User Tag List

First 67891018 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 246

  1. #71
    Senior Member aeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    310

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel De Mazarin View Post
    Almost everyone here is a libertarian leftist.
    I'm a libertarian centrist.


    cheers,
    Ian

  2. #72
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Because there is a major difference between choosing what you want for your own life, and choosing what shall be the rules for the entire group. Personally, I wouldn't cheat on my (hypothetical) wife. But as a leader, I shouldn't say, "No one should cheat on their wives, so adultery is now a felony!" A stupid individual may make poor decisions in life, but it's their right, as long as they aren't hurting others. A stupid leader making poor decisions affects everyone over whom they have authority. Also, even a below-average individual has better knowledge of their own condition than does the most well-informed and beneficent government figure. At the same time, relatively few people in the electorate know the structure of the government, how much money it spends and on what, the military, even the Amendments to the Constitution. In short, my view is that there is too much governmental power being wielded to begin with, and not enough personal freedom for the individual. Does that make sense?
    Here's what I'm thinking: If you give someone total freedom, you implicitly give someone the ability to take away someone else's freedom. We could debate what it means to hurt someone else, and I could say that you could force a lot of things onto someone without hurting them. So the question is how do you maintain individual freedom for all?

    The second question is how you define rights and prevent people from hurting each other? Who will get the authority to write which rights are valid and to be protected and which aren't. Do people have a right to health care? Do women have the right to abort a fetus? There can be a lot of arguments on which rights should or shouldn't be defended, so who is going to decide that and how?
    The same goes for preventing harm. Who's authority is that? When is harm defined? How is it prevented?


    My own philosophy is that universal freedom is something that inevitably negates itself in a (relatively short) matter of time, because human will is guaranteed to conflict. I tend to support large, popular government based on the theory that you'll accomplish more working with the grain than you will trying to run away from the inevitable. Since I'm not an authoritarian, of course, I advocate Socailist Democracy, because I want everyone contributing.



    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    The funny thing is that the libertarian rightists argue that no such thing exists.
    I've often thought about that. It's a pretty gross error. I think people like Lateralus represent those who are most ignorant of what left-wing ideology is.
    Last edited by Magic Poriferan; 06-16-2008 at 04:22 PM. Reason: Corrected and added stuff
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  3. #73
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Here's what I'm thinking: If you give someone total freedom, you implicitly give someone the ability to take away someone else's freedom.
    I don't see how that follows logically. One person's rights to do what they want should end where someone else's rights to do what they want begin. How would that implicitly give anyone the right to take someone else's freedom?

    The second question is how you define rights and prevent people from hurting each other? Who will get the authority to write which rights are valid and to be protected and which aren't. Do people have a right to health care? Do women have the right to abort a fetus? There can be a lot of arguments on which rights should or shouldn't be defended, so who is going to decide that and how?
    The same goes for preventing harm. Who's authority is that? When is harm defined? How is it prevented?
    In the United States, we rely on both the Constitution and common law tradition to define rights. Judicial decisions and the amendment process are two ways we determine what is and what is not a right. You have a right to seek health care, but not to get it for free. Abortion is trickier (Roe v. Wade was not the best SCOTUS moment, as it's based on a vague right to privacy). Ideally, each state would be able to decide their policy on the matter. "Harm" is also rather vague. If it equates with trespass, then I think that it would be a matter of theft, fraud, assault, murder, pollution, etc. An unwanted encroachment upon another party's rights. Self-harm (by adults) shouldn't be a matter for the government (end the stupid, pointless, violent War on Drugs; stop banning food products; let people decide for themselves).


    My own philosophy is that universal freedom is something that inevitably negates itself in a (relatively short) matter of time, because human will is guaranteed to conflict. I tend to support large, popular government based on the theory that you'll accomplish more working with the grain than you will trying to run away from the inevitable. Since I'm not an authoritarian, of course, I advocate Socailist Democracy, because I want everyone contributing.
    I have more faith in voluntary association, and I don't believe that big government is inevitable. It's been the trend for the last 100+ years, but we actually have less government control over a lot of things in society than we did 50 or 60 years ago. It's a lot better than it was during the World Wars.


    I've often thought about that. It's a pretty gross error. I think people like Lateralus represent those who are most ignorant of what left-wing ideology is.
    There is certainly a left-libertarianism, but modern usage has equated libertarianism with what used to be called "liberalism." I'd gladly trade the terms if we can get liberal back.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  4. #74
    / booyalab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,511

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    The funny thing is that the libertarian rightists argue that no such thing exists.
    That would be funny if they called themselves "libertarian rightists", instead of just libertarians.
    I don't wanna!

  5. #75
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by booyalab View Post
    That would be funny if they called themselves "libertarian rightists", instead of just libertarians.
    It would never happen. Most libertarians HATE HATE HATE being lumped in with the modern Right, because they have so little in common.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  6. #76
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    It would never happen. Most libertarians HATE HATE HATE being lumped in with the modern Right, because they have so little in common.
    You mean that just because someone prefers economic freedom to socialism, they don't necessarily support the war on terrorism? That's crazy talk!

  7. #77
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    You mean that just because someone prefers economic freedom to socialism, they don't necessarily support the war on terrorism? That's crazy talk!
    The GOP (outside of a few honorable exceptions) doesn't even support economic freedom these days. And Bush sucks so bad; I can't even enjoy the verbal slip-ups anymore. He is like Woodrow Wilson minus 50 IQ points. Just awful.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  8. #78
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by booyalab View Post
    That would be funny if they called themselves "libertarian rightists", instead of just libertarians.
    The irony is the first libertarian was allegedly an anarcho-communist. And those rightists have the nerve to argue that the left stole the term "liberal".
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  9. #79
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    The irony is the first libertarian was allegedly an anarcho-communist. And those rightists have the nerve to argue that the left stole the term "liberal".
    They did.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  10. #80
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    They did.
    Proof?
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

Similar Threads

  1. Political Compass Test
    By Babybop in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 06-23-2017, 05:32 PM
  2. Political Compass Test
    By themightyfetus in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-07-2015, 06:55 PM
  3. Political Compass Test
    By metaphours in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 03-27-2015, 08:30 PM
  4. Moral Compass Test
    By rivercrow in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: 01-31-2009, 02:01 AM
  5. Political Compass Test
    By Meursault in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 09-08-2007, 12:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO