In a libertarian society...

[Czarcasm]

@Nobody

Googling the difference between libertarians and Libertarians brought up various points of view, but it appears that it’s the Libertarians who believe in some legitimate government functions, but libertarians believe in no coercion which would seem to rule out taxes which seems to mean everything is privatized.

But which specific government functions are legitimate according to Libertarians? Is there a general consensus?

[furt]

@TriPolar

Everybody should be a small-l libertarian. I think most of this thread is discussing big-L Libertarians.

The vast majority of people who are philosophically libertarian (small-l) are not members of the official party (big-L).

[TriPolar]

@furt

The vast majority of people who are philosophically libertarian (small-l) are not members of the official party (big-L).

Eggs-actly. And they should understand that liberty (for everybody) is the goal of a libertarian. The big-L type belong to a political party, and a movement, which will tend towards extreme ideas. I don’t count people who are only interested in self-liberty as actual small-l libertarians, just big-Ls that didn’t join the party. But there is no single formal definition for small-ls.

[furt]

@Nobody

But the replies do bring me to another question. If a libertarian is just somebody who calls themselves a libertarian and there are no common issues on which a majority of libertarians agree, doesn’t it make the word meaningless?

This is not the case at all; there are a multiplicity of issues on which 99% of self-identified libertarians would agree. For example:

– legalizing most or all drugs
– ending corporate welfare
– smaller, less active military
– reforming or eliminating entitlements
– reducing or eliminating middle and upper class welfare
– freer speech laws

These are all at odds with the two major parties.

[foolsguinea]

See? Libertarians are just like everybody else! Nothing to worry about!

@Hyperelastic

There’s no reason a private company or voluntary association couldn’t do the things the OP wrings his hands over. Many do already. Whether that is the best way to do things is another debate.

@IdahoMauleMan

Can I answer a question with (3) questions:

1. Who do you want to do those things?

2. Why them?

3. Why do you think they will do a good job at it, relative to other alternatives?

Oh.

[Nobody]

@Czarcasm

But which specific government functions are legitimate according to Libertarians? Is there a general consensus?

No idea. Googling the Libertarian party platform it appears…

Government exists to protect the rights of every individual including life, liberty and property. Criminal laws should be limited to violation of the rights of others through force or fraud, or deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of harm.
…
We support restitution of the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or the negligent wrongdoer. We oppose reduction of constitutional safeguards of the rights of the criminally accused. The rights of due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must not be denied. We assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law.
…
The only proper role of
government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a
legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected.

So I guess the police and court system are still in.

All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor. We call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution. We oppose any legal requirements forcing employers to serve as tax collectors. Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without their consent. We support the passage of a “Balanced Budget Amendment” to the U.S. Constitution, provided that the budget is balanced exclusively by cutting expenditures, and not by raising taxes.

So, only government functions specifically mentioned in the constitution are legitimate to fund. Of course, it looks like they have to be funded voluntarily.

Education, like any other service, is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality and efficiency with more diversity of choice. …

So public schools are out.

We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression.

Military is in.

We seek to divest government of all functions that can be provided by non-governmental organizations or private individuals.

Everything else is out.

[Lobohan]

@Nobody

I was going to start a very similar thread.

Do it. The Free Market™ will determine which of the threads gets an actual response from a Libertarian. The other thread will be filled with slippery noncommittal jibba-jabba.

[Nobody]

@Lobohan

Do it. The Free Market™ will determine which of the threads gets an actual response from a Libertarian. The other thread will be filled with slippery noncommittal jibba-jabba.

:eek: You’re Mr. T aren’t you? The words jibba-jabba gave you away.

Anyway, if I started a thread a coercive mod or admin would just join it to this thread! :mad:

[TriPolar]

@Nobody

:eek: You’re Mr. T aren’t you? The words jibba-jabba gave you away.

Anyway, if I started a thread a coercive mod or admin would just join it to this thread! :mad:

Maybe not if you do it on the basis of being a competitive thread to allow Dopers to choose the better thread. Tell everybody how much more liberty they’ll have in your thread.

[Lobohan]

I pity the fool, that abrogates moral hazard by joining threads.

[Little_Nemo]

@Nobody

So I guess the police and court system are still in…Military is in.

So, only government functions specifically mentioned in the constitution are legitimate to fund. Of course, it looks like they have to be funded voluntarily.

You have to wonder about a platform that claims to believe in the ongoing existence of a government run police and court system and military but opposes any taxation.

[furt]

@Nobody

So, only government functions specifically mentioned in the constitution are legitimate to fund. Of course, it looks like they have to be funded voluntarily.

You may be assuming things. An income tax is only one of a number of different ways of raising funds for a government; opposing income taxes is not quite the same as saying all funding must be voluntary.

So public schools are out.

Again, you’re bringing in things not there. The introduction of a free market in education does not mean the government can’t provide schools; it means government school must compete on a level playing field with privately-run ones. Consider that the government already competes with the private sector in things like package delivery, health insurance, etc.

[Czarcasm]

@furt

You may be assuming things. An income tax is only one of a number of different ways of raising funds for a government; opposing income taxes is not quite the same as saying all funding must be voluntary.

Again, you’re bringing in things not there. The introduction of a free market in education does not mean the government can’t provide schools; it means government school must compete on a level playing field with privately-run ones. Consider that the government already competes with the private sector in things like package delivery, health insurance, etc.

I do so love the fallacious “level playing field” argument when it comes to education. If you want a real level playing field, make the private schools play under the same rules the public ones do-make them take whatever students show up at the door that live in their area regardless of educational ability or ability to pay.

[jjimm]

So according to the “libertarians” in this thread, a libertarian society as posed by the OP would be practically indistinguishable from what we have at the moment.

I miss the days of good ol’ Libertaria, where driving cross-country would involve stopping at a tollbooth every fifty yards and taking a massive diversion round Old Farmer Rand’s place, who doesn’t want any traffic running through his land.

furt, genuine non-snarky enquiry: what non-income-tax involuntary taxation methods did you have in mind?

[IdahoMauleMan]

@Czarcasm

Do you envision the endgame to be successfully avoiding directly answering questions by changing the subject?

The question is the subject.

The question presupposes that somebody needs to ‘do something’.

You might as well ask:

• Who is going to design the nano-technology iPhone?
• Who is going to design a more optimal terpenoid chemistry synthesis route?
• Who is going to make oatmeal more nutritous?

The OP has presupposed that those things in his list, must be done by somebody. Well, maybe. Or maybe not. Do hydroelectric dams need to be built at all? Maybe. I don’t really know, in a future world where innovation and energy efficiency may render them moot.

By presupposing that something needs to exist, somewhere, you’re begging the question as to who is going to fill the void. And naturally, to most on the statist left, if you look around and don’t like the actors you see (or don’t see), government must fill the void.

[Naxos]

@iiandyiiii

(I think this has been discussed in a variety of ways, but let’s do it again!)

I know libertarianism is not anarchy- I know that law enforcement and the military would still exist.

Well, it seems you know wrong.

Libertarianism is the ideology that does not recognize social morality, only individual preference. It dismisses and disregards any need of social authority, be it a government, police, army, law, order, or however you want to call it.

Also, when an individual prefers anarchy, then Libertarianism accepts, tolerates and promotes it.

But the problem with Libertarianism is not anarchy. It’s the idea that there is no objective morality, only a subjective rule of law, and an individual should be free to enslave, torture and dismember 10 year olds, for example, if he so chooses to do so, for either financial or personal profit.

Libertarianism is not a political idea. It’s a psychological disorder.

[BrainGlutton]

@Reno_Nevada

Given a sufficiently large set of current government responsibilities, no two libertarians will produce exactly the same division.

That won’t do at all. We’ll have to relay an action-consensus suggestion to the Regularization Volunteers.

[Nobody]

@furt

You may be assuming things. An income tax is only one of a number of different ways of raising funds for a government; opposing income taxes is not quite the same as saying all funding must be voluntary.

True, but if you’re against coercion then logically all government funding must be voluntary.

Again, you’re bringing in things not there. The introduction of a free market in education does not mean the government can’t provide schools; it means government school must compete on a level playing field with privately-run ones. Consider that the government already competes with the private sector in things like package delivery, health insurance, etc.

It seems pretty clear to me that the platform is against government run schools.

Education, like any other service, is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality and efficiency with more diversity of choice. Schools should be managed locally to achieve greater accountability and parental involvement. Recognizing that the education of children is inextricably linked to moral values, we would return authority to parents to determine the education of their children, without interference from government. In particular, parents should have control of and responsibility for all funds expended for their children’s education.

Bolding mine.

[furt]

@jjimm

So according to the “libertarians” in this thread, a libertarian society as posed by the OP would be practically indistinguishable from what we have at the moment.

To repeat:

there are a multiplicity of issues on which 99% of self-identified libertarians would agree. For example:

– legalizing most or all drugs
– ending corporate welfare
– smaller, less active military
– reforming or eliminating entitlements
– reducing or eliminating middle and upper class welfare
– freer speech laws

Ending the drug war would massively change our whole justice system. Slashing military spending would end one of the biggest sources of corporate influence on government. Eliminating middle-class welfare such as the mortgage interest exemption or flood insurance would save billions.

furt, genuine non-snarky enquiry: what non-income-tax involuntary taxation methods did you have in mind?

I personally don’t have a problem with an income tax per se, but some other options would include sales taxes, and/or value-added taxes. Some libertarians like the “Fair Tax” scheme, (basically, a national sales tax). More commonly, they propose a much greater employment of user fees. (As well as greater use of things like lotteries and voluntary endowments for things people will give to, such as parks, museums, etc.)

[furt]

@Naxos

Libertarianism is the ideology that does not recognize social morality, only individual preference. It dismisses and disregards any need of social authority, be it a government, police, army, law, order, or however you want to call it.

Horseshit. You are showing your ignorance.

Libertarianism is not a political idea. It’s a psychological disorder.

I’m a libertarian. Am I mentally ill?