If I had the chance to explain libertarians to John Stewart

[PetFlora]

Libertarianism works only when people as well as governments/corporations are 100% honest. Sadly, that has not been the case to date. On the bright side, 11-11-11 marks a consciousness transition that is said to herald moving us out of Duality and onward to Unity.

I think John understands this, but keep in mind he is regulated by those who have been pulling the strings.

 

[chickengutz]

Yes, it could make you one. Damn corporatism to hell.

Corporatism is not an Ideology, jeebus Syncos, get a goddam dictionary or something.

 

[Rob Roy]

I'd start Jon Stewart off with this....

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDoQtwIwAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D8z1buym2xUM&ei=EGOxTq6SI4Xc0QH1tamcAQ&usg=AFQjCNFaRuq8se-G_xmUIbhbhXOgNRER7g&sig2=OsaPOBn4yx0XSOWQC4VbvA

 

[sync0s]

Corporatism is not an Ideology, jeebus Syncos, get a goddam dictionary or something.

LOL

corporatism, Italian corporativismo, also called corporativism, the theory and practice of organizing society into “corporations” subordinate to the state. According to corporatist theory, workers and employers would be organized into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and controlling to a large extent the persons and activities within their jurisdiction. However, as the “corporate state” was put into effect in fascist Italy between World Wars I and II, it reflected the will of the country’s dictator, Benito Mussolini, rather than the adjusted interests of economic groups.

Title of the page: corporatism (ideology)

I won't waste anymore time on you except to tell you that I have been a libertarian for many years now. Perhaps you should start to learn what a libertarian really is if you think I am wrong.

 

[Parker]

the guy is saying ignore the weak so they die and go away than everything will be good.

It's not governments job. They have proven to be costly and ineffective. The federal government has assumed the role of society.
And society does not grow through force and coercion.

 

[chickengutz]

LOL



Title of the page: corporatism (ideology)

I won't waste anymore time on you except to tell you that I have been a libertarian for many years now. Perhaps you should start to learn what a libertarian really is if you think I am wrong.

You say that you've been a Libertarian for many years, yet you know nothing of the tenants and principals of the party. You're so full of shit. You say the party is varied on Gay rights, nothing could be further from the truth. The Libertarian position is "
Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the
government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption,
immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or
restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices
and personal relationships."

You say the Libertarian position is varied on abortion, it is not, "Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration." You cannot grasp that Libertarians are socially liberal. I'm guessing that your just another Conservative who believes that, because you think weed should be legal, that you are a Libertarian.

 

[sync0s]

You say that you've been a Libertarian for many years, yet you know nothing of the tenants and principals of the party. You're so full of shit. You say the party is varied on Gay rights, nothing could be further from the truth. The Libertarian position is "
Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the
government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption,
immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or
restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices
and personal relationships."

You say the Libertarian position is varied on abortion, it is not, "Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration." You cannot grasp that Libertarians are socially liberal. I'm guessing that your just another Conservative who believes that, because you think weed should be legal, that you are a Libertarian.

Just because you feel that the government should be out of it does not mean you cannot be personally against it. There are Libertarians who are against homosexuality, abortion, and so forth. Case and point: Ron Paul.

I am a socially liberal, fiscal conservative Libertarian. If you had read any of my posts in the past you would know this. Your premise is not only flawed, but down right false.

edit:

There is a reason that the Libertarian quiz has put the party on the top and that is because you can be both of the left or the right and still be a Libertarian. The fundamental view shared by all Libertarians is the how we view the role of government. Your personal view on homosexuality or the like has no recourse on that philosophy, and thus means people of all opinions on the matter can, in fact, be a Libertarian.

By the way, I think more than weed should be legal. Try everything.

 

[dukeanthony]

Libertarians are for open borders

 

[sync0s]

Libertarians are for open borders

Depends on what you mean by open borders.

 

[dukeanthony]

Depends on what you mean by open borders.

Freeflow of people goods and services

 

[Parker]

You say that you've been a Libertarian for many years, yet you know nothing of the tenants and principals of the party. You're so full of shit. You say the party is varied on Gay rights, nothing could be further from the truth. The Libertarian position is "
Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the
government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption,
immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or
restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices
and personal relationships."

You say the Libertarian position is varied on abortion, it is not, "Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration." You cannot grasp that Libertarians are socially liberal. I'm guessing that your just another Conservative who believes that, because you think weed should be legal, that you are a Libertarian.

chicken you make some good points in your post as does syncos in the post that follows yours.. Libertarianism isn't necessarily defined by one position imo.

 

[Parker]

Freeflow of people goods and services

Right but there are checks and balances involved. Having our troops protect the borders like the constitution says.
Plus no entitlements for non citizens and doing away with the anchor babies should be recognized as a way to deal with the problems illegals cause.

 

[sync0s]

Freeflow of people goods and services

In that case, I'd say not necessarily. There are few functions of government that a Libertarians support. Protecting the borders is one of them because it is rather integral to our national security. While I believe we need to make it much easier for foreigners to come to our country, whether it be work permits or visas, I don't think the borders should be left alone at all.

 

[deprave]

Libertarians are not for 'open borders' in an extreme sense of the word...very few are...when one claims he is its a pretty deal among us(I.E Gary Johnson)..National Sovereignty is a big deal for libertarians.

 

[chickengutz]

chicken you make some good points in your post as does syncos in the post that follows yours.. Libertarianism isn't necessarily defined by one position imo.

What I have posted is the official party position. There is no room to justify the limiting of the freedoms of others, that is what being Libertarian is all about. http://www.lp.org/platform

 

[Beansly]

Something about this and most libertarians seems to lack compassion. I'd probably consider myself a libertarian if it wasn't for that felling.

 

[canndo]

Something about this and most libertarians seems to lack compassion. I'd probably consider myself a libertarian if it wasn't for that felling.

I
am uncertain I could agree that libertarians lack compassion. While I am sure that Conservatives do, libertarians believe that the individual should have the most freedom possible (or so I understand, this conversation has me revisiting my view of the ideology). I can't see anyone wanting everyone else to be free as any sort of lack of compassion. I am still stuck on the reactive rather than proactive approach of libertarianism. It just seems to me that there will be more general suffering in a truely libertarian society. In my understanding, the degree of civilization is inversly proportional to the amount of suffering in a society. The less suffering - by people, by animals, by prisoners, by consumers, by children, by the poor, the more civilized the society is.

 

[sync0s]

What I have posted is the official party position. There is no room to justify the limiting of the freedoms of others, that is what being Libertarian is all about. http://www.lp.org/platform

Reading back I see that both of us were right because we were arguing two different things. You are arguing the policy platform and I'm talking about personal views of a libertarian (as started the argument). However, I stick by the fact that abortion being illegal can be the view of a libertarian because, depending on when you define life begins, all libertarians agree that murder should be illegal.

 

[Parker]

Something about this and most libertarians seems to lack compassion. I'd probably consider myself a libertarian if it wasn't for that felling.

Not really. They do not want government involved. That is the role of society. Society doesn't progress through the use of force and coercion.

 

[Parker]

I
am uncertain I could agree that libertarians lack compassion. While I am sure that Conservatives do, libertarians believe that the individual should have the most freedom possible (or so I understand, this conversation has me revisiting my view of the ideology). I can't see anyone wanting everyone else to be free as any sort of lack of compassion. I am still stuck on the reactive rather than proactive approach of libertarianism. It just seems to me that there will be more general suffering in a truely libertarian society. In my understanding, the degree of civilization is inversly proportional to the amount of suffering in a society. The less suffering - by people, by animals, by prisoners, by consumers, by children, by the poor, the more civilized the society is.

The laws government puts into place has caused more suffering than anything else. One example -No medical marijuana so people suffer.

The entitlement system which is costly and ineefective has not helped the poor rise up. When you have subsidize something you get more of it and create more dependency on government. Government sets the stage for failure as it picks and chooses its small, select group of winners.