You can’t argue in good faith against philosophies with “but… my gut tells me they’re secretly evil!”
You are ridiculous. You describe and advocate things that make up the libertarian philosophy (in this particular instance, I mean - your general views are more moonbat I’m sure) but then dismiss the philosophy because of it. You seem incapable of debating in good faith. You also have pretty much no chance of gaining a new perspective or learning anything new from debate, so I won’t engage you any further in this thread.
There are plenty of very poor, democratic societies, plenty of rich autocratic ones (India vs Saudi Arabia for example). Personally I think some economic policies are better than others, but that has nothing to with rights and liberty. Saudi Arabia has an incredible welfare system, but its people have next to no rights (a Saudi’s passport says they are the PROPERTY of their royal family), on the other side of the argument Pinochet’s Chile was wonderfully libertarian, but that didn’t stop the government from torturing and killing you at will.
Thats doesn’t make freedom from poverty a “right”. People in poverty are fertile ground for extremists, but that doesn’t mean poor people are having their rights abused. Anymore than rich people who have to pay high taxes are having their rights abused.
I think some of the knee-jerk jingoism the OP was questioning comes from the way that America was founded on individual freedoms and suspicion of government (which makes sense if you look at American history). Kids are taught the First Amendment, and because it seems basic and comes first on the list, they grow up assuming that everyone else in the developed world has these freedoms too (speech, religion, etc). To find out that other similar countries do not always have these freedoms built in can be surprising. I know that when I moved to Australia as an adult, I was pretty shocked to realize that the Australian government censors and actually bans certain books, films, and video games (and they’re working on the Internet).
Americans, for right or wrong, don’t usually associate health care, “freedom from hunger,” etc. with the concept of freedom. Americans are taught that freedom = the Bill of Rights, which is basically about individual freedoms such as speech.
Although, that said, if you’re looking for reason in crazy extremist email forwards, then, ah… good luck!
Nonsense. it’s the ‘I’ve Got Mine’ philosophy. All the rest is just sophistry to hide the fact that the proponents are, to judge by their ramblings, sociopaths and loons.
There definitely are “I’ve got mine” proponents among libertarianism. But I bet others are probably some of the kindest, most charitible people you’ve met. To paint any philosophy with such a broad brush is like assuming anyone wanting to advocate socialism ultimately wants to see Soviet-style gulags.
But even if I were to concede that it’s the “I’ve got mine” philosophy, it’s irrelevant to the point at hand. The central tenet of libertarianism is that the government’s role is the prevention and redress of coercion and initiation of force against its citizens. How can you claim that’s not part of the philosophy when it’s pretty much the entire basis?
The things he mentioned “…They aren’t allowed to burn down their competitors, or tell me I buy from them alone or else, upon pain of punishment from the government. They aren’t allowed to take my money and then refuse to give me what I bought; I’m not allowed to buy their products with fake money…” are the sort of thing that libertarians agree the government should be doing. How can those examples be used as a point against libertarianism?
You’ve both demonstrated substantial ignorance of the subject at hand. You seem to think libertarianism is the same as anarchy or having no government.
You’re allowed to dislike a philosophy and still understand it, you know.
Thanks! Here I was, trying to read all these words, when you’ve already summed it up neat and concise-like. I mean, why make up my own mind when you’ve done the hard thinking for me?
For example:
How the hell do you expect me to read and understand all that? Good thing I’ve got someone like tagos to assure me that all libertarians are sociopaths and loons! That saves me a lot of trouble, because there is no point in even trying to understand the positions of a bunch of rambling loonies.
As with almost any political philosophy, capitalization is key.
Libertarians = crazy people who think the government is the root of all evil
libertarians = normal people who think the government is bad at some things
Once the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms came into force in 1982, the practice you refer to was challenged in court. The Ontario Court of Appeal held that mandatory school prayer violated the Charter’s guarantee of freedom of religion and struck it down: Zylberberg v. Sudbury Board of Education, 1988 CanLII 189 (ON C.A.)
I don’t see how Europe is less free than the US, or viceversa. First Europe is some kind of nebulous concept, these are separate countries with wildly different cultures. Greece is not like Sweden, and Poland is not like Germany.
Different European countries value different concepts of personal freedom, which is why you have gay marriage in Spain, but not in Portugal, its closest neighbor in both geography and culture. And while you can see T&A in any old magazine or TV show in Germany you cannot publicly advocate Holocaust denial. Europeans, generally speaking, cherish their sexual freedoms, why Americans, generally speaking, cherish their 2nd Amendment rights, just an example of how their concepts are different.
Can we all agree that different nations have different ideas of which “freedoms” are important to them? Each is going to think of the other as less free because each likes better the freedoms each has fought for, defended and secured.
This isn’t the Pit so I can’t comment on the many and various causes you’ve offered this board to question your understanding about anything that contradicts your knee jerk neo-fascist response to anything political.
Technically, ‘libertarians’ are not a political group. They’re adherents of a political philosophy. The Libertarian Party is a political group, and as I’ve noted several times here before they’re not so much actual libertarians as Republicans who are okay with weed.