Con

That's what I thought.
Debate Round No. 3
SitaraMusica

Pro

I was sick so I could not respond. I stand by my factual argument that Libertarians are neither liberal nor conservative. I stated this fact and you disputed me, telling me that I was wrong.
Wylted

Con

Well this is pretty clear cut and I'm not sure why pro is standing by her/his original statement when I've offered unrefuted evidence to the contrary. Vote Con
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by SitaraMusica 2 years ago
SitaraMusica
Thanks A. I should have said it your way. To the other person, Libertarians are not full on liberals.
Posted by SitaraMusica 2 years ago
SitaraMusica
Thanks A. I should have said it your way. To the other person, Libertarians are not full on liberals.
Posted by Asburnu 2 years ago
Asburnu
Libertarians, as a political party, cover a broad range and are both liberal and conservative on a variety of issues. It is quite common to find two "libertarians" who disagree on many key issues. I am neither Democrat nor Republican because I believe in too much freedom to be stuck with either control freak faction. Everyone says they believe in freedom, but what most people mean is "freedom to be just like me and no different" and that's not true freedom there "patriot". Some hippie-crites and R.I.N.O.s might want to up their tolerance threshold a bit if they truly believe in freedom.
Posted by Atmas 2 years ago
Atmas
Don't they both come from the same root word that Liberty comes from? In essence, freedom of self-expression?
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
SitaraMusicaWyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Tie. Usually I'll penalize conduct for forfeits, but being extremely sick is completely understandable, if no reason was given this would have automatically been awarded to Con. S&G - Tie. Both had adequate spelling and grammar throughout. Arguments - Con. Pro failed to provide any compelling evidence to affirm/support his position. Con effectively showed that libertarians have roots in the liberal system, among other arguments, and backed each with valid evidence. For this, he is awarded both arguments and sources. Pro had no sources whatsoever. This is a clear win for Con.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
SitaraMusicaWyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro decided to throw out conduct, and refused to contest con's case.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
SitaraMusicaWyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro never provided a serious argument to affirm the resolution, let alone responded to the negation argument. Con was the only one to use sources, so source points go to him. "my opponemt disputed ,e, te.lling me that I was wrong. He alone is responsible for how he communicates. what I mean so that my audience can debate accordingly." - Is appalling grammar and makes the statement nigh incomprehensible, so S&G go to Con. Finally, Con gets conduct points for Pro's round forfeits.
Vote Placed by Subutai 2 years ago
Subutai
SitaraMusicaWyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: The terms "liberal" and "conservative" are vague and ever changing. What's liberal in North Korea is not the same thing as what's liberal in Sweden. This debate was doomed from the beginning for that very reason, and con exploited it.