Amazon.com Widgets
  • People falsely accuse libertarians of make false assumptions about people but other ideologies make the same mistakes

    The larger government grows, the more people have to rely on the government. It's sad, but already the majority of the population of the U.S. is at least partially financially dependent upon the government. The more power you put in a leadership role, the more good and moral people that are in that role have to be. Do you really think that the people who run this government, like the president and senators, are the most moral angels that will always be trying to please the people without having an ulterior motive, like getting elected again, for money. Throughout history, the times when a military force has done bad, like in the holocaust, or soviet union or even the U.S. forcing the Native Americans out of their land, those forces have been from a militarized government, when people form an army, it has always been for good throughout history, for example, U.S. colonies forming an army for freedom, or similar things happening all over Europe soon after the U.S. revolution. It is true that sometimes people do bad things for their own personal gain, but governments do it to, but a government can and has caused a lot more pain and terror than people ever have. I do not believe it is any mistake that the 1st most influential and 4th most influential economist in history were libertarians (Adam Smith and Milton Friedman), it has a very sound economic philosophy, if you doubt that, just read some of Milton Friedman's works or just watch some videos of him debating online. If you want to complain about monopolies, explain to me how government having control over something isn't a monopoly, like schooling, the only difference is, when businesses have a monopoly, people still have the free will to reject that business, but when a government has a monopoly on something, the people no longer have that choice, because the government always has the law on their side and law enforcement on their side, and governments don't have to compete with other businesses by lowering their prices or improving their products, for example, for car companies to stay in business, they have to come out with a new model each year, now imagine if a government had control of the automobile industry, there would be no incentive to improve their cars each year because no matter what, people have to purchase their cars, that applies to every industry. In short, yes, people do make mistakes, but so do governments which are run by people btw, so of course it's gonna make mistakes, but governments mistakes effect people in a larger scale and worse way, and the bigger the government, the bigger the mistakes effects, so the smaller the government, the safer the government.

  • People falsely accuse libertarians of make false assumptions about people but other ideologies make the same mistakes

    The larger government grows, the more people have to rely on the government. It's sad, but already the majority of the population of the U.S. is at least partially financially dependent upon the government. The more power you put in a leadership role, the more good and moral people that are in that role have to be. Do you really think that the people who run this government, like the president and senators, are the most moral angels that will always be trying to please the people without having an ulterior motive, like getting elected again, for money. Throughout history, the times when a military force has done bad, like in the holocaust, or soviet union or even the U.S. forcing the Native Americans out of their land, those forces have been from a militarized government, when people form an army, it has always been for good throughout history, for example, U.S. colonies forming an army for freedom, or similar things happening all over Europe soon after the U.S. revolution. It is true that sometimes people do bad things for their own personal gain, but governments do it to, but a government can and has caused a lot more pain and terror than people ever have. I do not believe it is any mistake that the 1st most influential and 4th most influential economist in history were libertarians (Adam Smith and Milton Friedman), it has a very sound economic philosophy, if you doubt that, just read some of Milton Friedman's works or just watch some videos of him debating online. If you want to complain about monopolies, explain to me how government having control over something isn't a monopoly, like schooling, the only difference is, when businesses have a monopoly, people still have the free will to reject that business, but when a government has a monopoly on something, the people no longer have that choice, because the government always has the law on their side and law enforcement on their side, and governments don't have to compete with other businesses by lowering their prices or improving their products, for example, for car companies to stay in business, they have to come out with a new model each year, now imagine if a government had control of the automobile industry, there would be no incentive to improve their cars each year because no matter what, people have to purchase their cars, that applies to every industry. In short, yes, people do make mistakes, but so do governments which are run by people btw, so of course it's gonna make mistakes, but governments mistakes effect people in a larger scale and worse way, and the bigger the government, the bigger the mistakes effects, so the smaller the government, the safer the government.

  • People falsely accuse Libertarians of making assumptions when they make assumptions too.

    The larger government grows, the more people have to rely on the government. It's sad, but already the majority of the population of the U.S. is at least partially financially dependent upon the government. The more power you put in a leadership role, the more good and moral people that are in that role have to be. Do you really think that the people who run this government, like the president and senators, are the most moral angels that will always be trying to please the people without having an ulterior motive, like getting elected again, for money. Throughout history, the times when a military force has done bad, like in the holocaust, or soviet union or even the U.S. forcing the Native Americans out of their land, those forces have been from a militarized government, when people form an army, it has always been for good throughout history, for example, U.S. colonies forming an army for freedom, or similar things happening all over Europe soon after the U.S. revolution. It is true that sometimes people do bad things for their own personal gain, but governments do it to, but a government can and has caused a lot more pain and terror than people ever have. I do not believe it is any mistake that the 1st most influential and 4th most influential economist in history were libertarians (Adam Smith and Milton Friedman), it has a very sound economic philosophy, if you doubt that, just read some of Milton Friedman's works or just watch some videos of him debating online. If you want to complain about monopolies, explain to me how government having control over something isn't a monopoly, like schooling, the only difference is, when businesses have a monopoly, people still have the free will to reject that business, but when a government has a monopoly on something, the people no longer have that choice, because the government always has the law on their side and law enforcement on their side, and governments don't have to compete with other businesses by lowering their prices or improving their products, for example, for car companies to stay in business, they have to come out with a new model each year, now imagine if a government had control of the automobile industry, there would be no incentive to improve their cars each year because no matter what, people have to purchase their cars, that applies to every industry. In short, yes, people do make mistakes, but so do governments which are run by people btw, so of course it's gonna make mistakes, but governments mistakes effect people in a larger scale and worse way, and the bigger the government, the bigger the mistakes effects, so the smaller the government, the safer the government.

  • Libertarianism allows the people to decide what happens without infringing on someone else's rights.

    Libertarianism allows an employee to decide what wage he is willing to work for, and allows companies to compete with their wages to get the best people. A minimum wage just sets a standard that all companies follow.

    Also a monopoly will not happen easily in a libertarian society. In order for a company to make it to that level, it must please everyone to the point where they are only buying from them. Corporate Welfare prevents smaller companies from taking over larger ones.

  • They are the most logical and consistent party out there.

    They believe in representing you as a unique individual. They believe in self-actualization or reaching your full potential as a human being. Where is the america the founding fathers, dreamed of the whole reason we rebelled was to get away, from a tyrant, abusive government. We need to do it for ourselves and stop relying on the government, to aid us through every step of life.

  • Pragmatism at it's best

    Ayn rand once stated "Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual)." A rule by natural laws and rights of life, property, and privacy. Only through toleration of every religion, philosophy only can peaceful coexistence thrive. The free market is inevitable and should be embraced. The only true crimes are violation of natural rights, victimless crimes are not violation of another's rights therefor not really a crime but rather populist coercion of ones lifestyle.

  • Pragmatic approach to coexistence

    Ayn rand once stated "Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual)." We all have natural rights to life property and privacy. But victimless crimes are in a sense a dictatorship of the majority violating the natural rights of every individual, and the prosecution of a victimless crime is an intrusion of our most basic natural rights

  • A pragmatic philosophy

    At it's base that we should be able to live our lives without adhering to the desires of others, while still respecting others rights to live there life as they choose. That only natural rights such as life, privacy, and property are sacred and should not be violated. Ayn rand once stated "Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual)."

  • People should be able to decide what they want to do.

    The United States works on a majority rule. The abuse of this principle is clear with other parties, principally the Democratic Party. Being fiscally liberal from an American perspective, Democrats want to force everyone to abide by their laws and taxes. Policies such as these are successful because they have the majority right now. Libertarians do not fight for restriction, they fight for liberty. If these Democrats want to give to charity, then they can. But if someone does not want to give to charity, they should not be forced because someone else tells them to do so.

  • Libertarians don't have a party....That's the beauty of it.

    Liberals like to say that ''evil'' corporations are the sole proprietors of injustice, and that a free market would somehow lead to monopoly and oligarchy.

    Conservatives like to say that government is the sole proprietor of evil etc.

    98% of the time where a true monopoly was created; government WAS the common denominator. Either regulating competition out or showing favoritism and/or exclusivity.
    We have an inflation problem. NO OTHER IDEOLOGY TALKS ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS OF THAT, AND WHY THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE THAT WE HAVE ECONOMICALLY.

    We have over 300x more laws than we did 100 years ago. Of those only 23% deal with crimes with a victim....

  • Libertarians tend to have unrealistic expectations of the world.

    The Libertarians that I read about or see on television tend to have unrealistic ideas about the real world. They want freedom to do anything without interference from government, which is good idea, but do not recognize the real world implications of government institutions, such as the Federal Reserve.

    Posted by: ddeathnote
  • Libertarianism is not a sound philosophy in itself, because it makes many false assumptions about human behavior.

    The premise behind libertarianism is that what is good for the individual is inherently good for all. As we have seen through history, however, men make many decisions that benefit him and cause harm to others. For example, when a business man pays thousands of people minimum wage, while making millions a year for himself from the sweat of others.

    Posted by: daveyxh
  • I don't believe that Libertarianism is a sound political philosophy because it doesn't make sense.

    I don't think libertarianism makes sense because not everyone behaves in a way that benefits the greater good. Not everyone is going to contribute their share, especially if they don't see any benefit to themselves. The people on my street are not going to pitch in and buy a snowplow and take turns driving it. That's why we pay taxes to local, state, and federal government.

    Posted by: N Schroeder 60
  • Libertarianism is individualism, whereas politics tends to focus on the group.

    Libertarianism works as a belief structure and ideal, but, as a political philosophy, it does not entirely work. Political philosophy tends to look at how to handle groups of people, what to control, what not to control, what to allow, and what to make taboo or even illegal. Libertarianism, on the other hand, is more of a refusal to control. It is a refusal to make things taboo or illegal. It is a belief that the individual should be allowed to do as they wish, which is completely at odds with political philosophy.

    Posted by: KnownEvan
  • Libertarianism is not a sound philosophy, as some government assistance and intervention is required in society.

    Libertarianism might work in an ideal society, where everyone was intelligent and rational. In a realistic society, where many people are incapable of caring for themselves or making rational decisions, however, it cannot work. A certain level of government is needed in order to help provide for those incapable of caring for themselves, and to control those people, it would infringe on the rights of others through crime or exploitation.

    Posted by: EminentBennett93
  • I do not consider Libertarianism a sound political philosophy, because it includes too many exceptions and too few clearly defined ideals.

    I believe there is too much variation within Libertarianism. For example, Libertarians are recognized as favoring a reduction of state, except in matters of infringement of others' rights, theft or fraud. However, that is essentially what our current governmental system strives to govern, and we can see that a large system must be in place to determine if an action is such an infringement, and how to punish that action. I also believe that not providing food, shelter, medical care and education is immoral. It is our society's obligation to do so, and paying taxes makes that possible. History has proved that political systems relying on the goodwill of man do not deliver on their promises of peace and prosperity for all. As in Communist Russia, the propensity for men to seek power and to seek a higher station for themselves, unfortunately, prevails, when not kept in check by the hand of government.

    Posted by: FemaleLucius44
  • If everyone were the same, perhaps...

    Libertarian ideals seem to operate on the assumption that all participants are intelligent, rational, moral, and able to plan for their future. That would be wonderful, but it's not based in reality. Free markets without regulation would be subject to corruption, and doesn't provide protection for have-nots from those with massive power using it to wield advantage over them. Government programs exist in part to help balance out the unfairness and excesses of markets, and the fact that not everyone starts with the same advantages, abilities and resources.

  • Libertarian ism Is Not Good Politics

    The fundamental danger of Libertarian social philosophy is it ignores the social contract that all stable modern societies must acknowledge, and while they may claim they are not dangerous because they do not infringe on the rights of others' freedom, the very fact they do nothing is what makes the system socially unstable.

    Paying taxes is what fundamentally keeps social inequality in check because the free market has no interest or incentive to look after people, which means if someone doesn't have the financial means to obtain an education, for example, they won't get one, or if law enforcement, or firefighting is privatized, the system would have no reason or incentive to help people who couldn't pay for services, and hence would lead to large social inequality, and probably social discord, as the lower classes become disillusioned with the higher classes.

  • Corporations don't care about the "greater good"

    Some people think that the free market will "sort itself". Businesses exist to make money. With less regulation, and bigger business we always see lower quality and safety standards. Big energy gets money from the taxpayers as they privatize the gains (money) and socialize the losses (our planet). We see corporate greed crushing average citizens every day, and we have regulation against it. Imagine if there was no regulation. That brings me to one of my other points. We have to imagine a libertarian government, because one has never existed...Unless you count Somalia.

  • Not Completely Sound

    I view libertarianism as a highly experimental and theoretical political philosophy driven by idealism for a freer world. It would destabilize many countries if implemented suddenly, but many of it's principles would be interesting to see experimented in, both on a country wide scale and a small control group with a diverse group of people.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.