Total Posts:97|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Libertarians???

comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 8:23:46 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Libertarians are not without flaw.
I understand the concept everyone here is attracted too, but "Libertarian" is not the greatest thing since sliced bread.

I think some of you need to hear it sometimes.

What are ways that Libertarians miss the mark?
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 8:34:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 8:23:46 PM, comoncents wrote:
Libertarians are not without flaw.
I understand the concept everyone here is attracted too, but "Libertarian" is not the greatest thing since sliced bread.

I think some of you need to hear it sometimes.

What are ways that Libertarians miss the mark?

There aren't enough.
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 8:36:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 8:23:46 PM, comoncents wrote:
What are ways that Libertarians miss the mark?

When Libertarians aren't libertarian, they've missed the mark.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 8:37:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Do you know what a libertarian is? Do you think Milton Friedman is a libertarian? If you start this thread with a broad or vague enough definition of libertarian, you will conclude that libertarians are lacking. The same is true of any ideology.

By the way, don't think I've forgotten the other thread, where you made a bunch of ad hominems, recited a few statist chants, and ran away when we demanded substance. I'm happy for another rinse-repeat.
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 8:38:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 8:23:46 PM, comoncents wrote:
Libertarians are not without flaw.
I understand the concept everyone here is attracted too, but "Libertarian" is not the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Of course not! Libertarianism predates sliced bread!
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 8:43:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 8:37:54 PM, Sieben wrote:
Do you know what a libertarian is?

Yes.

Do you think Milton Friedman is a libertarian?

Yes.

If you start this thread with a broad or vague enough definition of libertarian, you will conclude that libertarians are lacking. The same is true of any ideology.


I am aware; that is why I started out so vague. I wanted people to express their concerns, and some times the subject needs to broad for the inclusivity of everyone.

By the way, don't think I've forgotten the other thread, where you made a bunch of ad hominems, recited a few statist chants, and ran away when we demanded substance. I'm happy for another rinse-repeat.

Ok? I am busy, so I forget.
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 8:46:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 8:43:26 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 9/21/2010 8:37:54 PM, Sieben wrote:
Do you know what a libertarian is?

Yes.
Prove it.
Do you think Milton Friedman is a libertarian?

Yes.
You think a libertarian is someone who favors a centrally planned currency and price controls on interest rates?
If you start this thread with a broad or vague enough definition of libertarian, you will conclude that libertarians are lacking. The same is true of any ideology.

I am aware; that is why I started out so vague. I wanted people to express their concerns, and some times the subject needs to broad for the inclusivity of everyone.
So you want to focus on A) libertarians and B) everyone. Everyone is not a libertarian unfortunately.
By the way, don't think I've forgotten the other thread, where you made a bunch of ad hominems, recited a few statist chants, and ran away when we demanded substance. I'm happy for another rinse-repeat.

Ok? I am busy, so I forget.

http://www.debate.org...
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 8:48:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 8:46:33 PM, Sieben wrote:
At 9/21/2010 8:43:26 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 9/21/2010 8:37:54 PM, Sieben wrote:
Do you know what a libertarian is?

Yes.
Prove it.
Do you think Milton Friedman is a libertarian?

Yes.
You think a libertarian is someone who favors a centrally planned currency and price controls on interest rates?

Define "centrally-planned".

If you start this thread with a broad or vague enough definition of libertarian, you will conclude that libertarians are lacking. The same is true of any ideology.

I am aware; that is why I started out so vague. I wanted people to express their concerns, and some times the subject needs to broad for the inclusivity of everyone.
So you want to focus on A) libertarians and B) everyone. Everyone is not a libertarian unfortunately.
By the way, don't think I've forgotten the other thread, where you made a bunch of ad hominems, recited a few statist chants, and ran away when we demanded substance. I'm happy for another rinse-repeat.

Ok? I am busy, so I forget.

http://www.debate.org...
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 8:55:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 8:46:33 PM, Sieben wrote:
At 9/21/2010 8:43:26 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 9/21/2010 8:37:54 PM, Sieben wrote:
Do you know what a libertarian is?

Yes.
Prove it.
Do you think Milton Friedman is a libertarian?

Yes.
You think a libertarian is someone who favors a centrally planned currency and price controls on interest rates?

He holds Libertarian belief and is a self proclaimed Libertarian.
Libertarians are diverse, so taking some ones word is not a far stretch when definition is broad.

If you start this thread with a broad or vague enough definition of libertarian, you will conclude that libertarians are lacking. The same is true of any ideology.

I am aware; that is why I started out so vague. I wanted people to express their concerns, and some times the subject needs to broad for the inclusivity of everyone.
So you want to focus on A) libertarians and B) everyone. Everyone is not a libertarian unfortunately.

That is the point.
Why talk to only libertarians?
Why allow people that are passionate about their ideology, the only voice against the ideology?

By the way, don't think I've forgotten the other thread, where you made a bunch of ad hominems, recited a few statist chants, and ran away when we demanded substance. I'm happy for another rinse-repeat.

Ok? I am busy, so I forget.

http://www.debate.org...

Oh, I remember you now. I did not think you were educated enough to hold your positions, and have a real discussion about issues.
(Just telling you the truth)
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 8:59:04 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Definition,

http://www.lp.org...

http://en.wikipedia.org...

I really did not think that you would need the definition spelled out for you, but you surprise me some times.

Whatever.

Here they are.
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 9:02:15 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 8:55:11 PM, comoncents wrote:

<youtube>
Not a response to the fact that he supports central planning of some sectors in the economy.

Also still waiting on what you think a libertarian is.

He holds Libertarian belief and is a self proclaimed Libertarian.
If I proclaimed I was an apple, that wouldn't make me an apple.

Libertarians are diverse, so taking some ones word is not a far stretch when definition is broad.

If you start this thread with a broad or vague enough definition of libertarian, you will conclude that libertarians are lacking. The same is true of any ideology.

I am aware; that is why I started out so vague. I wanted people to express their concerns, and some times the subject needs to broad for the inclusivity of everyone.

We misunderstood each other. You want the thread to have everyone commenting on libertarianism. I get that. My concern is that if the definition of libertarian is too broad, we won't get anywhere. Obviously some people claim they are libertarians and hold false views... see the tea party /barf.

Oh, I remember you now. I did not think you were educated enough to hold your positions, and have a real discussion about issues.
(Just telling you the truth)

How do you know how educated I am? By my age?
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 9:04:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 8:59:04 PM, comoncents wrote:
Definition,


http://www.lp.org...

http://en.wikipedia.org...


I really did not think that you would need the definition spelled out for you, but you surprise me some times.

Whatever.

Here they are.

From the LP: "The Libertarian way is a logically consistent approach to politics based on the moral principle of self-ownership. Each individual has the right to control his or her own body, action, speech, and property. Government's only role is to help individuals defend themselves from force and fraud."

Government is the initiation of force against individuals. It is an "expropriating property protector". This is a contradiction in terms.

From wiki: "Roderick T. Long defines libertarianism as "any political position that advocates a radical redistribution of power [either "total or merely substantial"] from the coercive state to voluntary associations of free individuals", whether "voluntary association" takes the form of the free market or of communal co-operatives.[2]"

This is a good definition. It is incompatible with statism. Under this definition, milton friedman is not a libertarian.
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 9:11:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 8:43:26 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 9/21/2010 8:37:54 PM, Sieben wrote:
Do you know what a libertarian is?
Yes.
Do you think Milton Friedman is a libertarian?
Yes.

One of the above is false.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 9:14:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 9:02:15 PM, Sieben wrote:
At 9/21/2010 8:55:11 PM, comoncents wrote:

<youtube>
Not a response to the fact that he supports central planning of some sectors in the economy.


I did respond.

Also still waiting on what you think a libertarian is.

He holds Libertarian belief and is a self proclaimed Libertarian.
If I proclaimed I was an apple, that wouldn't make me an apple.


An apple is a defined object.
Libertarians are broadly defined; such as, Mr. Friedman qualifies for.

You would be closer if you said, "If I proclaimed I was a slob, would that make me a slob."
And the answer would have to be yes. I have to take your word for it, and after I see how your logic works I can apply the term "Slob" to that; just like you could apply the word "Slob" to my writing, nonetheless your word would be accurate.



Oh, I remember you now. I did not think you were educated enough to hold your positions, and have a real discussion about issues.
(Just telling you the truth)

How do you know how educated I am? By my age?

No. I had a back and forth discussion, and I do not feel as if you have a firm enough handle on your politics.

But, hell, what do I know?

I just voice my opinion based on what I see with your name attached.
It may not be enough to justify my opinion, but that is the beauty of opinion.
When I am proven wrong, I will acknowledge that, and fix it.

Hey, I am by no means the smartest man in the room. Hell, I am probably the dumbest one here on DDO, so don't worry what I think.

I am just another dumb dude in the world; I know and accept it.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 9:26:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 9:14:09 PM, comoncents wrote:
I just voice my opinion based on what I see with your name attached.
It may not be enough to justify my opinion, but that is the beauty of opinion.
When I am proven wrong, I will acknowledge that, and fix it.
You aren't allowed to express your opinion on this site. This site is for agreement and peaceful coexistence.
Hey, I am by no means the smartest man in the room. Hell, I am probably the dumbest one here on DDO, so don't worry what I think.
It would be tough to beat ____.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 11:41:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 9:14:09 PM, comoncents wrote:
An apple is a defined object.
Libertarians are broadly defined; such as, Mr. Friedman qualifies for.

Comon lol I'm impressed
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 11:49:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Anyway I agree with the OP.

Libertarians think they're so cool, trendy and radical. That's why it's a hit with all of the angsty teenagers. I'm pretty sure it's a rite of passage for all of those who spend so much time on the interwebs. Notice that you hardly ever see a non-socially awkward, well-adjusted teen in real life who is such a die hard capitalist lol.

Anyway, there are a lot of good theories out there. Most of them are just that: good in THEORY.

To respond to the OP's question - citing a problem with libertarianism - how about the fact that their free market propositions are inherently coercive? This is something I've asked but have never been given a decent answer to (which doesn't necessarily mean one doesn't exist).

If all land is private property, we can't "live off the land." We MUST be on someone's property, and considering we don't have the right to be on their property, we have to pay them for what their property gives us: food, shelter, etc. We'd be coerced into working to meet basic survival needs. We could always choose not to work for another, just as a slave could choose not to... The result would be the same.
President of DDO
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2010 11:50:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 8:55:35 PM, Sieben wrote:
At 9/21/2010 8:48:10 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:

Define "centrally-planned".

Under government direction.

You're good with personally-printed currency? Or do you mean centrally-planned in the sense of fiat currency? Because, if that's the case, I'm with you. Gold standard.
Sam_Lowry
Posts: 367
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2010 12:38:58 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 11:49:12 PM, theLwerd wrote:
Anyway I agree with the OP.

Libertarians think they're so cool, trendy and radical. That's why it's a hit with all of the angsty teenagers. I'm pretty sure it's a rite of passage for all of those who spend so much time on the interwebs. Notice that you hardly ever see a non-socially awkward, well-adjusted teen in real life who is such a die hard capitalist lol.

I can say that about pretty much any teenager who is seriously interested in philosophy or politics. One of the smartest kids I knew in high school was a self admitted authoritarian from China. Off the top of my head I can only think of three people I met in high school who would qualify as having an "adequate" grasp of politics while also being "mainstream". Two were liberals, and one was of a classic liberal.

Anyway, there are a lot of good theories out there. Most of them are just that: good in THEORY.

That depends entirely on what your definition of a "good theory" is.
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2010 6:06:34 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 9:14:09 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 9/21/2010 9:02:15 PM, Sieben wrote:
At 9/21/2010 8:55:11 PM, comoncents wrote:

<youtube>
Not a response to the fact that he supports central planning of some sectors in the economy.

I did respond.
With a youtube where milton friedman self proclaims he is a libertarian, then turns around and imposes centrally planned banking on every american via gunverment.

If I proclaimed I was an apple, that wouldn't make me an apple.


An apple is a defined object.
Libertarians are broadly defined; such as, Mr. Friedman qualifies for.
The definition of libertarian you provided is quite narrow, excluding Dr. Friedman...

You would be closer if you said, "If I proclaimed I was a slob, would that make me a slob."
And the answer would have to be yes. I have to take your word for it, and after I see how your logic works I can apply the term "Slob" to that; just like you could apply the word "Slob" to my writing, nonetheless your word would be accurate.
So, basically you think libertarian means both whatever people who call themselves libertarians are, AND the narrow definition given by RT Long on the wikipedia page.
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2010 6:07:50 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 11:50:11 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 9/21/2010 8:55:35 PM, Sieben wrote:
At 9/21/2010 8:48:10 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:

Define "centrally-planned".

Under government direction.

You're good with personally-printed currency? Or do you mean centrally-planned in the sense of fiat currency?

I mean the government manages the money supply and how it gets into the system.

Because, if that's the case, I'm with you. Gold standard.
Commodity money :)
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2010 6:17:41 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 11:49:12 PM, theLwerd wrote:

Anyway, there are a lot of good theories out there. Most of them are just that: good in THEORY.
A theory that doesn't apply to real life is a lousy theory.

To respond to the OP's question - citing a problem with libertarianism - how about the fact that their free market propositions are inherently coercive? This is something I've asked but have never been given a decent answer to (which doesn't necessarily mean one doesn't exist).
They could be coercive. If everyone agrees to the rules of the free market, no violence is necessary. If these rules have to be enforced, physical violence can be used. Libertarians distinguish between two types of coercion - self defense and aggression. We oppose the latter.

If all land is private property, we can't "live off the land."
Err, land is not automatically "private property". Example, the majority of land in the USA is unused, and is therefore open to homesteading by anyone. Except the government doesn't subscribe to homesteading theory :(

We MUST be on someone's property, and considering we don't have the right to be on their property, we have to pay them for what their property gives us: food, shelter, etc. We'd be coerced into working to meet basic survival needs. We could always choose not to work for another, just as a slave could choose not to... The result would be the same.

You can say the same thing about any individual right. A surgeon could refuse to save your life because he owns himself. The alternative is forcing the surgeon to perform operations. There is no "voluntary" way to resolve some dilemmas.

But you're basically just raising the question of monopoly (monopoly or oligopoly of land, services etc.) Which is a little silly on the micro level of individuals, since there are obviously many of those and the market is hard to corner. Even neoclassical economists use the wheat market to model "perfect" competition. But libertarians have pretty well thought out monopoly theory anyway... http://mises.org...
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2010 7:06:27 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/21/2010 11:50:11 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 9/21/2010 8:55:35 PM, Sieben wrote:
At 9/21/2010 8:48:10 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:

Define "centrally-planned".

Under government direction.

You're good with personally-printed currency? Or do you mean centrally-planned in the sense of fiat currency? Because, if that's the case, I'm with you. Gold standard.
There's something wrong with private parties producing vouchers with the promise to exchange gold for them?

Libertarians think they're so cool, trendy and radical. That's why it's a hit with all of the angsty teenagers.
You people who had an angsty libertarian phase think it's the same way for everyone don'tcha?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2010 7:11:02 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
And you'll have to define what the mark is before we can figure out whether and how it is missed.Or even aimed for.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2010 7:18:54 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I consider myself a Libertarian, and have for a long time. However over the years i have had to moderate my views some because as TheL has pointed out the practical application of the theory in it's purist form will fail as Marxism will fail, and for many of the same reasons, except in reverse.

I have had conversations with the purist libertarians about monopolies and never am i convinced that the theory of their conclusion is workable or good. In practice it accomplishes the opposite of what it sets out to achieve.

I believe that a libertarian directed model is what we need now, and is ultimately good and just, but to follow the theories to their natural end would be a disaster.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2010 7:58:11 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/22/2010 7:18:54 AM, innomen wrote:
I consider myself a Libertarian, and have for a long time. However over the years i have had to moderate my views some because as TheL has pointed out the practical application of the theory in it's purist form will fail as Marxism will fail, and for many of the same reasons, except in reverse.


Finally, someone comes out with out fear.
Thank you; this is exactly what I hoped to see when I started this thread.

I have had conversations with the purist libertarians about monopolies and never am i convinced that the theory of their conclusion is workable or good. In practice it accomplishes the opposite of what it sets out to achieve.

I believe that a libertarian directed model is what we need now, and is ultimately good and just, but to follow the theories to their natural end would be a disaster.

I agree.
This is exactly what I was hoping for.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2010 8:03:53 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
If Libertarian rule was supreme then it would have a huge stronghold in todays politics.
We know that Anarchy does not work, and the Libertarians are not in favor of complete chaos.

This is why I am a libertarian, little "l".
There are some problems with Libertarian, big "L".

Government is needed in a civilized society; it would be ignorant to argue on behalf of absolutely no government is the best method.
(I would agree that government is best when it governs less)
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2010 8:28:34 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Like most communists and anarchists I'd say that many libertarians are too idealistic. As Innomen pointed out, libertarianism in it's purist form would probably fail just as communism has.