Do you consider yourself a libertarian?

I have some questions regarding libertarianism; I'm interested in what various people consider to be libertarianism and to what extent they agree with it. And I'm referring to the general ideology, not to particular manifestation of libertarianism such as the Libertarian Party. Feel free to answer as many or a few questions as you want. So...

(1) Do you consider yourself a libertarian?

(2) Whether you do or not, how would you articulate - in a sentence or two - what it means to be libertarian?

(3) What would you call that which you consider most directly opposed to libertarianism? (e.g. authoritarianism, liberalism, conservatism, facism, statism)

(4) Comparing yourself to Americans in general: Where on a scale form 1 to 10 would you place yourself, with 10 being the most libertarian and 1 being the least libertarian (i.e. with 1 being the most whatever you identified in (3))?

(5) Relating to your own libertarian views, what things do you think the government shouldn't be doing that many others think it should be doing? (e.g. regulating firearms, redistributing wealth, prohibiting prostitution, requiring health care coverage, using tax rules to encourage or discourage certain behaviors, making drugs illegal, restricting the use of private property, prohibiting private actor discrimination, engaging in certain forms of surveillance, making decisions about children's education, requiring the withholding of income tax, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid)

(6) Relating to your own libertarian views, what things do you think the government should be doing that many others think it shouldn't be doing?

(7) Lastly, relating to your own libertarian views, what determines whether something is an answer to (5) rather than an answer to (6)? Does it just depend on how you happen to feel about it and you don't really consider the matter much beyond that? Is it based on some articulable principle? Is it based on objective criteria? (If so, do you think you apply that principle or criteria consistently?) Is it based on other considerations that you can identify?


Thanks in advance to anyone that takes the time to answer any of these questions or offer any other thoughts they might have on this general issue. And just to be clear, I'm interested in what you think, e.g, it means to be libertarian. I'm not interested in what others (e.g. dictionaries or political parties) think, except to the extent their thoughts reflect or inform your own thoughts.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
(1) Do you consider yourself a libertarian?

Not really. My political views can't really be labeled and pigeonholed.

(2) Whether you do or not, how would you articulate - in a sentence or two - what it means to be libertarian?

Drugs, sex, rock and roll. Anarchy.

(3) What would you call that which you consider most directly opposed to libertarianism? (e.g. authoritarianism, liberalism, conservatism, facism, statism)

All of the above. Libertarians have an anarchist bent, which would be in direct opposition to any controlling authority.

(4) Comparing yourself to Americans in general: Where on a scale form 1 to 10 would you place yourself, with 10 being the most libertarian and 1 being the least libertarian (i.e. with 1 being the most whatever you identified in (3))?

5

(5) Relating to your own libertarian views, what things do you think the government shouldn't be doing that many others think it should be doing? (e.g. regulating firearms, redistributing wealth, prohibiting prostitution, requiring health care coverage, using tax rules to encourage or discourage certain behaviors, making drugs illegal, restricting the use of private property, prohibiting private actor discrimination, engaging in certain forms of surveillance, making decisions about children's education, requiring the withholding of income tax, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid)

I think it's silly to insist on complete freedom in a country with such a large and diverse population. If people could be counted on to be considerate and act right, then I'd be all for unfettered freedom. But people are stupid and criminal and ignorant, so I appreciate the laws that protect me from them and allow me recourse when their freedom infringes on my freedom. The only real thing I think government should step away from is personal behavior and lifestyle choices that don't impact others on a personal level. As in, *you* may not like Adam and Steve, but their life doesn't affect you in any way and government should stay completely out of it.

(6) Relating to your own libertarian views, what things do you think the government should be doing that many others think it shouldn't be doing?

Prosecuting, incarcerating, and even capital punishing those who break our laws, regardless of race, color, or creed. Violent crime, in particular, needs to be dealt with forcefully and offenders removed from society permanently.

(7) Lastly, relating to your own libertarian views, what determines whether something is an answer to (5) rather than an answer to (6)? Does it just depend on how you happen to feel about it and you don't really consider the matter much beyond that? Is it based on some articulable principle? Is it based on objective criteria? (If so, do you think you apply that principle or criteria consistently?) Is it based on other considerations that you can identify?

Societal impact. If your actions will impact your fellow citizens at-large - getting drunk and drugged up, then making a public nuisance of yourself, for example - then government should step in. If you want to get an abortion or end your life, government should piss off.

Answers.
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
1. Yes

2. I believe a gay married couple should be allowed to protect their marijuana plants with assault weapons.

3. All the above. All of them increase the size and scope of the federal government and put less focus on the individual and their responsibility as an individual. Instead, one way or another, each political party or political realm is the complete opposite of libertarianism. I guess you could say the only semi-close thing is anarchism, but that's too far off the deep end for me.

4. Probably an 8 or 9. While I certainly do not advocate for more government, I do see the need for it in a civilized society. I probably wouldn't have so much of a problem with government if it wasn't done so poorly.

5. Again, all the above. :lol: I think we've gone past the ideas of limited government and a focus on individual responsibility. We've gone past the idea that civil liberties are paramount to American's way of life.

6. I think the govt. should decriminalize all drugs. I've stated my platform on this multiple times so I don't think I need to spell out why other than the current war on drugs isn't working, basically.

7. I think each situation is unique and you have to take into account all the other information surrounding it. Take for example the new law they want in NJ that is a $50 for walking and using your phone. Each story talks about the 11,000 people that have been injured walking and using their phone (over 11 years, across the entire country) as reasoning why. I detest the idea of a government using civil penalties for stupidity and using a minute and statistically insignificant number of incidents to justify it.
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
I have some questions regarding libertarianism; I'm interested in what various people consider to be libertarianism and to what extent they agree with it. And I'm referring to the general ideology, not to particular manifestation of libertarianism such as the Libertarian Party. Feel free to answer as many or a few questions as you want. So...

(1) Do you consider yourself a libertarian?

(2) Whether you do or not, how would you articulate - in a sentence or two - what it means to be libertarian?

(3) What would you call that which you consider most directly opposed to libertarianism? (e.g. authoritarianism, liberalism, conservatism, facism, statism)

(4) Comparing yourself to Americans in general: Where on a scale form 1 to 10 would you place yourself, with 10 being the most libertarian and 1 being the least libertarian (i.e. with 1 being the most whatever you identified in (3))?

(5) Relating to your own libertarian views, what things do you think the government shouldn't be doing that many others think it should be doing? (e.g. regulating firearms, redistributing wealth, prohibiting prostitution, requiring health care coverage, using tax rules to encourage or discourage certain behaviors, making drugs illegal, restricting the use of private property, prohibiting private actor discrimination, engaging in certain forms of surveillance, making decisions about children's education, requiring the withholding of income tax, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid)

(6) Relating to your own libertarian views, what things do you think the government should be doing that many others think it shouldn't be doing?

(7) Lastly, relating to your own libertarian views, what determines whether something is an answer to (5) rather than an answer to (6)? Does it just depend on how you happen to feel about it and you don't really consider the matter much beyond that? Is it based on some articulable principle? Is it based on objective criteria? (If so, do you think you apply that principle or criteria consistently?) Is it based on other considerations that you can identify?


Thanks in advance to anyone that takes the time to answer any of these questions or offer any other thoughts they might have on this general issue. And just to be clear, I'm interested in what you think, e.g, it means to be libertarian. I'm not interested in what others (e.g. dictionaries or political parties) think, except to the extent their thoughts reflect or inform your own thoughts.
1) yes
2) It's fine that you're gay and want an abortion, just don't ask me to pay for it.
3) Probably statism
4) 9
5) all of the above except for the income tax, you have to pay for a military. That's why I gave myself a 9 on the last question instead of a 10.
6) Very little. I think that the government should be shrinking considerably, so I can't really see adding any functions.
7) I think anything that causes someone to become more dependent upon the government and less on themselves is inherently bad. I'm not sure if that's falls under an articulable principle or a gut feeling though.
 

TheLibertonian

New Member
I have some questions regarding libertarianism; I'm interested in what various people consider to be libertarianism and to what extent they agree with it. And I'm referring to the general ideology, not to particular manifestation of libertarianism such as the Libertarian Party. Feel free to answer as many or a few questions as you want. So...

(1) Do you consider yourself a libertarian?

(2) Whether you do or not, how would you articulate - in a sentence or two - what it means to be libertarian?

(3) What would you call that which you consider most directly opposed to libertarianism? (e.g. authoritarianism, liberalism, conservatism, facism, statism)

(4) Comparing yourself to Americans in general: Where on a scale form 1 to 10 would you place yourself, with 10 being the most libertarian and 1 being the least libertarian (i.e. with 1 being the most whatever you identified in (3))?

(5) Relating to your own libertarian views, what things do you think the government shouldn't be doing that many others think it should be doing? (e.g. regulating firearms, redistributing wealth, prohibiting prostitution, requiring health care coverage, using tax rules to encourage or discourage certain behaviors, making drugs illegal, restricting the use of private property, prohibiting private actor discrimination, engaging in certain forms of surveillance, making decisions about children's education, requiring the withholding of income tax, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid)

(6) Relating to your own libertarian views, what things do you think the government should be doing that many others think it shouldn't be doing?

(7) Lastly, relating to your own libertarian views, what determines whether something is an answer to (5) rather than an answer to (6)? Does it just depend on how you happen to feel about it and you don't really consider the matter much beyond that? Is it based on some articulable principle? Is it based on objective criteria? (If so, do you think you apply that principle or criteria consistently?) Is it based on other considerations that you can identify?


Thanks in advance to anyone that takes the time to answer any of these questions or offer any other thoughts they might have on this general issue. And just to be clear, I'm interested in what you think, e.g, it means to be libertarian. I'm not interested in what others (e.g. dictionaries or political parties) think, except to the extent their thoughts reflect or inform your own thoughts.
1. Yes, I believe my political philosophy falls within the rather broad sphere of libertarian beliefs.

2. To be supportive of the maximum amount of freedom for the maximum amount of people with the minimum amount of intervention.

3. Statist and Authoritarians.

4. 7ish

5. The purpose of government is twofold; to protect its people from organized threat and to ensure the maximum amount of freedom with the minimum amount of intervention. The things the government shouldn't do are things that overstep these very basic outlines. The call for databases of muslims, for example, is a massive overstep of the boundaries of the government.

6. Regulation of business. A corporate interest that begins to have undue economic, political, or even social power over an individual is to be just as mistrusted as any other form of coercion of the individual. A corporate state is still a state and should be treated as such. The lessons of the gilded age are not to be ignored, nor the French Revolution.

7. I think the two points are internally consistent, though I'm sure others will disagree with me. I think a failing in the modern libertarian party, though I am a part of it, is a blind spot to the fact that liberty can be stripped by more then just governmental power, and that while it is natural for actors to exercise authority on one another naturally, there are reasonable ways and unreasonable ways. I also, bluntly, think the country is not ready for that much freedom as it remains chained to outdated thinking.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Excellent. I watch Stossel and Kennedy - both self-described as libertarian, but - often doubtful.

But basically, as a philosophy, I don't embrace it - what they believe is like refusing to have traffic signals, because people should be free to just come and go without restrictions.
Yeah, I've BEEN in countries without traffic lights - or stop signs - and it's a joke.

Generally, I concur with a lot of what they believe, but at times I feel they're painted into a logical corner and must answer the stupid answer just to stay consistent.
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Excellent. I watch Stossel and Kennedy - both self-described as libertarian, but - often doubtful.

But basically, as a philosophy, I don't embrace it - what they believe is like refusing to have traffic signals, because people should be free to just come and go without restrictions.
Yeah, I've BEEN in countries without traffic lights - or stop signs - and it's a joke.

Generally, I concur with a lot of what they believe, but at times I feel they're painted into a logical corner and must answer the stupid answer just to stay consistent.
Just from those I have seen in this forum. I am not a libertarian and do not choose to be.
 

TheLibertonian

New Member
Excellent. I watch Stossel and Kennedy - both self-described as libertarian, but - often doubtful.

But basically, as a philosophy, I don't embrace it - what they believe is like refusing to have traffic signals, because people should be free to just come and go without restrictions.
Yeah, I've BEEN in countries without traffic lights - or stop signs - and it's a joke.

Generally, I concur with a lot of what they believe, but at times I feel they're painted into a logical corner and must answer the stupid answer just to stay consistent.
I've never actually met anyone who advocated not having street lights. Is that a thing?
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
Excellent. I watch Stossel and Kennedy - both self-described as libertarian, but - often doubtful.

But basically, as a philosophy, I don't embrace it - what they believe is like refusing to have traffic signals, because people should be free to just come and go without restrictions.
Yeah, I've BEEN in countries without traffic lights - or stop signs - and it's a joke.

Generally, I concur with a lot of what they believe, but at times I feel they're painted into a logical corner and must answer the stupid answer just to stay consistent.
I feel like people who don't really understand libertarianism conflate it with anarchism. It's not the same, as libertarians see the need for government, albeit a small(er) need, but a need none the less. Anarchists don't see any need for authority.
 

TheLibertonian

New Member
I feel like people who don't really understand libertarianism conflate it with anarchism. It's not the same, as libertarians see the need for government, albeit a small(er) need, but a need none the less. Anarchists don't see any need for authority.
Technically anarchy is under the libertarian sphere but it's like...far right extremist libertarian.
 

TheLibertonian

New Member
I believe Sam was using what's known as a simile. It's like a metaphor, but different :lol:
There's a libertarian candidate who talks to the ghosts of her dead sister and another one who declared himself Augustus Sol Invictus, or "The Glorious and Immortal God of the Sun".

I'm not cracking wise, I'm being quite serious.
 

tommyjo

New Member
I have some questions regarding libertarianism; I'm interested in what various people consider to be libertarianism and to what extent they agree with it. And I'm referring to the general ideology, not to particular manifestation of libertarianism such as the Libertarian Party. Feel free to answer as many or a few questions as you want. So...

(1) Do you consider yourself a libertarian? No

(2) Whether you do or not, how would you articulate - in a sentence or two - what it means to be libertarian? Pollyanna...possessing a child like view of the world and people.

(3) What would you call that which you consider most directly opposed to libertarianism? (e.g. authoritarianism, liberalism, conservatism, facism, statism) Adults

(4) Comparing yourself to Americans in general: Where on a scale form 1 to 10 would you place yourself, with 10 being the most libertarian and 1 being the least libertarian (i.e. with 1 being the most whatever you identified in (3))?

(5) Relating to your own libertarian views, what things do you think the government shouldn't be doing that many others think it should be doing? (e.g. regulating firearms, redistributing wealth, prohibiting prostitution, requiring health care coverage, using tax rules to encourage or discourage certain behaviors, making drugs illegal, restricting the use of private property, prohibiting private actor discrimination, engaging in certain forms of surveillance, making decisions about children's education, requiring the withholding of income tax, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid)

(6) Relating to your own libertarian views, what things do you think the government should be doing that many others think it shouldn't be doing?

(7) Lastly, relating to your own libertarian views, what determines whether something is an answer to (5) rather than an answer to (6)? Does it just depend on how you happen to feel about it and you don't really consider the matter much beyond that? Is it based on some articulable principle? Is it based on objective criteria? (If so, do you think you apply that principle or criteria consistently?) Is it based on other considerations that you can identify?


Thanks in advance to anyone that takes the time to answer any of these questions or offer any other thoughts they might have on this general issue. And just to be clear, I'm interested in what you think, e.g, it means to be libertarian. I'm not interested in what others (e.g. dictionaries or political parties) think, except to the extent their thoughts reflect or inform your own thoughts.
see above
 

Vince

......
Libertarian? I can say I really don't know anymore. I used to consider myself a Republican, but the way they are going, I can't say that any longer.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
I feel like people who don't really understand libertarianism conflate it with anarchism. It's not the same, as libertarians see the need for government, albeit a small(er) need, but a need none the less. Anarchists don't see any need for authority.
I know two things I've generally seen as Libertarian views - complete legalization of all drugs and open borders. Both concepts which spell utter and complete disaster for this nation.
And I think they believe it for two reasons - one, it can't ever happen, so it's easy to espouse it as a belief, and two, it's consistent with their stated philosophy which has to be kept as gospel.

So I drew the traffic light idea - a nice concept of liberty, but - well, it's absurd.
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
...
6. Regulation of business. A corporate interest that begins to have undue economic, political, or even social power over an individual is to be just as mistrusted as any other form of coercion of the individual. A corporate state is still a state and should be treated as such. The lessons of the gilded age are not to be ignored, nor the French Revolution.
....
Do you not agree that it's the government that put those businesses in those places? If so, why argue that government should do more and regulate more?

I mean, the Ex-Im Bank, tax codes, political contribution rules, etc. are all things that can easily be removed and would immediately put all businesses on the same playing field. I'm not trying to harp on you, but it's weird seeing a self-proclaimed libertarian advocating that the government regulate businesses more than it is.

Just from those I have seen in this forum. I am not a libertarian and do not choose to be.
I bet you're more libertarian than you think.
 

TheLibertonian

New Member
Do you not agree that it's the government that put those businesses in those places? If so, why argue that government should do more and regulate more?

I mean, the Ex-Im Bank, tax codes, political contribution rules, etc. are all things that can easily be removed and would immediately put all businesses on the same playing field. I'm not trying to harp on you, but it's weird seeing a self-proclaimed libertarian advocating that the government regulate businesses more than it is.



I bet you're more libertarian than you think.
When a corporations exercises undue coercion of individuals or even the political system, it is a net loss for the freedom and liberty of the maximal amount of people.

That being said, obviously the government has a hand helping to prop up these stations. Obviously that needs to be reformed and prevented from happening again.

In some areas we need less regulation, in others, more. Scalpels, not hammers. To say I support "more regulation" or "less regulation" is a gross simplification of a highly complex issue.
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
I know two things I've generally seen as Libertarian views - complete legalization of all drugs and open borders. Both concepts which spell utter and complete disaster for this nation.
And I think they believe it for two reasons - one, it can't ever happen, so it's easy to espouse it as a belief, and two, it's consistent with their stated philosophy which has to be kept as gospel.

So I drew the traffic light idea - a nice concept of liberty, but - well, it's absurd.
The drug debate has been beat to death on this forum so there's no need to re-hash that other than to say that if we really are a truly "free" country, that involves the choice to put into our bodies what we wish. Does that mean complete free reign? No.

"Open borders" is a term that's a bit misleading, IMO. While there are some folks that believe that we should revert back to the early 1900s when anyone who got here became a citizen (arguably, it worked for some time), there are folks (like me) that believe we should have a border and an organized way to enter the country, but needless administrative barriers should be reduced and some sort of work Visa should be easy enough to get if one is willing to be a citizen. It allows us to see who is here and where they are, and allows them to pay into our systems here.

There is, of course, other variables that intermingle. Someone is bound to bring up the terrorist angle. Maybe we wouldn't be hated by so many if we haven't been in perpetual war with the Middle East for so damned long, but that's a whole other subject.
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
When a corporations exercises undue coercion of individuals or even the political system, it is a net loss for the freedom and liberty of the maximal amount of people.

That being said, obviously the government has a hand helping to prop up these stations. Obviously that needs to be reformed and prevented from happening again.

In some areas we need less regulation, in others, more. Scalpels, not hammers. To say I support "more regulation" or "less regulation" is a gross simplification of a highly complex issue.
But without the mechanisms in place that allow a corporation to exercise that coercion, they have no choice. Reduce the regulation and level the playing field for everyone. Simply saying "we'll reduce regulation for you guys, but you real big guys over here need more regulation" is counter to everything that is American, IMO.
 
Top