Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

What Makes People Become Libertarians?

Page 7 of 11 [ 167 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

AldousH
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 172
Location: SE Europe

06 May 2011, 3:17 am

Stupidity.

Leaning to the left means that part of the brain is missing.



Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

06 May 2011, 7:11 am

AldousH wrote:
Stupidity.

Leaning to the left means that part of the brain is missing.


holy crap 8O
that is one of the most misinformed posts i have seen.
you actually assume you know eveything about the subject, to be able to make such a comment.


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

06 May 2011, 7:43 am

AldousH wrote:
Stupidity.

Leaning to the left means that part of the brain is missing.


Libertarian thought is not particularly left wing. It is a distrust of government authority and a loathing of government tyranny.

ruveyn



dsaly1969
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 4 Nov 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41

06 May 2011, 11:16 am

ruveyn wrote:
AldousH wrote:
Stupidity.

Leaning to the left means that part of the brain is missing.


Libertarian thought is not particularly left wing. It is a distrust of government authority and a loathing of government tyranny.

ruveyn


Libertarian thought in the U.S. is typified by the wearing of tin foil hats, a paranoid fear of black helicopters, a tendency to believe all anti-government conspiracy theories, the worship of the U.S. Constitution, and the butt-kissing of the "Founding Fathers".

:lol:



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

06 May 2011, 11:49 am

ruveyn wrote:
Libertarian thought is not particularly left wing. It is a distrust of government authority and a loathing of government tyranny.

ruveyn

Well, really the basic root is a desire for individual liberty. Just a lot of libertarians see government as the threat to individual liberty. The idea of merging right-libertarianism and the traditional left-wing isn't an impossible idea, or one not thought of, but rather for a period of time "liberaltarianism" was a topic among a few right-wing libertarian thinkers.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

06 May 2011, 4:22 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Well, really the basic root is a desire for individual liberty. Just a lot of libertarians see government as the threat to individual liberty. The idea of merging right-libertarianism and the traditional left-wing isn't an impossible idea, or one not thought of, but rather for a period of time "liberaltarianism" was a topic among a few right-wing libertarian thinkers.


Right wingers are generally very pro-state. Libertarians have been anti-statist in their sentiments. They see government, not as a good thing, but at best a necessary evil required to keep a modicum of peace and order in the society.

ruveyn



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

06 May 2011, 5:36 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Right wingers are generally very pro-state. Libertarians have been anti-statist in their sentiments. They see government, not as a good thing, but at best a necessary evil required to keep a modicum of peace and order in the society.

ruveyn

Your statements on the right are contestible.

Libertarians generally agree with you, but that's not the root of their ideology. The liberaltarian synthesis idea in many ways kind of opposes what you suggest libertarianism is.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

06 May 2011, 7:29 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

Libertarians generally agree with you, but that's not the root of their ideology. The liberaltarian synthesis idea in many ways kind of opposes what you suggest libertarianism is.


What do you say the root is?

I have been hanging around libertarians since the 1970's (40 years) so I think I know what I am talking about.

ruveyn



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

06 May 2011, 8:16 pm

ruveyn wrote:
What do you say the root is?

I have been hanging around libertarians since the 1970's (40 years) so I think I know what I am talking about.

ruveyn

Well.... ok, you are probably right on populist libertarianism, but the issue is that I am thinking more about the ideology, and as I stated, the real ideological line is individual rights.

I mean, one can reject populist opposition to the government and still be a libertarian. It is difficult to see a person really being very libertarian if they don't have some notion of rights.

That being said, my background is mostly reading up on the ideology and different perspectives about that. This is why I brought up the modern liberaltarians.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

06 May 2011, 8:22 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
What do you say the root is?

I have been hanging around libertarians since the 1970's (40 years) so I think I know what I am talking about.

ruveyn

Well.... ok, you are probably right on populist libertarianism, but the issue is that I am thinking more about the ideology, and as I stated, the real ideological line is individual rights.

I mean, one can reject populist opposition to the government and still be a libertarian. It is difficult to see a person really being very libertarian if they don't have some notion of rights.

That being said, my background is mostly reading up on the ideology and different perspectives about that. This is why I brought up the modern liberaltarians.


The main enemy of human rights is government. Governments no matter how well they start out always evolve into tyranny.

ruveyn



NeantHumain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,837
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

06 May 2011, 8:23 pm

The interesting thing about the social-psychological research on libertarianism is that it validates some of the criticisms of libertarianism as well. When a left-winger slurs libertarians as "emotionally stunted," they're referring to the decidedly libertarian preference for systemizing over empathizing, for reason/logic over emotion.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

06 May 2011, 8:24 pm

NeantHumain wrote:
The interesting thing about the social-psychological research on libertarianism is that it validates some of the criticisms of libertarianism as well. When a left-winger slurs libertarians as "emotionally stunted," they're referring to the decidedly libertarian preference for systemizing over empathizing, for reason/logic over emotion.


Two cheers for being emotionally stunted.

ruveyn



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

06 May 2011, 8:29 pm

ruveyn wrote:
The main enemy of human rights is government. Governments no matter how well they start out always evolve into tyranny.

ruveyn

Even if this is true, it is not true that government is the only possible enemy. Private discrimination also can reduce an individual's effective freedom to act, and this is a problem compatible with the market, even if undermined by the market in the long-run.



LibertarianAS
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jul 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115
Location: Norfolk, US

07 May 2011, 2:38 am

NeantHumain wrote:
The interesting thing about the social-psychological research on libertarianism is that it validates some of the criticisms of libertarianism as well. When a left-winger slurs libertarians as "emotionally stunted," they're referring to the decidedly libertarian preference for systemizing over empathizing, for reason/logic over emotion.


it is funny because a real Asperger MUST prefer systemizing over empathizing and reason/logic over emotion

my opinion,give or take, most left-wing asperger are FAKE ASPERGER(Neurotypical who use AS to justify real life fails) or are left-wing in order to collect welfare checks



Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

07 May 2011, 2:46 am

LibertarianAS wrote:
NeantHumain wrote:
The interesting thing about the social-psychological research on libertarianism is that it validates some of the criticisms of libertarianism as well. When a left-winger slurs libertarians as "emotionally stunted," they're referring to the decidedly libertarian preference for systemizing over empathizing, for reason/logic over emotion.


it is funny because a real Asperger MUST prefer systemizing over empathizing and reason/logic over emotion

my opinion,give or take, most left-wing asperger are FAKE ASPERGER(Neurotypical who use AS to justify real life fails) or are left-wing in order to collect welfare checks


You are a wilful idiot. And, no, a "real Aspie" doesn't have to prefer systemizing over empathizing, they only have to be better at systemizing. And, the whole "low on empathy" facet of Asperger's may be misleading, as studies that differentiate between "cognitive empathy" and "affective empathy" demostrate no difference in levels of affective empathy between aspies and non-aspies.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16906462


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

07 May 2011, 3:43 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Even if this is true, it is not true that government is the only possible enemy. Private discrimination also can reduce an individual's effective freedom to act, and this is a problem compatible with the market, even if undermined by the market in the long-run.


If there is any such thing as a basic human right, it is the right to associate or not associate with other folks according to one's choice. THEREFORE discrimination, in the sense of refusal to associate with others for any reason whatsoever is an exercise of a basic human right. In short, "discrimination" in the sense of not associating is not only permissible, it ought to be legal. If I own a business I have a right to hire or not hire on any basis whatsoever. I have a right to sell or not sell to a potential customer on any basis whatsoever. Who I associate with or not associate with is my choice or ought to be.

Having said that, personally I think discrimination based on superficial characteristics such as skin color, hair color shape of nose or other superficial physical characteristic is silly and stupid. That is my opinion on the matter. However I do not have the right to impose my standards of association on others nor do they have the right to impose their standards of association on me.

Racial discrimination should not be prohibited by law when practiced by individuals, but should be prohibited when practiced by governments which are supported by tax loot stolen from everyone.

ruveyn