PDA

View Full Version : Are libertarians on the "left" or the "right"?



Ethereal
01-09-2015, 06:45 PM
American politics is largely characterized by the fake divide between Democrats and Republicans, who are characterized as either belonging to the ideological "left" and "right", respectively. In reality, they largely subscribe to the same basic tenets. Income taxes, central banking, imperialism, and federal welfare are all agreed upon by the mainstream on both sides. One only needs to look at the Presidencies of Bush and Obama to see the similarities.

So where do libertarians fall along this fake divide? When you refer to someone as a "leftist" or a "rightist", are you including libertarians?

Captain Obvious
01-09-2015, 06:50 PM
It's the social paradigm that's the bigger difference but economically I'd say they tilt somewhat fairly heavily right.

Chris
01-09-2015, 06:54 PM
There are left and right leaning libertarians but the Nolan chart puts us above the fray along a continuum between statism and anarchism.

http://i.snag.gy/mS1MO.jpg

Ravens Fan
01-09-2015, 06:56 PM
Libertarians, like anybody who does not choose one of the only real parties, are fence sitters and stand for nothing. They only exist to hurt the Republican party. But don't expect the Republicans to even try to earn a vote from them, they just want to mock the fence sitters till they come crawling back to the right side. Sarcasm off/

Ravens Fan
01-09-2015, 06:57 PM
But seriously, I think Libertarians lean a little to the right, but that's just my take on it.

Private Pickle
01-09-2015, 07:11 PM
Right Foreign Policy
Right Fiscal Policy
Left Social Policy

Polecat
01-09-2015, 07:13 PM
If liberty reigns supreme then a left tilt would be by default.

kilgram
01-09-2015, 07:14 PM
American politics is largely characterized by the fake divide between Democrats and Republicans, who are characterized as either belonging to the ideological "left" and "right", respectively. In reality, they largely subscribe to the same basic tenets. Income taxes, central banking, imperialism, and federal welfare are all agreed upon by the mainstream on both sides. One only needs to look at the Presidencies of Bush and Obama to see the similarities.

So where do libertarians fall along this fake divide? When you refer to someone as a "leftist" or a "rightist", are you including libertarians?
Libertarians (as they are understood in USA) are rightist.

Libertarians in Europe, mainly in Spain, are leftist.

Have I answered the question or have I said nothing?

Therefore, normally if I talk here about Libertarian I refer to rightist ideology. If I talk about Libertarian in a Spanish forum, I talk about leftism.

Chris
01-09-2015, 07:18 PM
But seriously, I think Libertarians lean a little to the right, but that's just my take on it.

I think American libertarians seem to lean right for their liberal free market stance--note, not fence sitting but taking up a stance. European libertarians seem to lean a little more left for their liberal social stance. Libertarians though are both.

Captain Obvious
01-09-2015, 07:19 PM
If liberty reigns supreme then a left tilt would be by default.

This is where Chris 's paradigm plays in.

Polecat
01-09-2015, 07:19 PM
Libertarians (as they are understood in USA) are rightist.

Libertarians in Europe, mainly in Spain, are leftist.

Have I answered the question or have I said nothing?

Therefore, normally if I talk here about Libertarian I refer to rightist ideology. If I talk about Libertarian in a Spanish forum, I talk about leftism.

In Spain even the rocks are leftest, no?

Chris
01-09-2015, 07:19 PM
Right Foreign Policy
Right Fiscal Policy
Left Social Policy


Noninterventionist in foreign, fiscal and social policy.

Private Pickle
01-09-2015, 07:30 PM
Noninterventionist in foreign, fiscal and social policy.

Sure...until they got elected...then they would be...

Right Foreign Policy
Right Fiscal Policy
Left Social Policy

Ethereal
01-09-2015, 07:31 PM
Libertarians (as they are understood in USA) are rightist.

Libertarians are pro-legalization and anti-war, so aren't they also "leftist" to some degree?

kilgram
01-09-2015, 07:34 PM
In Spain even the rocks are leftest, no?
No, but the Libertarian movement is leftist. And in Spain is where has existed the strongest anarchist movement of history (well, with the permission of Ucraine between 1918-1921.)

Squads... And the answer to the establishment comes from the left in Spain.

While in USA seems that the answer to the establishment will come from the right. The libertarian movement, however I can be wrong because I have a small perspective of the political reality of USA.

kilgram
01-09-2015, 07:38 PM
Libertarians are pro-legalization and anti-war, so aren't they also "leftist" to some degree?
Depends where you situate leftism.

I usually situate left/right in economic positions. And in social positions Libertarian/authoritarian. And pro-legalization and anti-war is more Libertarian.

About pro-legalization there are leftist organizations that they are against because they believe it is the objectivization of the woman and leads to explotation of them. About anti-war, yes in Spain is a position that has been traditionally leftist, but because for example in Spain the left is much more libertarian than the right. Therefore, social questions are not possession of the right or the left. If you are authoritarian you will pretend to reduce freedom and if you are libertarian you will try to increase freedom.

Ethereal
01-09-2015, 08:16 PM
Depends where you situate leftism.

I usually situate left/right in economic positions. And in social positions Libertarian/authoritarian. And pro-legalization and anti-war is more Libertarian.

About pro-legalization there are leftist organizations that they are against because they believe it is the objectivization of the woman and leads to explotation of them. About anti-war, yes in Spain is a position that has been traditionally leftist, but because for example in Spain the left is much more libertarian than the right. Therefore, social questions are not possession of the right or the left. If you are authoritarian you will pretend to reduce freedom and if you are libertarian you will try to increase freedom.

Would land ownership would fall under economic policy? If so, how would you characterize the following statements, as "leftist" or "rightist"?

From the nature and purpose of civil institutions, all the lands within the limits which any particular society has circumscribed around itself are assumed by that society, and subject to their allotment only. This may be done by themselves, assembled collectively, or by their legislature, to whom they may have delegated sovereign authority; and if they are allotted in neither of these ways, each individual of the society may appropriate to himself such lands as he finds vacant, and occupancy will give him title.

Blackrook
01-09-2015, 08:40 PM
I consider libertarians to be worthless since they do not see why abortion is wrong. Except for Alyosha I guess, and a few others who are out of the norm.

Cthulhu
01-09-2015, 09:02 PM
I consider libertarians to be worthless since they do not see why abortion is wrong. Except for Alyosha I guess, and a few others who are out of the norm.
Tunnel vision. If the current prez outlawed the practice and shut down planned parenthood - I still wouldn't like him any better.

And also people would still get them done. Illegally and such, but it would still get done.

Zoom out.


Sent from my evil cell phone.

Bob
01-09-2015, 09:02 PM
Right Foreign Policy
Right Fiscal Policy
Left Social Policy

That makes no sense at all.

Ethereal
01-09-2015, 09:03 PM
I consider libertarians to be worthless since they do not see why abortion is wrong. Except for Alyosha I guess, and a few others who are out of the norm.

There is no standard libertarian position on abortion.

zelmo1234
01-09-2015, 09:05 PM
American politics is largely characterized by the fake divide between Democrats and Republicans, who are characterized as either belonging to the ideological "left" and "right", respectively. In reality, they largely subscribe to the same basic tenets. Income taxes, central banking, imperialism, and federal welfare are all agreed upon by the mainstream on both sides. One only needs to look at the Presidencies of Bush and Obama to see the similarities.

So where do libertarians fall along this fake divide? When you refer to someone as a "leftist" or a "rightist", are you including libertarians?

Don't you think that it is a little of both depending on the issue.

To me they stand for more liberty on issues than even constitutional conservatives. So on some social issues that fall to the left and other issues to the right.

To me a libertarian will always side with smaller Government

Chris
01-09-2015, 09:13 PM
This is where Chris 's paradigm plays in.

My paradigm?

Captain Obvious
01-09-2015, 09:15 PM
My paradigm?

Authoritarian/liberty

It's a cubical spectrum I think.

Chris
01-09-2015, 09:17 PM
I consider libertarians to be worthless since they do not see why abortion is wrong. Except for Alyosha I guess, and a few others who are out of the norm.


Interesting. I'm libertarian and against abortion. So is codenam section. Others too. I think you overgeneralize.

Chris
01-09-2015, 09:21 PM
Authoritarian/liberty

It's a cubical spectrum I think.

Square, but, yes. I could go get a 3d cube version though it's hard to visualize.

Captain Obvious
01-09-2015, 09:27 PM
Square, but, yes. I could go get a 3d cube version though it's hard to visualize.

Right - 3d.

Social
Authoritarian/liberty
Fiscal

Blackrook
01-09-2015, 09:27 PM
There may be pro-life libertarians, but the movement itself is not taking sides in the abortion debate, and therefore, by default is taking the side of legalization -- since there is no neutral position possible while 3000 babies are aborted each day.

Chris
01-09-2015, 09:33 PM
There may be pro-life libertarians, but the movement itself is not taking sides in the abortion debate, and therefore, by default is taking the side of legalization -- since there is no neutral position possible while 3000 babies are aborted each day.

That's simply not rational.

Chris
01-09-2015, 09:40 PM
Right - 3d.

Social
Authoritarian/liberty
Fiscal


Nah, the Nolan Chart is two dimensional: left v right, liberty v authority.

http://i.snag.gy/b46wJ.jpg

In order to go to three dimensions, you have to consider Positive & Negative Liberties in Three Dimensions (http://www.friesian.com/quiz.htm), where negative liberties are the right to be left alone in economic and social matters, and positive (legal, legislated) liberties are political.

http://i.snag.gy/A6AWj.jpg

Told you, hard to visualize. But libertarians seek to maximize liberty in all three dimensions.

Captain Obvious
01-09-2015, 09:44 PM
Nah, the Nolan Chart is two dimensional: left v right, liberty v authority.

http://i.snag.gy/b46wJ.jpg

In order to go to three dimensions, you have to consider Positive & Negative Liberties in Three Dimensions (http://www.friesian.com/quiz.htm), where negative liberties are the right to be left alone in economic and social matters, and positive (legal, legislated) liberties are political.

http://i.snag.gy/A6AWj.jpg

Told you, hard to visualize. But libertarians seek to maximize liberty in all three dimensions.

That explains why I got a B in calculus

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 10:17 PM
Right Foreign Policy
Right Fiscal Policy
Left Social Policy

Libertarians have the wrong foreign policy and the wrong social policy.

Their only real claim to fame is fiscal responsibility.

Captain Obvious
01-09-2015, 10:18 PM
Libertarians have the wrong foreign policy and the wrong social policy.

Their only real claim to fame is fiscal responsibility.

So you'd vote for them then, as long as they wore the required flag pin?

iustitia
01-09-2015, 10:25 PM
So you'd vote for them then, as long as they wore the required flag pin?

Ha. I see what you did there.

Dark Mistress
01-09-2015, 10:30 PM
I consider libertarians to be worthless since they do not see why abortion is wrong. Except for Alyosha I guess, and a few others who are out of the norm.
There is a difference between seeing abortion as wrong and where one stands as to what the government should do in regards to abortion. The problem with abortion stems from home life and upbringing and how we view "life." legally speaking a fetus isnt a "life" until a certain point. I say hogwash. That is a life form and i believe it has a spirit and energy from the beginning. I cant force that belief on anyone anymore than my government can tell me what is "life" and what is merely a "fetus."

Dark Mistress
01-09-2015, 10:30 PM
They are neither left or right. They are zen :tongue:

iustitia
01-09-2015, 10:37 PM
Libertarians are neither left nor right because the left-right paradigm is nonsensical and means nothing outside of Revolutionary France.

What were the anti-war, anti-slavery, big government Federalists? What were the imperialist, pro-slavery, constitutionalist Jeffersonians? Was Mussolini, a die-hard socialist, right-wing just because he was a nationalist? Was Stalin not left-wing because he revived Russian nationalism to win the "great patriotic war"?

Left and Right make no sense outside of their usage in France denoting seating arrangements in a political body. It makes no sense in European politics and even less so when mixed into the American lexicon. And no, dividing issues into social and fiscal matters doesn't help because no issue is only fiscal or social.

iustitia
01-09-2015, 10:40 PM
Libertarians have the wrong foreign policy and the wrong social policy.

Their only real claim to fame is fiscal responsibility.

http://i.imgur.com/BWlmKx9.png

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 10:40 PM
So you'd vote for them then, as long as they wore the required flag pin?

You seem to have a real hangup over the flag pin.

If I meet a stranger on the street I don't care if that person has a flag pin.

Nor does it matter to me if they respect the flag in any way.

But if taxpayers spend $1 billion a year pampering some clown called "the president" I hold that guy to a higher standard.

Such as respect for the flag and the republic for which it stands.

Blackrook
01-09-2015, 10:41 PM
If libertarians think they can buy pro-lifers off with small government arguments then well, that's not going to work.

The primary purpose of government is to protect the weak against the strong.

That is the meaning of the statement "All men are created equal." Thomas Jefferson may have been a hypocrite when he wrote that statement, but it means what it says: no noble class, and on the other hand no serfs, no slaves, no second-class citizens.

Legal abortion denies unborn children basic human rights which should be protected by the law, and if libertarians can't see that, I have no use for them.

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 10:41 PM
http://i.imgur.com/BWlmKx9.png

At least I don't post stupid pictures to speak for me.

Captain Obvious
01-09-2015, 10:42 PM
You seem to have a real hangup over the flag pin.

If I meet a stranger on the street I don't care if that person has a flag pin.

Nor does it matter to me if they respect the flag in any way.

But if taxpayers spend $1 billion a year pampering some clown called "the president" I hold that guy to a higher standard.

Such as respect for the flag and the republic for which it stands.

I respect or discredit the material, the reality - not the token.

That might explain why I vote conservative and you do not.

iustitia
01-09-2015, 10:45 PM
You seem to have a real hangup over the flag pin.

If I meet a stranger on the street I don't care if that person has a flag pin.

Nor does it matter to me if they respect the flag in any way.

But if taxpayers spend $1 billion a year pampering some clown called "the president" I hold that guy to a higher standard.

Such as respect for the flag and the republic for which it stands.

http://www.photobullseye.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/10-murica.jpg

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 10:51 PM
I respect or discredit the material, the reality - not the token.

That might explain why I vote conservative and you do not.

I'm not interested in what you respect.

You are a nobody who can shit on the flag for all I care.

But obumer, the guy lugging the presidential seal around the world on Air Force One is another story.

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 10:54 PM
http://www.photobullseye.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/10-murica.jpg

I see you are thin skinned about libertarians.

too bad.

Captain Obvious
01-09-2015, 10:56 PM
I'm not interested in what you respect.

You are a nobody who can shit on the flag for all I care.

But obumer, the guy lugging the presidential seal around the world on Air Force One is another story.

And you voted for him basically.

Textbook useful idiot.

Private Pickle
01-09-2015, 10:59 PM
Libertarians have the wrong foreign policy and the wrong social policy.

Their only real claim to fame is fiscal responsibility.


You can't be an isolationist in today's global economy and claim fiscal responsibility.

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 11:00 PM
And you voted for him basically.

Textbook useful idiot.

You are mistaken about that.

i voted for Romney.

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 11:01 PM
You can't be an isolationist in today's global economy and claim fiscal responsibility.

I agree.

Whats your point?

iustitia
01-09-2015, 11:04 PM
I'm not interested in what you respect.

You are a nobody who can shit on the flag for all I care.

But obumer, the guy lugging the presidential seal around the world on Air Force One is another story.
And you voted for him basically.

Textbook useful idiot.

You are mistaken about that.

i voted for Romney.

Right over your head.

Wow.

iustitia
01-09-2015, 11:06 PM
I see you are thin skinned about libertarians.

too bad.

I'm not a libertarian. Try again.

http://i.imgur.com/BWlmKx9.png

http://www.photobullseye.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/10-murica.jpg

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 11:06 PM
Right over your head.

Wow.

No I understand the fence sitter lib lie that Romney and obumer are the same.

Captain Obvious
01-09-2015, 11:06 PM
You are mistaken about that.

i voted for Romney.

http://www.acting-man.com/blog/media/2012/06/obama-romney.jpg

Private Pickle
01-09-2015, 11:07 PM
I agree.

Whats your point?


Libertarians are full of shit man! Just another party that if voted into office would be rendered completely impotant by what makes the world go round... Money.

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 11:07 PM
I'm not a libertarian. Try again.

http://i.imgur.com/BWlmKx9.png

http://www.photobullseye.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/10-murica.jpg

Then you are being thin skinner for no reason.

Thats even dumber than I thought.

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 11:09 PM
Libertarians are full of $#@! man!

.

I think so too.

iustitia
01-09-2015, 11:10 PM
Then you are being thin skinner for no reason.

Thats even dumber than I thought.

Is that like Lynyrd Skynyrd?

Captain Obvious
01-09-2015, 11:13 PM
Is that like Lynyrd Skynyrd?

Buffalo Bob

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAMQGIx3JKk

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 11:14 PM
Is that like Lynyrd Skynyrd?

Ha ha.

Now you are down to wasting bandwidth on typos.

When the trivial is all you have then you got nothing.

iustitia
01-09-2015, 11:16 PM
No I understand the fence sitter lib lie that Romney and obumer are the same. In 2012 America got to choose between Goldman Sachs and Goldman Sachs. After carefully weighing their options, Americans voted for... Goldman Sachs. GOD BLESS AMERICA LAND THAT I LOVE FROM SEA TO SHINING SEA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS UNDER GOD

http://oyster.ignimgs.com/wordpress/write.ign.com/133742/2013/07/Meanwhile+in+Murica+_062f93860376eea9654d7c1a8db8e b13.jpg

Dark Mistress
01-09-2015, 11:18 PM
If libertarians think they can buy pro-lifers off with small government arguments then well, that's not going to work.

The primary purpose of government is to protect the weak against the strong.

That is the meaning of the statement "All men are created equal." Thomas Jefferson may have been a hypocrite when he wrote that statement, but it means what it says: no noble class, and on the other hand no serfs, no slaves, no second-class citizens.

Legal abortion denies unborn children basic human rights which should be protected by the law, and if libertarians can't see that, I have no use for them.

The interesting thing about "children" is that they don't share the same rights adults do. I don't mean to apply this to the abortion topic, but I mean in a general sense. My kids don't get to decide on most things. I do. I am the parent and that is my right as such. I choose not to put them into public school for now and maybe one day they will plead I took away their rights by keeping them home, but I as a parent have the right to make that decision for them.

Children have a right to life. If not with their birth mom or parents then with someone who does want a baby. Then you get into the adoption issue. It is outrageously expensive to adopt. Here I have a sister who is dying to have kids and she can't. My heart breaks for her. Her and her husband can't adopt either because it is too expensive. Why is adoption so expensive? Compliments of the government. Screw that. If my sister wants to adopt a baby she should be able to. In our church adoptive services they subsidize the cost so that couples who can't but want to have children can actually afford it.

I got pregnant out of wedlock and never once did I consider aborting the baby. I did however think about adoption merely because that is what everyone in my family wanted me to do. I didn't. I wanted that baby. And I kept him. He is one of life's greatest blessings as were and are each child I have had since, but when you are all alone and that father has turned you out and away you feel pretty helpless and alone. Giving that baby away would have meant I would really be alone. And being selfish I wasn't willing to give him to someone else more deserving than I was or capable of providing for us.

I will not argue abortion with you because your opinion will not change mine nor will mine yours. I understand you and what you are saying, but I think there are other steps to achieve downsizing the number of abortions that occur by a change in society and removal of government in the equation. We now look to our gov't to tell us what is morally correct and acceptable and ultimately our government is immoral and run by corrupt and immoral men/women. That should not be the purpose of a government. It should be limited and minimal. I do consider abortion laws of much greater importance and consequence than others, but I side with neither pro-choice or pro-life in regards to politics. I am pro-life as an individual. No party tells me what to believe.

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 11:18 PM
In 2012 America got to choose between Goldman Sachs and Goldman Sachs. After carefully weighing their options, Americans voted for... Goldman Sachs. GOD BLESS AMERICA LAND THAT I LOVE FROM SEA TO SHINING SEA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS UNDER GOD http://oyster.ignimgs.com/wordpress/write.ign.com/133742/2013/07/Meanwhile+in+Murica+_062f93860376eea9654d7c1a8db8e b13.jpg

You have a well rehearsed excuse for sitting on the fence and doing nothing.

iustitia
01-09-2015, 11:19 PM
Buffalo Bob

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAMQGIx3JKk

"You're my sister, you're my sister!"

iustitia
01-09-2015, 11:22 PM
You have a well rehearsed excuse for sitting on the fence and doing nothing.

Nah, I'll follow your example by voting for a gun-controlling, pro-choice, tax-hiking, healthcare-mandating, big government progressive. Instead of the Democrat.

Dumbass.

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 11:28 PM
Nah, I'll follow your example by voting for a gun-controlling, pro-choice, tax-hiking, healthcare-mandating, big government progressive. Instead of the Democrat.

Dumbass.



You are a typical lib who likes to attack others for their vote but not take responsibility for your own choices.

iustitia
01-09-2015, 11:32 PM
You are a typical lib who likes to attack others for their vote but not take responsibility for your own choices.

http://i.imgur.com/BWlmKx9.png

Dr. Who
01-09-2015, 11:40 PM
iusticia and Mac-7, stop the sarcasm and name calling. Disagreeing doesn't require being disagreeable.

Mac-7
01-09-2015, 11:41 PM
http://i.imgur.com/BWlmKx9.png

Another speechless lib.

You guys should have studied harder in school.

Mini Me
01-09-2015, 11:59 PM
That explains why I got a B in calculus

That explains why I never took calculous!

Mort Saul explains the political spectrum, 1967 Comedy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=h5yd3Nqp19s&list=PLiYAFbQ6uvSj7RcQneEOUyaIxrqHiXKo7

Private Pickle
01-10-2015, 12:12 AM
Buffalo Bob

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAMQGIx3JKk

I'd fuck me... I'd fuck me hard...

kilgram
01-10-2015, 03:43 AM
Would land ownership would fall under economic policy? If so, how would you characterize the following statements, as "leftist" or "rightist"?

From the nature and purpose of civil institutions, all the lands within the limits which any particular society has circumscribed around itself are assumed by that society, and subject to their allotment only. This may be done by themselves, assembled collectively, or by their legislature, to whom they may have delegated sovereign authority; and if they are allotted in neither of these ways, each individual of the society may appropriate to himself such lands as he finds vacant, and occupancy will give him title.
It is pretty leftist.

Ethereal
01-10-2015, 04:04 AM
It is pretty leftist.

It was a quote from Thomas Jefferson. You would agree he had some "leftist" views, yes?

kilgram
01-10-2015, 06:27 AM
It was a quote from Thomas Jefferson. You would agree he had some "leftist" views, yes?
Yes, but that is not a position very shared by most of the American Libertarian.

There are some positions that are leftist but they are mostly right.

Do you agree with that sentence?

However as I said that sentence is moderately leftist. A leftist would use other terms but with similar consequences, and also he is from other time.

Today I believe that there would be little few Libertarian that would agree with Jefferson. Because from their point of view that occupation would mean a violation of private property. (That land may not be used but be property of someone else).

By the way, I like this game. If you can quote something else, it would appreciated. But it would be better if it was a little more actual.

zelmo1234
01-10-2015, 06:43 AM
http://www.acting-man.com/blog/media/2012/06/obama-romney.jpg

I was not aware that the was a difference?

donttread
01-10-2015, 07:13 AM
American politics is largely characterized by the fake divide between Democrats and Republicans, who are characterized as either belonging to the ideological "left" and "right", respectively. In reality, they largely subscribe to the same basic tenets. Income taxes, central banking, imperialism, and federal welfare are all agreed upon by the mainstream on both sides. One only needs to look at the Presidencies of Bush and Obama to see the similarities.

So where do libertarians fall along this fake divide? When you refer to someone as a "leftist" or a "rightist", are you including libertarians?

Speaking for myself, I am a fiscal conservative ( especially at the federal level) and a social liberal. There's a saying something to the effect "Libertarians, plotting to take over the country and leave you alone"

Chris
01-10-2015, 07:57 AM
If libertarians think they can buy pro-lifers off with small government arguments then well, that's not going to work.

The primary purpose of government is to protect the weak against the strong.

That is the meaning of the statement "All men are created equal." Thomas Jefferson may have been a hypocrite when he wrote that statement, but it means what it says: no noble class, and on the other hand no serfs, no slaves, no second-class citizens.

Legal abortion denies unborn children basic human rights which should be protected by the law, and if libertarians can't see that, I have no use for them.



I don't think we expect to convince statists of anything. No, it's the growing majority of Americans discontented with failing left and right statism we will continue to present an alternative for.

Chris
01-10-2015, 07:59 AM
You can't be an isolationist in today's global economy and claim fiscal responsibility.

Libertarians are noninterventionists, not isolationists. I wonder how many times people will use that conflating canard for an argument?

Chris
01-10-2015, 08:01 AM
Libertarians are full of shit man! Just another party that if voted into office would be rendered completely impotant by what makes the world go round... Money.

And now you confuse Libertarian Party with libertarian principles and movement? Go back to the OP, do not pass go, do not collect $200.

Chris
01-10-2015, 08:11 AM
Would land ownership would fall under economic policy? If so, how would you characterize the following statements, as "leftist" or "rightist"?

From the nature and purpose of civil institutions, all the lands within the limits which any particular society has circumscribed around itself are assumed by that society, and subject to their allotment only. This may be done by themselves, assembled collectively, or by their legislature, to whom they may have delegated sovereign authority; and if they are allotted in neither of these ways, each individual of the society may appropriate to himself such lands as he finds vacant, and occupancy will give him title.


My answer to that is it's neither left nor right. I can see where a leftist will see leftist elements, ignoring the rest, and vice versa. But it's neither. Jefferson there seems to be saying a society should be free to decide how it wants to allocate resources such as land. It could be owned stately, collectively, or individually as they see fit. Right there, I think, are the three basic forms of government, monarchy, democracy and anarchy.

And the people should be free to determine which they self-organize by.

Some more of Jefferson: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Perhaps, Ethereal, I read more into it than you would. I'm open to feedback.

Chris
01-10-2015, 08:12 AM
The interesting thing about "children" is that they don't share the same rights adults do. I don't mean to apply this to the abortion topic, but I mean in a general sense. My kids don't get to decide on most things. I do. I am the parent and that is my right as such. I choose not to put them into public school for now and maybe one day they will plead I took away their rights by keeping them home, but I as a parent have the right to make that decision for them.

Children have a right to life. If not with their birth mom or parents then with someone who does want a baby. Then you get into the adoption issue. It is outrageously expensive to adopt. Here I have a sister who is dying to have kids and she can't. My heart breaks for her. Her and her husband can't adopt either because it is too expensive. Why is adoption so expensive? Compliments of the government. Screw that. If my sister wants to adopt a baby she should be able to. In our church adoptive services they subsidize the cost so that couples who can't but want to have children can actually afford it.

I got pregnant out of wedlock and never once did I consider aborting the baby. I did however think about adoption merely because that is what everyone in my family wanted me to do. I didn't. I wanted that baby. And I kept him. He is one of life's greatest blessings as were and are each child I have had since, but when you are all alone and that father has turned you out and away you feel pretty helpless and alone. Giving that baby away would have meant I would really be alone. And being selfish I wasn't willing to give him to someone else more deserving than I was or capable of providing for us.

I will not argue abortion with you because your opinion will not change mine nor will mine yours. I understand you and what you are saying, but I think there are other steps to achieve downsizing the number of abortions that occur by a change in society and removal of government in the equation. We now look to our gov't to tell us what is morally correct and acceptable and ultimately our government is immoral and run by corrupt and immoral men/women. That should not be the purpose of a government. It should be limited and minimal. I do consider abortion laws of much greater importance and consequence than others, but I side with neither pro-choice or pro-life in regards to politics. I am pro-life as an individual. No party tells me what to believe.


^^Probably the most thoughtful contribution to the entire thread. Thank you! Why can't more make this effort?

Peter1469
01-10-2015, 08:18 AM
If liberty reigns supreme then a left tilt would be by default.

The left in America are Statists. They are enemies of liberty. They worship cradle to grave state assistance.

Mac-7
01-10-2015, 08:30 AM
The libertarian message described by the libs on this board sounds very appealing and pat.

It sort of reminds me of the free love hippies in the 1960s and 70s.

They had all the answers too and no one over 30 could tell them anything.

But the world is a naturally occurring Bad Place and simply sticking our head in the sand won't save us from the madness.

Domestically, we are all too young to remember, but every illegal drug used to be legal.

and they caused a lot of problems for society.

But libs don't know what they don't know.

Chris
01-10-2015, 08:47 AM
The libertarian message described by the libs on this board sounds very appealing and pat.

It sort of reminds me of the free love hippies in the 1960s and 70s.

They had all the answers too and no one over 30 could tell them anything.

But the world is a naturally occurring Bad Place and simply sticking our head in the sand won't save us from the madness.

Domestically, we are all too young to remember, but every illegal drug used to be legal.

and they caused a lot of problems for society.

But libs don't know what they don't know.

Neither are you cons interested in intellectually honestly understaning libertarianism. And as a partisan you have no interest in doing so.

Chris
01-10-2015, 08:51 AM
The left in America are Statists. They are enemies of liberty. They worship cradle to grave state assistance.

The right are statists as well. Some political models take the left/right end points of the political spectrum, wrap them around to where they meet to form a circle as statism.

Such a model is much the same as the Nolan chart.

Peter1469
01-10-2015, 08:52 AM
The libertarian message described by the libs on this board sounds very appealing and pat.

It sort of reminds me of the free love hippies in the 1960s and 70s.

They had all the answers too and no one over 30 could tell them anything.

But the world is a naturally occurring Bad Place and simply sticking our head in the sand won't save us from the madness.

Domestically, we are all too young to remember, but every illegal drug used to be legal.

and they caused a lot of problems for society.

But libs don't know what they don't know.

The younger generation doesn't particularly care what the older generation thinks.

Mac-7
01-10-2015, 08:55 AM
Neither are you cons interested in intellectually honestly understaning libertarianism. And as a partisan you have no interest in doing so.

We don't have your imported-from-china rose colored glasses to misinform us.

iriemon
01-10-2015, 09:05 AM
I'm sure that there is some more precise definition of libertarian.

But from my experience it mostly seems to be the very wealthy and trust fund babies living off their investments who don't want to pay taxes. When they yammer about "liberty" they usually mean they don't want to have to pay taxes, which they call "theft" and "slavery" and the like. There are some exceptions of course.

Chris
01-10-2015, 09:24 AM
I'm sure that there is some more precise definition of libertarian.

But from my experience it mostly seems to be the very wealthy and trust fund babies living off their investments who don't want to pay taxes. When they yammer about "liberty" they usually mean they don't want to have to pay taxes, which they call "theft" and "slavery" and the like. There are some exceptions of course.


No, there's no precise definition. In The Uneasy Marriage of Liberty and Democracy (http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/37430-The-Uneasy-Marriage-of-Liberty-and-Democracy) many are defined: Anarchism, Public-Goods Libertarianism, Kantian Libertarianism, Utilitarian Libertarianism.

It's much easier to define a person's political position who isn't libertarian simply by the made up memes they use. You, for instance, are typical of liberal progressives, leftists, in the way you define libertarianism. Mac is typical of so-called conservatives, rightists.

Bo-4
01-10-2015, 09:25 AM
American politics is largely characterized by the fake divide between Democrats and Republicans, who are characterized as either belonging to the ideological "left" and "right", respectively. In reality, they largely subscribe to the same basic tenets. Income taxes, central banking, imperialism, and federal welfare are all agreed upon by the mainstream on both sides. One only needs to look at the Presidencies of Bush and Obama to see the similarities.

So where do libertarians fall along this fake divide? When you refer to someone as a "leftist" or a "rightist", are you including libertarians?

They are SUPPOSED to be socially tolerant, non-interventionist, and fiscally conservative. Fact is, most who claim to be libertarians fail in at least one of these categories.

There are a few ... like Gary Johnson. Rand Paul is a fake. Most of them identify more strongly and vote with Republicans.

Chris
01-10-2015, 09:26 AM
They are SUPPOSED to be socially tolerant, non-interventionist, and fiscally conservative. Fact is, most who claim to be libertarians fail in at least one of these categories.

There are a few ... like Gary Johnson. Rand Paul is a fake. Most of them identify more strongly and vote with Republicans.


Rand Paul doesn't claim to be a libertarian. Perhaps you confuse him with his father, Ron Paul, who is and does.

donttread
01-10-2015, 10:17 AM
And now you confuse Libertarian Party with libertarian principles and movement? Go back to the OP, do not pass go, do not collect $200.

Ah, Pickle , the ole "my party is corrupt, but if elected yours would be to" argument. Changing the way we fund elections is part of the issue

donttread
01-10-2015, 10:19 AM
Another way to define Libertarians at the federal level is to read the Constitution and BOR's. that's pretty much who we are in a nutshell

Chris
01-10-2015, 11:05 AM
Another way to define Libertarians at the federal level is to read the Constitution and BOR's. that's pretty much who we are in a nutshell

Minarchist libertarian!

Adelaide
01-10-2015, 11:33 AM
I have found that most libertarians are very conservative fiscally, but many come off as indirectly socially liberal. They maybe don't support things like same-sex marriage or abortion morally, but their ideology wouldn't have them implementing laws to determine who gets married or whether abortion is available, to use two examples off the top of my head.

Animal Mother
01-10-2015, 11:42 AM
I have found that most libertarians are very conservative fiscally, but many come off as indirectly socially liberal. They maybe don't support things like same-sex marriage or abortion morally, but their ideology wouldn't have them implementing laws to determine who gets married or whether abortion is available, to use two examples off the top of my head.

Pretty much except that I am not anti-abortion. I don't think we use it enough. :wink:

Adelaide
01-10-2015, 11:44 AM
Pretty much except that I am not anti-abortion. I don't think we use it enough. :wink:

Well, all libertarians seem to have different opinions on the social issues but are fairly consistent on the belief government doesn't belong when it comes to creating or enforcing legislation related to those issues. It's why I don't think you can mass classify libertarians.

Bo-4
01-10-2015, 11:45 AM
Rand Paul doesn't claim to be a libertarian. Perhaps you confuse him with his father, Ron Paul, who is and does.

He says he's "libertarian-ish".

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/04/25/rand-paul-on-being-libertarian-ish/

Chris
01-10-2015, 11:56 AM
He says he's "libertarian-ish".

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/04/25/rand-paul-on-being-libertarian-ish/



Right, full statement:


The first-term senator described himself as “libertarian-ish,” but said he’s never endorsed libertarian candidates.

He was corrected by the student, who pointed out that Paul supported his father, ex-Rep. Ron Paul, when he ran for president as a libertarian in 1988.

“You’re right. I did. I stand corrected,” Paul said, laughing.


-ish, not -ism.

Chris
01-10-2015, 11:58 AM
Well, all libertarians seem to have different opinions on the social issues but are fairly consistent on the belief government doesn't belong when it comes to creating or enforcing legislation related to those issues. It's why I don't think you can mass classify libertarians.


I was just reading other day about Libertarian Monarchy (http://madmonarchist.blogspot.com/2014/06/libertarian-monarchy.html).

iustitia
01-10-2015, 12:01 PM
I'm not a libertarian but the neocon and progressive sheep in this thread are grossly underestimating and misrepresenting libertarians.

The real problem for libertarians is that the twin behemoths of "left" and "right" in this country get to take all the nasty qualities they ascribe to their opponents and then juxtapose them onto libertarians. Neocons like Mac-7 get to accuse libertarians of being drug-induced, baby-killing faggots. Progressives like Bo-4 and iriemon get to accuse libertarians of being poor-hating, gun-toting racists. Both get to accuse libertarians of simultaneously being isolationists and anti-american which are completely at odds but it doesn't stop war mongering militarists. Libertarians get the short end of the stick because, were the left-right paradigm not bullshit (it is), they'd be situated right in the middle making them centrists. And despite the 'left' and 'right' constantly claiming to want to fight for independents and the disaffected, instead of trying to win them over they castigate and slander them.

Realistically "libertarian" only means you support liberty but it doesn't demand adherence to a particular stance. Ron Paul is pro-life. Neal Bortz supported the Iraq War. Judge Napolitano... goes on Fox News? Some libertarians are reformists, some are minarchists, some are anarchists, anracho-capitalists. Objectivists are often called libertarians but I believe Rand actively opposed being grouped with them. The word 'libertarian' originates from French socialists in the 1800's if I recall correctly. When anyone from anti-capitalist Anarchists to fair tax reformers can be described as libertarian, there's a lot of room for libertarians on a fake political spectrum. Anyone can be a libertarian. Capitalists, socialists, communists, Christians, atheists, constitutionalists, anarchists, doesn't matter.

Political terminology is meant to be vague enough to prevent definitive doctrine yet polarizing enough to arbitrarily place people into enemy camps and perpetuate intellectually lazy philosophy and dishonest debate.

Bo-4
01-10-2015, 12:06 PM
Right, full statement:

-ish, not -ism.

I like MANY of his policy positions, particularly foreign policy. But he lost me when he tried to tuck a national personhood amendment into the national flood insurance bill.

However Chris ... if it's Rand vs Hilly (very possible.. probably 25% or so) i'd probably have to vote for Rand.

donttread
01-10-2015, 01:45 PM
Minarchist libertarian!

At the federal level I'm all about the enumerated powers.
However, I differ from many of my Libertarian friends in two key ways
1) I do believe in more human service, education , social programing and safety nets at the state level than most as long as they "hand up oriented" and evaluated for efficiency. For example a dramatic improvement in drug treatment when we end prohibition.
2) My whole hearted belief that the megacorps don't represent Capitalism, they make a mockery of it and that for freedom to live the megacorps must die

Ethereal
01-10-2015, 03:10 PM
Yes, but that is not a position very shared by most of the American Libertarian.

How do you know?


There are some positions that are leftist but they are mostly right.

Do you agree with that sentence?

I don't understand the sentence.


However as I said that sentence is moderately leftist. A leftist would use other terms but with similar consequences, and also he is from other time.

Today I believe that there would be little few Libertarian that would agree with Jefferson. Because from their point of view that occupation would mean a violation of private property. (That land may not be used but be property of someone else).

But there are American libertarians who agree with him.


By the way, I like this game. If you can quote something else, it would appreciated. But it would be better if it was a little more actual.

A little more actual?

kilgram
01-10-2015, 03:20 PM
Again, what's to teach? I remember years ago when this was a hot topic, I would ask proponents of ID what they would teach, ask them to lay out some lesson plans. None ever came up with any, because there's nothing to teach. Behe, a famous ID, would teach the three pillars of evolution--mutation, selection, inheritance, then say but irreducible complexity? God. That's it.
Yes from the XX century


Отправлено с моего MT15i через Tapatalk

Chris
01-10-2015, 03:26 PM
Yes from the XX century


Отправлено с моего MT15i через Tapatalk


That post of mine came from another thread.

Mini Me
01-10-2015, 07:40 PM
I like MANY of his policy positions, particularly foreign policy. But he lost me when he tried to tuck a national personhood amendment into the national flood insurance bill.

However @Chris (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=128) ... if it's Rand vs Hilly (very possible.. probably 25% or so) i'd probably have to vote for Rand.

But by voting for Rand, you are voting for the Rethuglican party platform which controls all members with Grovers fist and Rove's power and is sworn to impose the corporate fascism upon us, and only cares about the rich elite. Rands maverick ways would be crushed like a bug as soon as he took office, lets not kid ourselves.

Never believe what a politician says, just look at his deeds!

Dr. Who
01-10-2015, 08:07 PM
Would land ownership would fall under economic policy? If so, how would you characterize the following statements, as "leftist" or "rightist"?

From the nature and purpose of civil institutions, all the lands within the limits which any particular society has circumscribed around itself are assumed by that society, and subject to their allotment only. This may be done by themselves, assembled collectively, or by their legislature, to whom they may have delegated sovereign authority; and if they are allotted in neither of these ways, each individual of the society may appropriate to himself such lands as he finds vacant, and occupancy will give him title.
I'm not sure really. It is a libertarian statement, thus underscoring the inherent right of people to use land that is not otherwise being used. Is belief in inherent rights left or right or neither. It might be viewed as a liberal idea in the classical sense, but I don't know if that is left, except in the context of a society where the concept of property rights trump human rights. Conversely in a truly socialistic society, there would be no property rights at all, but just use rights.

PolWatch
01-10-2015, 09:20 PM
Please do not call Republicans Rethugicans. It offends our republican posters.

Captain Obvious
01-10-2015, 09:28 PM
Please do not call Republicans Rethugicans. It offends our republican posters.

It really isn't more offensive than calling them 'Republicans'.

...alright, I'm going

PolWatch
01-10-2015, 09:31 PM
play nice Capt...or I'll call Mrs Capt!

Captain Obvious
01-10-2015, 09:32 PM
play nice Capt...or I'll call Mrs Capt!

She's cranky tonight.

Not because of me either, believe it or not.

I have a massive back rub teed up for her tomorrow morning, and a coffee in bed. And breakfast later.

PolWatch
01-10-2015, 09:35 PM
clever fella!

Ethereal
01-10-2015, 09:37 PM
I'm not sure really. It is a libertarian statement, thus underscoring the inherent right of people to use land that is not otherwise being used. Is belief in inherent rights left or right or neither. It might be viewed as a liberal idea in the classical sense, but I don't know if that is left, except in the context of a society where the concept of property rights trump human rights. Conversely in a truly socialistic society, there would be no property rights at all, but just use rights.

I don't actually subscribe to the left-right dichotomy. I think that if you really got precise, you would find that most "average" folks agree on the important issues, whether they belong to the republican party or the democrat party or no party at all. If there were a dichotomy, it would be the one between the oppressed and the oppressor, and the oppressors use the left-right dichotomy to divide and conquer the oppressed.

Captain Obvious
01-10-2015, 09:39 PM
clever fella!

No, not clever really.

I've been on this job here for going on 4 years right now. Before that I did a lot of temporary/interim stuff, traveled a lot. Wanted to settle down here but she really doesn't like the region. It's depressed, really hick. There's drugs and stuff. The campground we're in is fine, nothing bad going on here, it's out in the country a bit, away from all the shit but the camper life is growing on her.

So I got my resume together and I'm flirting with a couple of places. She's anxious about that because she knows I'm content here. Moving to a new job doesn't scare me at all, I know I'll be successful wherever I land but it's been a bit of a stressful last few years with all the traveling.

I see it in her face, she has a lot of angst. She's been a complete angel about all of this so far, I just want her to be happy. It's going to be a little bit of a stressful first half of 2015 I think but we'll be fine.

Matty
01-10-2015, 09:40 PM
Just watch who Caucasus with who!

PolWatch
01-10-2015, 09:46 PM
I completely understand the life in an RV issue. We spent 10 years following jobs around the southeast. Sometimes we would be in one place for 3 days and one place we were there 3 years. Some places were nice...some, not so nice. We kept our house and came home as often as we could but sometimes that wasn't often. Trying to live in an RV full time is a pain. I see those cool ads on TV for RV's with everyone smiling & happy and just go 'BAH-HUMBUG'. We always seemed to be working on the backside of beyond...20+ miles to the nearest grocery store...formal wear consisted of having your teeth in...nice places.

A friend of mine didn't believe me so they sold their home and bought a beautiful RV...fireplace & all the fancy stuff. They traveled for about a year but she was ready to buy another house after about 6 months.

Captain Obvious
01-10-2015, 09:47 PM
Just watch who Caucasus with who!

I want to caucus with Mia Love.

Captain Obvious
01-10-2015, 09:48 PM
I completely understand the life in an RV issue. We spent 10 years following jobs around the southeast. Sometimes we would be in one place for 3 days and one place we were there 3 years. Some places were nice...some, not so nice. We kept our house and came home as often as we could but sometimes that wasn't often. Trying to live in an RV full time is a pain. I see those cool ads on TV for RV's with everyone smiling & happy and just go 'BAH-HUMBUG'. We always seemed to be working on the backside of beyond...20+ miles to the nearest grocery store...formal wear consisted of having your teeth in...nice places.

A friend of mine didn't believe me so they sold their home and bought a beautiful RV...fireplace & all the fancy stuff. They traveled for about a year but she was ready to buy another house after about 6 months.

People are different.

I could stay here indefinitely. I love this lifestyle.

She tolerates it, well. But she's really growing homesick - or housesick more specifically. I get that too.

Dr. Who
01-10-2015, 09:58 PM
I don't actually subscribe to the left-right dichotomy. I think that if you really got precise, you would find that most "average" folks agree on the important issues, whether they belong to the republican party or the democrat party or no party at all. If there were a dichotomy, it would be the one between the oppressed and the oppressor, and the oppressors use the left-right dichotomy to divide and conquer the oppressed.
I agree. Too many notions are ascribed to left or right. Is freedom a left or right concept? I think it is neither. Is the right to survive left or right - neither. What falls left or right is the ideology behind the means of achieving the best situation for the most people. Often the political focus ends up being partisan and achieves the most for the least people while most people dwell on the political affiliations and labels more than they dwell on the reality of what is really happening. The really wealthy people who control our governments are neither left or right. The terms lose all meaning when the focus behind all of the politics is control of the many by the very few.

Dr. Who
01-10-2015, 10:03 PM
People are different.

I could stay here indefinitely. I love this lifestyle.

She tolerates it, well. But she's really growing homesick - or housesick more specifically. I get that too.
Yes. Women are nesters and it's not a nest if it moves around. I'm sure that nomadic life was hell on women in our historic past. It was probably a woman who discovered and promoted farming, to avoid all that traipsing around looking for food.

Captain Obvious
01-10-2015, 10:06 PM
Yes. Women are nesters and it's not a nest if it moves around. I'm sure that nomadic life was hell on women in our historic past. It was probably a woman who discovered and promoted farming, to avoid all that traipsing around looking for food.

I think it's more of a she just wants to get the fuck away from me more than 3 feet every now and then thing to be honest.

I could live in a shoe box and grill outdoors every night. She wants ovens, locking bedroom doors.

Women...

Dr. Who
01-10-2015, 10:15 PM
I think it's more of a she just wants to get the fuck away from me more than 3 feet every now and then thing to be honest.

I could live in a shoe box and grill outdoors every night. She wants ovens, locking bedroom doors.

Women...
Maybe not just you, but kids too. She just may want a little peace and quiet and some space to herself. I'm claustrophobic, so I'd go nuts in an RV or Camper for more than a vacation situation. I don't know how you deal with it, without spending most of your time outside.

PolWatch
01-10-2015, 10:23 PM
My husband was gone most of the time...he usually worked 12 hour days, 6 days a week. I was in a 32' 5th wheel with 2 dogs & 2 cats. In good weather it wasn't too bad...outside under the awning. Winter and really hot weather I was stuck inside. In towns where the only place to eat out at the local gas station deli. We had a washer/dryer combo in the RV but it takes about 6 hours to wash & dry 2 pairs of jeans & 2 shirts. They all have 3 burner ranges with propane ovens...that never heat like a regular oven. There is the joy of having to empty the grey & black water tanks. RV life is just filled with all kinds of joy. Toss in some interesting folks in some of the RV parks....I nearly kissed the dirt in my front yard when we finally retired and came home for good!

Captain Obvious
01-10-2015, 10:28 PM
My husband was gone most of the time...he usually worked 12 hour days, 6 days a week. I was in a 32' 5th wheel with 2 dogs & 2 cats. In good weather it wasn't too bad...outside under the awning. Winter and really hot weather I was stuck inside. In towns where the only place to eat out at the local gas station deli. We had a washer/dryer combo in the RV but it takes about 6 hours to wash & dry 2 pairs of jeans & 2 shirts. They all have 3 burner ranges with propane ovens...that never heat like a regular oven. There is the joy of having to empty the grey & black water tanks. RV life is just filled with all kinds of joy. Toss in some interesting folks in some of the RV parks....I nearly kissed the dirt in my front yard when we finally retired and came home for good!

Google "luggable loo" - water's shut off and that's what we're working on now.

She empties it mostly because she's home during the day.

That's deserving of sainthood IMO.

http://arfarfarf.com/review/images/luggable_loo.jpg

Dr. Who
01-10-2015, 10:29 PM
My husband was gone most of the time...he usually worked 12 hour days, 6 days a week. I was in a 32' 5th wheel with 2 dogs & 2 cats. In good weather it wasn't too bad...outside under the awning. Winter and really hot weather I was stuck inside. In towns where the only place to eat out at the local gas station deli. We had a washer/dryer combo in the RV but it takes about 6 hours to wash & dry 2 pairs of jeans & 2 shirts. They all have 3 burner ranges with propane ovens...that never heat like a regular oven. There is the joy of having to empty the grey & black water tanks. RV life is just filled with all kinds of joy. Toss in some interesting folks in some of the RV parks....I nearly kissed the dirt in my front yard when we finally retired and came home for good!
I can't imagine living that lifestyle. Kudos to anyone who can, but I need roots and a modicum of space. An RV/Camper is like living in one room all of the time. That will be fine if I one day have Alzheimer's and lose touch with reality, but I did that recently for a month in Germany and it got on my nerves.

Dr. Who
01-10-2015, 10:30 PM
Google "luggable loo" - water's shut off and that's what we're working on now.

She empties it mostly because she's home during the day.

That's deserving of sainthood IMO.

http://arfarfarf.com/review/images/luggable_loo.jpg
Yuk. You're lucky you're not divorced.

Captain Obvious
01-10-2015, 10:31 PM
Maybe not just you, but kids too. She just may want a little peace and quiet and some space to herself. I'm claustrophobic, so I'd go nuts in an RV or Camper for more than a vacation situation. I don't know how you deal with it, without spending most of your time outside.

It's way better in the warmer weather, we sit outside by the campfire and the kid is off throwing sticks at trees.

In the wintertime, not so much. It's a mild winter here in the Ohio Valley but last week or so it's been snowing a lot and sub-zero temps which is off the bell curve a bit so we're inside a lot. And yeah, that grows on everyone, including the kid.

Captain Obvious
01-10-2015, 10:32 PM
Yuk. You're lucky you're not divorced.

I have skillz.

:biglaugh:

PolWatch
01-10-2015, 10:33 PM
I've said it before...Mrs Capt is a saint!

Dr. Who
01-10-2015, 10:34 PM
It's way better in the warmer weather, we sit outside by the campfire and the kid is off throwing sticks at trees.

In the wintertime, not so much. It's a mild winter here in the Ohio Valley but last week or so it's been snowing a lot and sub-zero temps which is off the bell curve a bit so we're inside a lot. And yeah, that grows on everyone, including the kid.
Time for a change CO. Your wife deserves a real home.

Ethereal
01-10-2015, 10:34 PM
Time for a change CO. Your wife deserves a real home.

Home is where the heart is.

Alyosha
01-10-2015, 10:38 PM
I could live in a cave if the person I loved was there.

Captain Obvious
01-10-2015, 10:39 PM
I've said it before...Mrs Capt is a saint!

The girls in Accounting say the same thing.

And she is. I'm really lucky in a lot of ways. She puts up with a lot of shit that I'm sure you can appreciate from knowing about me what you know.

And she's lucky too. I'm really good to her. She's the center of my universe.

Captain Obvious
01-10-2015, 10:40 PM
Home is where the heart is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6zslvLklyI

Ethereal
01-10-2015, 10:46 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6zslvLklyI

Funny movie!

Mini Me
01-11-2015, 12:40 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6zslvLklyI

Son. you ever been to a Turkish prison?

Do you like Gladiator movies?

Mini Me
01-11-2015, 12:57 AM
Moderators:

I am not referring to the posters here when I use the term Rethuglicans or Duhmocraps. I only mean the two parties. Those terms are "affectionate, comical terms", and not to be taken personally.

But most all of us know that it is the Donkephant that is to blame, and do not love either political party, right?

My terminology is certainly very mild compared to the vile, hatefull posts I see on her daily by assorted nut jobs, who are really here to inflame people, troll, and create discord, and use F bombs and foul epithets. I come to this board to inform, learn, discuss, and maybe a few laughs now and then. I do hate censorship and poiltical correctness, and need my free spirit to roam with ease and no hinderence.I seek the truth, and nothing else, and am not out to offend anyone.

Private Pickle
01-11-2015, 01:44 AM
Moderators:

I am not referring to the posters here when I use the term Rethuglicans or Duhmocraps. I only mean the two parties. Those terms are "affectionate, comical terms", and not to be taken personally.

But most all of us know that it is the Donkephant that is to blame, and do not love either political party, right?

My terminology is certainly very mild compared to the vile, hatefull posts I see on her daily by assorted nut jobs, who are really here to inflame people, troll, and create discord, and use F bombs and foul epithets. I come to this board to inform, learn, discuss, and maybe a few laughs now and then. I do hate censorship and poiltical correctness, and need my free spirit to roam with ease and no hinderence.I seek the truth, and nothing else, and am not out to offend anyone.

And with this I bid you a good night.

Chris
01-11-2015, 08:10 AM
I don't actually subscribe to the left-right dichotomy. I think that if you really got precise, you would find that most "average" folks agree on the important issues, whether they belong to the republican party or the democrat party or no party at all. If there were a dichotomy, it would be the one between the oppressed and the oppressor, and the oppressors use the left-right dichotomy to divide and conquer the oppressed.


Arnold Kling, an economist mainly, speaks of a Three-Axes Model:

http://i.snag.gy/54l2S.jpg

kilgram
01-11-2015, 08:26 AM
Arnold Kling, an economist mainly, speaks of a Three-Axes Model:

http://i.snag.gy/54l2S.jpg

And according to you the line of oppressors - oppressed is the leftist line of thinking. :-)

Enviat des del meu MT15i usant Tapatalk 2

Chris
01-11-2015, 08:29 AM
And according to you the line of oppressors - oppressed is the leftist line of thinking. :-)

Enviat des del meu MT15i usant Tapatalk 2


Let's just say it's the way you frame everything. Mister D tends to frame things as civilization v barbarians. I tend to frame things as liberty v coercion.

If I understand Kling correctly we all have all 3 models, some can switch between them, while others suppress one or more.

Jonathon Haidt would explain this as a difference in values.

Max Rockatansky
01-11-2015, 08:52 AM
Libertarians, like anybody who does not choose one of the only real parties, are fence sitters and stand for nothing. They only exist to hurt the Republican party. But don't expect the Republicans to even try to earn a vote from them, they just want to mock the fence sitters till they come crawling back to the right side. Sarcasm off/

LOL. Funny and too true. The Far Right ridicules Libertarians as Lefties, but most Lefties accuse Libertarians as being Righties.

Libertarians are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. The Libertarian philosophy can be summed up in the phrase "I don't care what you do, just don't force me to do it too or make me pay for it".

Chris
01-11-2015, 09:58 AM
LOL. Funny and too true. The Far Right ridicules Libertarians as Lefties, but most Lefties accuse Libertarians as being Righties.

Libertarians are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. The Libertarian philosophy can be summed up in the phrase "I don't care what you do, just don't force me to do it too or make me pay for it".

Nice righty interpretation of libertarianism.

kilgram
01-11-2015, 10:03 AM
Let's just say it's the way you frame everything. Mister D tends to frame things as civilization v barbarians. I tend to frame things as liberty v coercion.

If I understand Kling correctly we all have all 3 models, some can switch between them, while others suppress one or more.

Jonathon Haidt would explain this as a difference in values.
Obviously and for this reason I am leftist because my values are very different from yours. However, I don't see much difference between oppressors/oprressed and liberty/coercion. Just it is another form to say the same.

However, you don't see as coercion the use of indirect coercion. You only see as coercion the direct violence. It is the biggest difference between the right and the left. If you saw indirect coercion as a form of oprresion you would be leftist ;)

For example when we discussed in other thread and I mentioned the limitations of having to accept a job or death. You said that it was not forced. Obviously that is forced. That is oppresion or coercion in an indirect form. And in that circunstances there is no freedom neither voluntary acts.

Chris
01-11-2015, 10:15 AM
Obviously and for this reason I am leftist because my values are very different from yours. However, I don't see much difference between oppressors/oprressed and liberty/coercion. Just it is another form to say the same.

However, you don't see as coercion the use of indirect coercion. You only see as coercion the direct violence. It is the biggest difference between the right and the left. If you saw indirect coercion as a form of oprresion you would be leftist ;)

For example when we discussed in other thread and I mentioned the limitations of having to accept a job or death. You said that it was not forced. Obviously that is forced. That is oppresion or coercion in an indirect form. And in that circunstances there is no freedom neither voluntary acts.


Here's the basic difference, as I see it. Because I tend to view things from a liberty/coercion framework, I see freedom as a responsibility to myself and others I should be left alone to fulfill outside the coercive force of the state. You, otoh, tend to view things from an oppressor/oppressed framework, you desire freedom from responsibility and believe you're entitled to the needs and wants of life.

Take work. I view it as a responsibility, something I need to do in order to get what I need and want, so I contract voluntarily with others to do so. You, otoh, believe employers owe you, that you're entitled to whatever you want, but you must work and so you're not free.

Chris
01-11-2015, 10:26 AM
Here's Arnold Kling explaining it as guest on Russ Robert's podcast, Kling on the Three Languages of Politics (http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2013/06/kling_on_the_th.html):


Guest: Okay, so there are three things that set aside oppositions, or the good and the bad. So what I claim is that Progressives organize the good and the bad in terms of oppression and the oppressed, and they think in terms of groups. So, certain groups of people are oppressed, and certain groups of people are oppressors. And so the good is to align yourself against oppression, and the historical figures that have improved the world have fought against oppression and overcome oppression. The second axis is one I think Conservatives use, which is civilization and barbarism. The good is civilized values that have accumulated over time and have stood the test of time; and the bad is barbarians who try to strike out against those values and destroy civilization. And the third axis is one I associate with Libertarians, which is freedom versus coercion, so that good is individuals making their own choices, contracting freely with each other; and the bad is coercion at gunpoint, particularly on the part of governments.

Russ: So, let's apply it to one example you do in the book, which is immigration. Talk about how the three different languages would work with that very sensitive political issue.

Guest: Okay, so in the United States today, a Progressive might think of the people who have crossed the border from Latin America as an oppressed group, and native white Americans who are hostile to the immigrants as oppressors. And so they would be favoring allowing these immigrants to come in. With one sort of caveat, in that they also think that, would classify low-skilled working Americans as among the oppressed group and they wouldn't want to create conflicts where bringing in more immigrants hurts low-skilled Americans. For Conservatives looking along the civilization/barbarism axis, I think that having a border, and a well-defined border, and a well-defined population is part of civilized values. They would worry that if you allow immigration that you might undermine that, and they would feel very strongly that people who have crossed the border illegally have, by definition, carried out an illegal act and therefore certainly ought not to be rewarded for it and perhaps ought to be punished for it. Finally, Libertarians don't like the idea of government coercion at all, and don't see why political borders should have any significance, and so they would tend to favor open borders. So that they would see this as a freedom versus coercion issue. I should probably say that I don't think of these axes as some kind of fundamental explanation of why people think what they do. More, it predicts how they will be most comfortable expressing their points of view. So, a Progressive will be most comfortable expressing their point of view on immigration, whatever it is, in terms of how it deals with oppressed groups. Conservatives will be most comfortable talking about it in terms of how it affects civilized values versus a tax on civilized values. And Libertarians will be most comfortable talking about it in terms of freedom versus coercion. It's how they feel most comfortable talking about it, not necessarily an explanation of why they believe what they believe.

Chris
01-11-2015, 10:37 AM
At the risk of straying from topic, sort of...


Jonathon Haidt would explain this as a difference in values.


Obviously and for this reason I am leftist because my values are very different from yours.

Haidt in The Righteous Mind groups moral values as follows:

Group 1: Important to conservatives & liberals


Care/Harm

Liberty/Oppression



Group 2: Important to conservatives but somewhat less important to liberals


Fairness/Cheating



Group 3: Important to conservatives but not so important to liberals


Loyalty/Betrayal

Authority/Subversion

Sanctity/Degradation



And libertarians almost exclusively value morally Liberty/Oppression, but define it not as liberals do but conservatives do.


That's according to Haidt.

kilgram
01-11-2015, 10:46 AM
Here's the basic difference, as I see it. Because I tend to view things from a liberty/coercion framework, I see freedom as a responsibility to myself and others I should be left alone to fulfill outside the coercive force of the state. You, otoh, tend to view things from an oppressor/oppressed framework, you desire freedom from responsibility and believe you're entitled to the needs and wants of life.

Take work. I view it as a responsibility, something I need to do in order to get what I need and want, so I contract voluntarily with others to do so. You, otoh, believe employers owe you, that you're entitled to whatever you want, but you must work and so you're not free.
No, I don't want freedom from responsibility. In my idea of anarchism I believe people should be responsible. But, there is a thing, freedom gives you more responsibility but there are factors that reduce any kind of freedom. For example, in the today's system where the means of production are owned by a few it limits the freedom of choice of the rest where they must accept the conditions of the owners. Even if that goes against their principles, they have to accept that or die or if they don't die, become pariahs of society.

That is the situation.

I defend a system where everybody has the same opportunity, equality. If you take a bad decission, you are responsible of that, but a bad decission cannot condemn your life. We live in a society where each others protect ourselves, it is solidarity and mutual aid and it ensures a strong society and the survival.

Chris
01-11-2015, 10:51 AM
No, I don't want freedom from responsibility. In my idea of anarchism I believe people should be responsible. But, there is a thing, freedom gives you more responsibility but there are factors that reduce any kind of freedom. For example, in the today's system where the means of production are owned by a few it limits the freedom of choice of the rest where they must accept the conditions of the owners. Even if that goes against their principles, they have to accept that or die or if they don't die, become pariahs of society.

That is the situation.

I defend a system where everybody has the same opportunity, equality. If you take a bad decission, you are responsible of that, but a bad decission cannot condemn your life. We live in a society where each others protect ourselves, it is solidarity and mutual aid and it ensures a strong society and the survival.


Again, you are faced with the necessities life imposes on you, to feed, clothe and shelter yourself, and again you blame others for not providing it. You do indeed feel entitled.

For the rest you do have the same opportunity. But it requires extra work, it requires risk. Your time preference is simply to high.

Ethereal
01-11-2015, 12:50 PM
Is this a leftist or rightist statement?

A right of property in moveable things is admitted before the establishment of government. A separate property in lands, not till after that establishment. The right to moveables is acknowledged by all the hordes of Indians surrounding us. Yet by no one of them has a separate property in lands been yielded to individuals. He who plants a field keeps possession till he has gathered the produce, after which one has as good a right as another to occupy it. Government must be established and laws provided, before lands can be separately appropriated, and their owner protected in his possession. Till then, the property is in the body of the nation, and they, or their chief as trustee, must grant them to individuals, and determine the conditions of the grant.

Peter1469
01-11-2015, 01:27 PM
Is this a leftist or rightist statement?

A right of property in moveable things is admitted before the establishment of government. A separate property in lands, not till after that establishment. The right to moveables is acknowledged by all the hordes of Indians surrounding us. Yet by no one of them has a separate property in lands been yielded to individuals. He who plants a field keeps possession till he has gathered the produce, after which one has as good a right as another to occupy it. Government must be established and laws provided, before lands can be separately appropriated, and their owner protected in his possession. Till then, the property is in the body of the nation, and they, or their chief as trustee, must grant them to individuals, and determine the conditions of the grant.

Sounds like the indians are about to lose their land.

Mac-7
01-11-2015, 05:54 PM
There is no standard libertarian position on abortion.

Libs (libertarians) do not believe in non intervention in citizens private lives?

I think most libertarians cannot help themselves and have to be pro abortion.

iustitia
01-11-2015, 05:56 PM
Ron Paul.

Mini Me
01-11-2015, 08:12 PM
Here's the basic difference, as I see it. Because I tend to view things from a liberty/coercion framework, I see freedom as a responsibility to myself and others I should be left alone to fulfill outside the coercive force of the state. You, otoh, tend to view things from an oppressor/oppressed framework, you desire freedom from responsibility and believe you're entitled to the needs and wants of life.

Wow! That's harsh!

You make Kilgram sound like a Communist! hehe


Take work. I view it as a responsibility, something I need to do in order to get what I need and want, so I contract voluntarily with others to do so. You, otoh, believe employers owe you, that you're entitled to whatever you want, but you must work and so you're not free.

Mini Me
01-11-2015, 08:15 PM
Libertarians just want to smoke dope and run around naked!

Or:

Libertarians are Republicans who voted for Bush twice, and are too ashamed to admit it!

Then there are the Obamunists who voted for Obama twice.
I am at a loss for words.

Mac-7
01-12-2015, 10:07 AM
Libertarians just want to smoke dope and run around naked!

Or:

Libertarians are Republicans who voted for Bush twice, and are too ashamed to admit it!

Then there are the Obamunists who voted for Obama twice.
I am at a loss for words.

I don't think many libertarians voted for GWB.

Nor do I see them voting repub in the last two elections.

Many may have voter for Gary Johnson or Ron Paul in the repub primary.

But then took their football and went home during the general election.

I look for them to play the same dishonest game in 2016.

Chris
01-12-2015, 10:11 AM
I don't think many libertarians voted for GWB.

Nor do I see them voting repub in the last two elections.

Many may have voter for Gary Johnson or Ron Paul in the repub primary.

But then took their football and went home during the general election.

I look for them to play the same dishonest game in 2016.

Dishonesty was in the GOP. As usual they hope to gain the libertarian vote by paying lip service to sound fiscal policy, smaller government, and a balanced budget--libertarians and libertarian ideas--but come convention time that's set aside for big government establish types. That's dishonest. Not walking away when Ron Paul is shunned.

Codename Section
01-12-2015, 10:12 AM
Yeh, Hell would have frozen over before I voted for Romney. The dude is completely unlikable and when you make Obama look slightly more likable you're a fucking tool.

I voted Gary Johnson. I would have anyway but Mitt Romney didn't even entice me. Ron Paul would have made me vote Republican tho.

Mac-7
01-12-2015, 10:29 AM
Dishonesty was in the GOP. As usual they hope to gain the libertarian vote by paying lip service to sound fiscal policy, smaller government, and a balanced budget--libertarians and libertarian ideas--but come convention time that's set aside for big government establish types. That's dishonest. Not walking away when Ron Paul is shunned.

I call libertarians dishonest because so many registered and voted in the republican primary but then walked away during the general election.

Codename Section
01-12-2015, 10:32 AM
I call libertarians dishonest because so many registered and voted in the republican primary but then walked away during the general election.

The whole primary and election system is anti-choice and forces us to accept the top two worthless candidates that corporations can buy. I really don't care what you think about voting in the primary to get Ron Paul in. If he had won, they'd have voted Republican. You don't get our vote and you're not entitled to it.

Mac-7
01-12-2015, 10:36 AM
The whole primary and election system is anti-choice and forces us to accept the top two worthless candidates that corporations can buy. I really don't care what you think about voting in the primary to get Ron Paul in. If he had won, they'd have voted Republican. You don't get our vote and you're not entitled to it.

If your worthless candidate had won the primary the entire repub establishment would have worked to get him elected.

And you would expect me to hold my nose in the general election and vote for your worthless candidate even though he was not my first choice.

which I would have done.

Chris
01-12-2015, 10:38 AM
I call libertarians dishonest because so many registered and voted in the republican primary but then walked away during the general election.

Nah, you do so because you're dishonest.

Chris
01-12-2015, 10:39 AM
If your worthless candidate had won the primary the entire repub establishment would have worked to get him elected.

And you would expect me to hold my nose in the general election and vote for your worthless candidate even though he was not my first choice.

which I would have done.



Romney. Worthless.

Codename Section
01-12-2015, 10:55 AM
If your worthless candidate had won the primary the entire repub establishment would have worked to get him elected.

And you would expect me to hold my nose in the general election and vote for your worthless candidate even though he was not my first choice.

which I would have done.

Right because he was a Republican and Republicans do that. I'm not one so my vote is not your guaranteed vote. If you want me to switch parties you'd have to have a candidate I'm willing to vote for.

I refuse to vote for a war mongering neocon like Romney or Obama. The last two of those got friends of mine killed and their rhetoric fooled my 18 year old self that America was under attack and I stupidly joined the military.

Fool me once, as they say.

Mac-7
01-12-2015, 11:26 AM
Right because he was a Republican and Republicans do that. I'm not one so my vote is not your guaranteed vote. If you want me to switch parties you'd have to have a candidate I'm willing to vote for.



what is the point of holding elections if everyone to the right of center is so bullheaded that they must have their own first choice or nothing?

That means no republican can ever hope to get more than 25% of the vote in a genernal election and the democrats will be laughing all the way to the bank.

Common
01-12-2015, 11:39 AM
Libertarians are exactly opposite of my thinking and when I make the next statement it is a NOT intended for the people that declare themselves libertarian. Its for Rand Paul only, hes a fraud and a phony and he lies like a rug.

Chris
01-12-2015, 11:57 AM
Libertarians are exactly opposite of my thinking and when I make the next statement it is a NOT intended for the people that declare themselves libertarian. Its for Rand Paul only, hes a fraud and a phony and he lies like a rug.

Rand Paul doesn't claim to be libertarian. :icon_scratch:

Mac-7
01-12-2015, 12:00 PM
Rand Paul doesn't claim to be libertarian. :icon_scratch:

But he is.

Chris
01-12-2015, 12:03 PM
But he is.

No, he's not. He's too interventionist.

Common, I made the same mistake you did and criticized Rand for not being libertarian, specifically noninterventionist enough. It was pointed out to me Rand never claims to be libertarian. He's not his father.

Common
01-12-2015, 12:33 PM
Rand Paul doesn't claim to be libertarian. :icon_scratch:

Hes hailed as the libertarian hero and I believe he does just like his father. They both are the face of the libertarianism and neither are in that party

Common
01-12-2015, 12:35 PM
No, he's not. He's too interventionist.

@Common (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=659), I made the same mistake you did and criticize Rand for not being libertarian, specifically noninterventionist enough. It was pointed out to me Rand never claims to be libertarian. He's not his father.

I agree, his father I respected Ron stood by what he believed through thick or thin. His son is a lying pos and hes whatever his audience wants him to be. I cant stand him

Chris
01-12-2015, 12:36 PM
Hes hailed as the libertarian hero and I believe he does just like his father. They both are the face of the libertarianism and neither are in that party

Some libertarians like him, none I know hail him so nor see him as face. He's just more libertarian than establishment Reps like Romney, Bush, whoever else.