11 Questions You Should Ask Libertarian Hypocrites

After the embarassment of George Bush Jr. many Republicans here jumped to the Libertarian party so they could say "Its not my fault"...To those "people" I say:

Ask yourselves these questions

http://www.alternet.org/economy/11-ques ... hypocrites

It’s only a dream people. Just another ridiculous theory like Trickle Down Economics that never Trickle Down to anybody, and like your theories on Obama Care...All you got is theories and opinions... Heres a fact kids: At no time or place in human history has there been a working libertarian society which provided its people with the kinds of outcomes libertarians claim it will provide

First off, none of the idealistic political structures has ever been implemented by more than a few people for a few minutes.

I also think that most of the political nature of this country by operation was pretty libertarian up until about 100 years ago, folks were given the freedom to do good and bad, they just did not need to call it out. Also, I think that much of the actual wealth created was and is created by libertarians (see massive US expansion of 18th century, see industrial revolution - brought to you by libertarians. Without them, folks like you, the Democrats and Republicans would have nothing to harvest from. Current political parties take advantage of the good parts of libertarianism when it works and when they just want more they take it with force.

Your perception of history must be overly branded.

Libertarians are generally fans of earning things vs. taking them. Convincing people vs. forcing them. Libertarians like to compete, they are not afraid of it. That is pretty much the whole philosophy. The two major political parties like to make posts like you do thinking that somehow it is more moral to: take things vs. earning them, forcing people vs. convincing them and eliminate competition to make the one you want the winner.

I would reserve force for the rarest of occasions by the govt, if at all. I think perhaps the use of domestic force should be reserved to the people and even taken from the govt all together. But I know, that will force people to really agree in stead of 51% forcing their more than moral ways on the 49% with their gunned representatives.

Trickle down is not libertarian, it is something that sometimes happens when people down at the bottom are smart, skilled or work hard and there are not 1000 laws holding them back. Trickle down works better when people are not held down or have their opportunity completely eliminated by law (like unskilled folks being illegal to work at their value rate) and being forced onto welfare as the only option aside from begging (which is becoming more illegal and not because of libertarians - mostly democrats finding laws to avoid the homeless and poor). Libretarians may not fund a lot of food programs in side of the govt, but they would never make laws saying that it is illegal to hand out food to the homeless, we leave this to the Rs and Ds.

Can you explain your fundamental philosophy of how you think others should be treated. Govt is force, can you list all the specific ways it is ok to force someone to do things in less than one page?

Again, society has not seen a functioning democracy (we are certainly not one of these, even in the strictest of definitions), it has not seen a republic, it has not seen communism or socialism or just about any other ism any more than Libertarianism. That being said, the world with France and the US at the lead went through a Libertarianesque revolution that laid the foundation for all dispersed weath since the mid 1700s. Was it perfect, well no, especially because about 100 years ago, we outlawed most of the stuff that built up the wealth and today have a structure and a turnover in a major govt is not even possible outside of politics and barely possible within it. And this, the real lack of any political turnover, well the Rs and Ds brought you that too.

The only real political system that has been implemented is Cronyism. It was around in the days of kings and it is alive and strong today. To be honest there really are only two political systems, Cronyism and Libertarianism, just seems odd you are against the Libertarians and with the Cronies. But they market well and they don't use their real name and people, as you know, really only care about the name....ever follow sports or meet a sports fan.....

That article did not discount librarianism, it just made fun of it. I feel bad for those that really think they are safe at all times and that everyone gets along because the govt makes it so. Ever go into the wilderness with a group of people without a constitution and a set of enforceable rules in your hand. Well, you can do it and it can work. It is called spontaneous cooperation and like it or not it is responsible for 99% of your safety and opportunity. It is the process of the correct incentives being in place.

But you have a source, like LJ, an article that does not even really address the point it is trying to make or entertain the alternative which is more impossible. As a bad example the guy talks about unions like they are not libertarian. Unions are fine, people can ban together for a purpose. Now govt protection for the union, that is not fine. If they can get together and use the power of their number, by striking when no other workers are available or slowing work to make a point, that is fine. Now in a libertarian system, if there were no other workers willing to work for less in the market, then the boss will likely bend and the union will work the way it is supposed to. Now if there are other workers willing to work for less, I am not even sure I see the function of the union, unless protected with the govts guns and the govt forces the company to fire the lower priced workers and rehire the union. This may be acceptable, if the boss violates a contract. So be clear, unions no issues, forcing employment or not allowing people to fire people, big issue, forcing the boss to follow through on his clearly written word - well that is why libertarians want any govt at all. We are simply against the govt writing the contract without the parties involved. We are against artifical increases in prices so that union employees can keep their jobs if there are other workers skilled enough and willing to do the job for less. Without such things prices would go out of control and generally between this and the more ugly head of regulatory capture, you pay 2 or 3x the real market value of many products (like cell or internet service). I could go on, but I thought it was fair after talking about general philosophy, to address something specific brought up in the article. So again unions ok, forced unions bad.

Cute thread. I will honestly be surprised if it develops into a discussion of political philosophy. I bet it becomes more of a "Randriod" saying monkey crap throwing kind of thread if this is not the last post. People here cannot handle this kind of talk.

VL,
You are bringing up a false finale. Most libertarians want to see a more for more personal freedom not the elimination of all government. If you are anti-libertarian, do you think people should have no personal freedom?

BB What a cynic you are. Obama's plan is different and it will work, just like Obamacare.

So I guess it was ok to take from the rich and give to the poor, but now that there is a taking from the middle class to give to the poor not so ok any more?

BTW Under Moderation I like your new name. I had no idea who it was!