Asperger syndrome and Libertarianism idea

Post Reply New Topic

I couldn't watch that video , real Americans , get out of town so I would be considered a traitor being on the centre left ?

where dumb dumbs got it .

so how would the welfare state / or min wage be like under your plan ?

The only trait I can see which ASD people have in common with Libertarians is a tendency to lecture others about a core belief. The difference is that ASDs have all sorts of core beliefs, libertarians seem to have one track minds.

Wow, unmitigated fail. You have a total lack of understanding of what aspergers is and then attempt to link it to a totally straw man version of libertarianism. For the record, I do have aspergers and I do feel emotions as does everyone with it, it's a common misconception that we don't, we just process them differently and are not very good at expressing them. I looked up "libertarianism and aspergers" just out of curiosity, hoping to find a meaningful, intelligent and rational conversation on the subject (believe it or not they do exist out on the internet if you look hard enough) and all I found was poorly written dribble from someone who understands neither.

This is directed to the OP since I am a little late in this thread.

Libertarian is a philosophy that government should not get involved with social aspects and that the only job government should have is to keep order and protect individual liberties. For example if I do something to someone else and it prevents them from having their rights then government comes in to correct that action. Same goes for business practices and so on. However we as free people should ideally by our own accord assist those who need help. This is more of a moral principal than anything. Something that most Americans lack these days. However lack thereof it should never be the government?s responsibility to enforce social standards. Those issues should be handled independently at state level only through a democratic process. This view should not make Libertarians seem self-indulged. Libertarians can have a selfless cause and in my opinion have more of a selfless cause than our Republican and Democrat counterparts. You make all Libertarians out to be evil. While there are some selfish Libertarians it is also safe to say that there are selfish Republicans and Democrats. So it is unfair to take the characteristics of a few Libertarians and generalize all Libertarians to be as such. It almost makes you sound like you have your own political agenda and are imposing your own bias views.

Where do you see self this and self that in a Libertarian philosophy?

There a big difference between being asocial and anti-social. The modern libertarianism (or Neo-liberalism), as you pointed out propagates a very anti-social doctrine such as privitisation of the commons and the spreading of misinformation that is designed to pit people against each other. This Neo-liberalism
that you mention is far from rational due to it's constant faith in market monopoly disguised as "free-marketism for all, therefore individual freedom for all". What they fail to mention is, though individual freedom is to a certain extent permitted in the form of civiliberties, economic freedoms are limited only to companies that are counted as individuals by the corporate persons act; an act that has existed for hundred or so years.

But I digress. It is very dangerous to link Aspergers with a socio-political/economic ideology. Aspergers is not a characteristic or a custom made ideology, it is part of our neurology. So, back to the difference between asocial and anti-social, I would largely argue that majority of people with Aspergers are asocial. The definition of asocial is someone who avoids social contacts with others because they cannot and do not feel comfortable around the universal social standards others impose upon one another. The meaning of anti-social is someone or something that actively seeks out to harm others.

Therefore, it is entirely different from the anti-social approach of Free-market libertarianism because it employs powerful divisive instruments that cause harm to a large majority of people. The small plutocratic group that oversees this calls it rational because it is only rational for a company or "global market place" to be in a constant state of growth in profit regardless of the blatantly irrational socio-economic harms this does to the public. All in all, the new libertarianism is focused around privatising the benefits while socialising the costs which are incidentally shared among the public

I am ideally a libertarian. It is logical and everyone gets what they put in, but it cannot control for those who would take advantage of such a political system. Many people would find a way to put their finger on the scale to tip the balance unfairly. It wouldn't work IRL.

The lliberpergerarianism suggestion is falsely based on the belief that autistics don't have empathy. I suppose some don't, but others have too much empathy. I have met autistics who were hard-hearted, but many more who were not. I am the latter, but who has learned that I am not safe with others. I think lliberpergerarianism might apply to a subset of autistics like the ones the OP described.

ok, i've not read through this whole thread, so i'm not responding to anyone in particular, just throwing in my 2 cents about the subject.

i always thought that libertarians had some good ideas, but just some. i used to love to watch lyndon larouche's campaign videos - he'd make perfect sense for almost 20 min, then segue into the truly bonkers. i don't think any political philosophy is THE way to go, ideally there should be a synthesis of the best from all.

i know a libertarian presidential candidate named Cecil Ince who has an autistic son.

I like libertarianism and I think I understand why aspies like libertarianism.

Free market is excuse free

That is. If you buy or sell stocks. It doesn't matter if you deliberately win or lose. What matter is whether you win or lose.

If you go to a store, for example. It doesn't matter that the store cannot provide better product at cheaper cost to you or that it can but simply wants higher profit.

So what does that have anything to do with aspies?

Neurotypical are master of making excuses.

What often happen is people do not do their best to do what's productive. Often they have conflict of interests. Often they simply do not intent to run issues.

Recently an indonesian parlement want to buy UPS (uninterruptible power source) at $300k a piece. They claimed they did their best. They claimed it's what's necessary for schools. Obviously they didn't care about kids' well being at all and just want to have kick backs from UPS sellers.

Then we got excuses after excuses. We got stories about how parliament members do not know what UPS is, of how all these are not deliberate, or whatever.

Freemarket doesn't allow such excuses. Any private school frivolously spending $300k for useless doodads will have parents sending their child somewhere else.

An Aspie will tend to like this excuse free system. That's because you can make judgement without having to guess others' intent are.

we don't believe in corporate safety nets.

I have had the same impression of the Libertarians over the years. I think the best role they can serve in the political arena is to force the other parties to back off their subtle, and not so subtle, assaults on freedom. But seriously, their overall plank is so ludicrous that it frequently falls into the category of 'laughable'.

how do libertarians want to assault freedom?

I considered myself left-libertarian for a while, which far from out of being self-centred was because I'm not fond of authority figures/don't tend to recognise authority as legitimate. Think I've matured into being a social liberal though, realising just how bad an effect individualism has been having on western culture, and libertarianism's role in that. It's got good points but goes too far.

I should note that being European, my definition of these terms might differ from some of yours though. From a European perspective, everyone in America is right wing.

I think personal freedom is very important and don't agree with the government telling you how to live(within reason, basically everyone should live how they want so long as it does not impede on anyone elses freedom or harm others so yeah obviously things like rape, murder, assault, mental abuse should be illegal). I also think they have a duty to serve the people, all of the people not specifically the wealthy elite. Also it makes sense for there to be regulations on buisiness in order to prevent them impeding on the over-all well-being of the population, I mean for instance laws against dumping toxic waste into rivers..since that can hurt the water supply people drink and damage the environment/ecosystems people and animals depend on.

Anyways I am not a libertarian that is for sure...I don't care much for pure capitalism and every man for himself greed mentality. I also think this greed mentality is a good argument for the existence of taxes to fund public services...that said I think the government needs to do a better job of spending tax money and ensuring taxes are not so high as to noticeably burden the middle class or below. But if you're going to have government and a society/community I don't see a real way around having some form of tax to fund public services if you want to keep an infrastructure intact.

For practical definition purposes I am probably more of a socialist.