Any libertarians here? (Ron Paul, weapons, border, solutions)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Specifically, people who would identify as free market anarchist, anarcho-capitalist, voluntaryist, agorist, etc., moreso than the Ron Paul Libertarian types.
I'm new here and just trying to get a feel for who is out there. Hi everyone.
I am an anarchist myself and would be interested in discussing the philosophy. If there are any like-minded people out there, or anyone who is curious and interested in discussing it, holler out!
Dude, your giving the left too much ammunition and a topic a little too deep for some on the right who might be libertarian leaning but the water's so deep, they're so timid to think so deeply and what if their real desires were there looking back at them.... or is it really just Ron Paul.
I tend to be libertarian leaning middle of the road. Less government does more for me but can justify some assistance for some cases. And the only thing I really ever wanted to do was join the Army.
Big-L Libertarianism is certainly much different. I, as well as many other anarchists, am fine with the label (small-l) "libertarian," however. Different people mean different things by it, I guess. It doesn't necessarily imply the removal of government, but the removal of government fits under the "libertarian" umbrella.
I suppose it would be safe to say all anarchists are libertarians, but not all "libertarians" are anarchists. (And an anarchist is never a -- Big-L -- Libertarian.) In this thread I am more interested in trying to get a feel for what views are out there on this forum than nitpicking labels though.
I consider myself a libertarian, but I fall quite short of being an anarchist or an individualist. I favor larger government presence closer to home, less at the state and federal levels.
I haven't made up my mind on free trade... it's not something that I've done enough reading on to make an intelligent statement.
I do think that an unborn child has a right to live, even if the mother doesn't want it.
I do think the 2nd Amendment is a tough one to reconcile. It's there for us to defend our nation against tyranny, yet few would argue that I should be allowed to posess nuclear or biological weapons. I'm not in favor of disarming anyone, but really wonder how we can refresh the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants if our army is as technologically advanced as it is.
Those are some of the major things that I differ from textbook libertarians on. (I know there's not just 1 viewpoint within the philosophy)
This Libertarian refuses to be associated with anarchists. Even as much as I believe that government run services can easily be taken over by the private sector, the fact of the matter is that I (and most Libertarians) realize that a limited amount of government is necessary in some instances ... such as the military/national defense, and maintaining law & order.
On the other hand, most government run services that many people take for granted can & should be turned over to the private sector ... one of which is education. The common agreement among most all Libertarians is that the NEA should be abolished. However, some Libertarians believe that education should be turned over entirely to a local government level. Others like me believe that the private sector does a much better job of educating children, and that the public should not have the enormous tax burden of subsidizing the education for other people's kids.
One thing that I tend to disagree with the Libertarian party on is immigration. Until recently, many Libertarians advocated an open border policy, which I believe to be completely wrong. Thankfully, some Libertarians have begun to reconsider their stance on that issue in the last few years.
I think that education is a tough one. I think that an educated population provides greater benefits to the potential taxpayer than it does cost, if managed properly. I have no problem with my local tax dollars going to education because it can be tightly controlled. Private schools in competition for those dollars would be the best option in my opinion... it allows parents to make the choice as to which school is performing by applying the funds to a specific school.
I think immigration should be controlled in a manner to disqualify felons or people who are unable to support themselves when they arrive. However I think the real issue is to take away the incentives for people who want to leech off of the taxpayers. Take those away and people that aren't willing to work won't see as big of a draw to come.
the fact of the matter is that I (and most Libertarians) realize that a limited amount of government is necessary in some instances ... such as the military/national defense, and maintaining law & order.
Is this a fact merely because you assert it as such, or are you willing to debate this point?
Why do you believe it is "necessary" that a state monopoly provides defense?
What is different about defense (rather than say, education) that makes it so the private sector could not provide it effectively?
And one final question: As a self-described Libertarian, are you familiar with the non-aggression principle, and do you accept it?
If paying for someone's education provided a benefit to me, I could choose to do so on my own, right?
People today are given the choice to privately fund primary education for students, but few do.
I think that schools can be funded through excise taxes, so in the end, it would be your choice. If you choose to participate in the economy, you will choose to fund at least the basic services that are required to support that economy. But if you wished to live on your own land with an allodial title, grow your own crops, and not interact with the outside world... then you should be free to avoid paying into those programs.
But back to the real world... the benefits of an education system which guarantees equal opportunity for all children can greatly outweigh the cost. It provides the means to an educated workforce which can produce more complex output with better efficiency. It also allows promotes introspection as well as retrospection, both of which are required to advance society as a whole. While these aren't skills that our current public education system typically hones, it is not indicitive of all possible outcomes, merely the of the path that we have chosen.
Given a representative democracy, I feel it is critical that our voters be as educated as possible... for their decisions will play a direct role in my life. I don't think the problem in this country today stems from the evils of a single ideology, but that of ignorance. Competing ideas and solutions should be welcomed by a libertarian just as much as competing businesses in a free market.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
