Four Reasons to Reject Libertarianism

Post Reply New Topic

Agorism doesn't require anything major to happen politically. That's one of it's major strengths.

That is also its major weakness. In today's political climate, getting elected and staying in office depends in large part how drastic your views are, especially regarding change.

Eh? Why is that a weakness? Agorists don't try to get elected...

Which limits the ability to effect change.

You're free to go start you're own business under libertarian rules you crazy radical feminist. Why do you rely so much on others to produce and provide you a job?

Not really, The purpose is to nullify the state, not use it.

You're not helping, bro.

You basically said, 'Anyone who disagrees with me is a freedom-hating (bad) person' in your prior post. Now you're implying that I'm either stupid or lazy because I don't start my own business.
Firstly, there is more than one type of freedom. Not being able to quit your job and start your own business, because your family would lose medical coverage, is not freedom. Just for example.

As for why I rely on other people for anything, it's because I'm a member of a social species in a complex social environment in which no one can be an expert at everything one needs to have done in order to get through the average week or the average year.

In a libertarian environment, you're free to perform your own appendectomy sans a general anesthetic if you lack health insurance and can't pay for a doctor. Why do you rely on other so much to perform necessary medical procedures? You're free to draw your own blood and run your own medical tests using your own $30K chemistry analyzer. Are you too stupid and lazy to do those things?

Or maybe you don't do them because it would be unnecessarily painful, and have far less positive outcomes, than if you let the experts do it. Maybe you don't do it because some people are good at things like drawing blood and running lab tests, and other people are good at starting businesses.

What I wonder is why you think that one type of person is somehow morally superior to the other.

I am implying that you are taking away my freedom because you want me to pay taxes to support your beliefs. If you have faith in how the government spends your money, that's fine. But don't demand that I need to pay for somebody else's healthcare, government employee salaries & pensions, your food stamps etc.

If you knew anything about microeconomics (my college major) you would know that the free market approach creates way more jobs. Your chances of having a higher paying job under a libertarian government are much greater than the manipulated government employed job market we have now.



Again, under a libertarian government there wouldn't be all of the government employees being payed, and we wouldn't have to pay nearly as many stupid taxes. Money would be getting circulated in the economy much more than it is now. Your chances of being able to afford your own healthcare would be much greater than they are today. I'm not saying that we don't need some government, but the size of our government is beyond a police state now.

And that's what your implying; your twisted view of a libertarian government is no government at all. We need reduced government. Taxes are killing businesses and keeping them from hiring and growing. Government spending is around 50% of GDP. Do you even know what that means?







You don't know me. It's very ignorant of you to make such a statement that I think "one type of person is more superior than the other" I don't even know what you mean by that comment.

I'm an aspie male. My chances of starting a business are slim. I want the most private sector jobs for America as possible.

I know, and I don't usually act this way when discussing politics and trying to prove points. But do you really think there is any reasoning with these people?

Especially with the demographics of people on this website...with the platform libertarians stand for?

First rule of debate: You don't try to persuade the people you're arguing against - they've already made up their minds. You try to persuade the people listening that haven't made up their minds yet.

Second rule of debate: The person who best keeps their cool wins.

I will give you that.

LKL said that I speak like a 3 year old before I lost my cool, so technically she lost before I did.

'Cept she was right. You made a point that was about as well-formed as something my 10 year old niece would say.

That's funny, you either have a different view of freedom than I do or you do not know the libertarian party's policies.

LIBERTY-

: the state or condition of people who are able to act and speak freely

: the power to do or choose what you want to

: a political right

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberty


If you want to be educated quickly on what their policies are than look here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertaria ... ted_States)

Please tell me:

1. What your definition of freedom is?

2. What parts of the Libertarian platform deny you these freedoms?

I don't need to read up on the libertarian party - I happen to be a member. It's obvious that the libertarian party is for liberty - however, that does not mean that in order to be in favor of individual liberty you must be a libertarian. That's just insane.

Yes it does pretty much, unless if you can find a party with the same philosophy on just about everything that the libertarian party has.

If you want government control, especially as much as we have right now, than that is taking away other peoples freedom. That's fine if YOU want to pay taxes to the government and receive government services but when you force other people to that's taking away their freedom because they are doing it against their ill will.