Would you support a REAL Libertarian Party?

[someguymp3]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready someguymp3 said: Power is not limited to government means that in turn, with less government the people are less represented, other groups gain the power, abuse it, the people rise up. I say: If that is what you meant, how is it comparable to the current situation? I mean, right now the U.S. has a HUGE government, that is almost wholly corrupted, has only two official "parties" talked about when speaking politics, and it is the original group of power holders (libertarian philosphies) now trying to retake the system through diplomacy, with revolt as a last resort. I mean, under your statement above, you are saying that since our government is so huge, it represents the most? Please explain, as this makes NO sense to me as applied to reality.(seven political parties at least, but only two represented, in the biggest governmet on earth.)

Two wrongs don't make a right, I'm against the current administration and I feel not only is it wasteful, it is not as representitive of the people as it should be. However, it is more so than a Libertarian government would be. I feel our two parallel conversations are merging, so I won't continue with my point and I'll just wait for you to get back to me re: inequality/education (If you haven't done so whilst I'm typing this)

[Osborn F Enready]

Someguymp3, I want you to specifically address where and why you think libertarian ideals fall short.

I think you are basing your decision on misinformation, and I want to save myself some typing.

[someguymp3]

Answer my question about education please and I can continue.

If you can't see how there'd be more inequality, you're in denial. Even many supporters of Libertarianism see this, they just don't think it's as important as 'liberty' or being able to keep more of their tax dollars.

[bishop]

Quote by: RickSp Oh come on bishop. You know better than that. Yes the Arpanet grew into the internet, almost despite the government than because of it, but to suggest that computers were creations of government just isn't true. Yes, the space program lead to advancements in existing computer systems but the real advances have been made by the private sector. IBM does stand for International Business Machines, after all, and neither Gates nor Jobs are big government contractors. <snip> Government is more likely to get in the way of innovation than to foster it.

yet the first "customers" for arpanet and ibm were government institutions - public universities and the military.. subsequently, yes, private consumption fueled future growth, but it's impossible to deny the beneficial contribution public funds have made. and in today's world, government r&d funds dwarf private funds. i'm sure a good amount of this is waste, but if even 10% of it is truly useful, that number still dwarfs all private investment combined.

besides computers and the internet, many other innovative technologies are often created in universities and financed via federal grants. the cat scan, x-ray, etc...

[brien]

Quote by: bentodd As the Libertarian Party grows we are running winable candidates and giving them the funding they need to compete with the major parties. The Libertarian Party has moved to zero dues for membership so they can concentrate on training and funding candidates instead of membership renewals. To join for free go to www.lp.org This thread and poll is to see how many people will give the Libertarian Party their vote for 1 year. If you agree with the Libertarians then vote strait Libertarian on election day 2006. If you don't see the growth of a strong third party with political clout at least it was not a presidental election year. Will you support the Libertarian Party in 2006?

Well I probably skewed your poll also. Been a Libertarian since the 80's. Was introduced to it by Gene Burns and David Brudnoy, out of "BZ" in Boston.

I find we Libertarians can be quite a disagreeable bunch but generally speaking our compasses all point toward the same goal, getting an overbearing government out of the constant everyday lives of citizens. Most people, I believe, are attracted to the Party when they get fed up with the mega intrusion of government into their lives. Anyone who has had dealings with the IRS, usually turns to the Libertarian Party for their ideology afterwards.

The term "sheeple", as I saw it posted here somewhere, best terms the Republicrats. They have every excuse in the world not to change government, or pretend to change government, while Libertarians find reasons to change government. Libertarians have a solution in the reduction of government intrusion into the citizen's life. Republicrats have solutions that are tired and worn out. Or they are just plain liars that say they are for a reduction in government size, yet do nothing of the kind. Some elected politicians openly admit they are for expanded government in our society. At least they are honest. This I admire and, at the same time, we can know who the people are that require work. It is stealthy liars who are dangerous.

Republicrats promote government Dipolicus. Google the dinosaur if you aren't familiar with this giant who couldn't support its own weight on land. Most Libertarian oppostion comes from elitist people who are afraid to allow individuals to govern themselves. They don't trust the body politic of citizens. They claim they're too dumb to know what is right for society. There is no room for the Elitist philosophy of "I know better than you do, so sit down and shut up" in the government. And that is exactly what we have now. Oh, they don't admit it, but their actions speaks for themselves.

Ted Kennedy's ideas of conservation and alternative energy stops in his back yard when he refuses to allow wind mills to be constructed off Martha's Vinyard because it will spoil his view of the ocean. He never mentions the greater good of the people of MA, and their benefit, from the cheaper wind power generated electric. Just one example of a selfish elitist hypocrite that knows better than the citizens what is good for them.

Libertarians may disagree on many points within the platform of the Party, but one thing that I think they all agree upon is changing the government from the local level up. I saw a post here by someone who thought voting for a candidate for National Office was a wasted vote. I may agree at this point in time, if one thinks it is important to hold National Office before we hold many, many lower offices, however I would still vote my conscience.

The change must occur from the bottom up. The Libertarians must bear effective influence by holding local offices first. Then state offices, then Congressional offices and then, Senate offices. What good is a Libertarian President without any support from the Congress? Indeed it is absurd to think that a Libertarian candidate would even win the Presidency at this point in time. The candidate for President is merel a symbol at this point in time.

Libertarian success is not going to be measured by one Congressional office. It is far more important to hold a vast amount of statewide offices first. One Libertarian vote in Congress isn't worth holding the thousands of statewide and local offices throughout the nation. Real change will occur statewide first, and then it will rise upward towards the nationally important offices. Check out what is happening in NH with the Free State Project and Libertarian successes there. The real power lies locally where concerned and activist citizens can put pressure upon Congresspeople to vote what their constituents favor in their district. Then, if they don't, to the dustbin of history with them. It is then when the Libertarian candidate will step in to take the office of the elitist republicrat.

[bentodd]

Quote by: someguymp3 Because, other groups then have this power. People will become less and less equal because of differences in opportunity from birth. The problem will only multiply, how do you plan on providing education to the poor?

How about homeschool. I have two kids and I refuse to send then to a government school. I can not afford to send them to a private school. I work part time, and my wife works at home and we are able to provide our kids with the best education possible.

Public schools graduate thousands fo kids each year who can not even read. Then of course the No child left behind act takes up so much time that people can not even help the students.

Anyone send their kids to head start? Did you know that because of "no child left behind" they have to show that the children they teach improved. Do you think they work harder to teach the kids? NO they do not. What they do is under score the kids at their first assasment. That way they do show improvement. Another helpful government program.

By the way up until 2 weeks ago I was a preschool teacher. My school partnered with head start. After what I saw I left.

Ben

[bentodd]

Quote by: brien Well I probably skewed your poll also. Been a Libertarian since the 80's. Was introduced to it by Gene Burns and David Brudnoy, out of "BZ" in Boston. I find we Libertarians can be quite a disagreeable bunch but generally speaking our compasses all point toward the same goal, getting an overbearing government out of the constant everyday lives of citizens. Most people, I believe, are attracted to the Party when they get fed up with the mega intrusion of government into their lives. Anyone who has had dealings with the IRS, usually turns to the Libertarian Party for their ideology afterwards. The term "sheeple", as I saw it posted here somewhere, best terms the Republicrats. They have every excuse in the world not to change government, or pretend to change government, while Libertarians find reasons to change government. Libertarians have a solution in the reduction of government intrusion into the citizen's life. Republicrats have solutions that are tired and worn out. Or they are just plain liars that say they are for a reduction in government size, yet do nothing of the kind. Some elected politicians openly admit they are for expanded government in our society. At least they are honest. This I admire and, at the same time, we can know who the people are that require work. It is stealthy liars who are dangerous. Republicrats promote government Dipolicus. Google the dinosaur if you aren't familiar with this giant who couldn't support its own weight on land. Most Libertarian oppostion comes from elitist people who are afraid to allow individuals to govern themselves. They don't trust the body politic of citizens. They claim they're too dumb to know what is right for society. There is no room for the Elitist philosophy of "I know better than you do, so sit down and shut up" in the government. And that is exactly what we have now. Oh, they don't admit it, but their actions speaks for themselves. Ted Kennedy's ideas of conservation and alternative energy stops in his back yard when he refuses to allow wind mills to be constructed off Martha's Vinyard because it will spoil his view of the ocean. He never mentions the greater good of the people of MA, and their benefit, from the cheaper wind power generated electric. Just one example of a selfish elitist hypocrite that knows better than the citizens what is good for them. Libertarians may disagree on many points within the platform of the Party, but one thing that I think they all agree upon is changing the government from the local level up. I saw a post here by someone who thought voting for a candidate for National Office was a wasted vote. I may agree at this point in time, if one thinks it is important to hold National Office before we hold many, many lower offices, however I would still vote my conscience. The change must occur from the bottom up. The Libertarians must bear effective influence by holding local offices first. Then state offices, then Congressional offices and then, Senate offices. What good is a Libertarian President without any support from the Congress? Indeed it is absurd to think that a Libertarian candidate would even win the Presidency at this point in time. The candidate for President is merel a symbol at this point in time. Libertarian success is not going to be measured by one Congressional office. It is far more important to hold a vast amount of statewide offices first. One Libertarian vote in Congress isn't worth holding the thousands of statewide and local offices throughout the nation. Real change will occur statewide first, and then it will rise upward towards the nationally important offices. Check out what is happening in NH with the Free State Project and Libertarian successes there. The real power lies locally where concerned and activist citizens can put pressure upon Congresspeople to vote what their constituents favor in their district. Then, if they don't, to the dustbin of history with them. It is then when the Libertarian candidate will step in to take the office of the elitist republicrat.

If you want to check out what we are doing in Vermont goto www.vtlp.org

Click on the 10 10 10 plan

Ben

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: bentodd I find it silly that you claim the LP is dead. You obviously have not had any involvment with the LP since nov 2004. The LP has emerged with a new outlook. The entire party is now totally focused running, training, and funding winable candidates. The LP just opened the Libertarian leadership achool. It is an online university that will train about 2100 Libertarians before the 2006 elections. We are providing training classes here in Vermont. We have also raised almost $10,000 in a candidate fund. We are running 10 candidates for the Vermont house. These candidates will have more funding then their opponents. They also include candidates that have done well in past elections where they did not have the funding. We even elected a Libertarian to the Vermont house in the late 90s. He served two terms. We have over 20 elected office holders in VT right now. We have increasing membership. The LP is far from dead. We are the strongest we have been since 1980. Sorry for going on and on but I don't like people to make claims when they have no basis for them. Ben

I'm sympathetic to your movement, but it is futile.


The existance of the LP is the wrong approach. Libertarians should be trying to change one of the major parties from the inside out.

[someguymp3]

Quote by: bentodd How about homeschool. I have two kids and I refuse to send then to a government school. I can not afford to send them to a private school. I work part time, and my wife works at home and we are able to provide our kids with the best education possible. Public schools graduate thousands fo kids each year who can not even read. Then of course the No child left behind act takes up so much time that people can not even help the students. Anyone send their kids to head start? Did you know that because of "no child left behind" they have to show that the children they teach improved. Do you think they work harder to teach the kids? NO they do not. What they do is under score the kids at their first assasment. That way they do show improvement. Another helpful government program. By the way up until 2 weeks ago I was a preschool teacher. My school partnered with head start. After what I saw I left. Ben

Are you seriously, with a straight face, suggesting that home schooling is appropiate for the poor?

[brien]

Quote by: someguymp3 Answer my question about education please and I can continue. If you can't see how there'd be more inequality, you're in denial. Even many supporters of Libertarianism see this, they just don't think it's as important as 'liberty' or being able to keep more of their tax dollars.

I will answer your question about education. Education needs to be turned back to the control of the local community that funds it. We don't need a "DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION" in DC.. What good do they do anyway? Tell me.

The local community is better equipped to know what they want in education for their children. Let them decide by local referendum. Sure, the government can set the reasonable standard of acheivement, but it is the citizens that must acheive it. Who cares how they do it? As long as it gets done effectively.

For example, if it is the standard across the nation that all children must read and write English, then so be it. The local citizens in each educational district will figure how best to acheive this goal. In a heavily Latin American district, perhaps it is best to teach in Spanish for this goal. Who cares how they do, it as long as it gets done.

The same for Math or Science. Local communities do not require so called "No Child Left Behind" programs that are dictated unfunded to them. This only promotes resentment and anger over increased property taxes and class disagreement between those who rent and those who own homes. Not to mention goals set by people in government who have no ties to that community.

As long as education is supported by local property taxes, it is the local who should decide how best to educate their students. They don't need, nor should they want, elitist government officials telling them what is best for them when those officials don't even know what effect their elitist policies have upon the community.

Where is the inequity of "allowing" locals decide what is best for their own community? I say the locals should take back their schools from a government that neither cares about their students nor understands the needs of the community they so arrogantly dictate to on a daily basis.

Government schools are a failure. The United States does not rank first in Education among the civilized nations in the world. This is a myth that is commonly propagated by those who support government schools. Privatize education here in America, and you will see great change. The good schools will flourish and the bad ones will wither away because people will have a choice of where to educate their children.

It is a sad commentary upon government funded education when many, many politicians, and teachers educate their own children in private schools. It is a testamonial to the success of privately controlled schools as well as to the failure of government schools. It is that old elitist attitude again of "do as I say, but not as I do". Hypocritical elistist people who simply think they know what is best for the average citizens force government schools upon those citizens, but then do the exact opposite themselves, with their own children. This is the REAL INEQUITY in education in America today.

Libertarians understand this and promote a system that is fair to all students. True equity lies in equal opportunity and choice for all students, not elitist solutions that are rife with hypocrisy and inequity.

[RickSp]

Quote by: tman_ndsu08 The existance of the LP is the wrong approach. Libertarians should be trying to change one of the major parties from the inside out.

That is a bad joke. The chance to be ignored, patronized and by default end up supporting imperialism and an asssault on our liberties. Sounds like a great plan.

Sort of like trying to dig out an elephant's stable from the the bottom up. The best outcome is that you get crushed in dung.

[brien]

Quote by: bentodd If you want to check out what we are doing in Vermont goto www.vtlp.org Click on the 10 10 10 plan Ben

As a former resident of Vermont in both Putney and White River Junction, you appeal to my Green Mountain senses.

I think the Vt Libertarian Party has to work very hard in places like Brattleboro, Rutland, Bennington, Springfield, and Barre - Montpelier so as to be able to counter the Socialists of Burlington. This is a big job.

Best of luck from a former Green Mountain Boy.

[brien]

Quote by: tman_ndsu08 I'm sympathetic to your movement, but it is futile. The existance of the LP is the wrong approach. Libertarians should be trying to change one of the major parties from the inside out.

Thanks, but no thanks, but we don't require any sympathy. The movement is neither futile nor is it dependent upon the Republicrats to continue its growth.

The existence of the LP is autonomous and growing. The Republicrats will continue to lose membership as the younger voters become disallusioned with the old garde and politics as usual.

[Osborn F Enready]

Great answers on Education there Brien, and I meant to answer but had to leave before I could.

There is such misunderstanding of libertarian principles, and it is all so much misinformation.

Thank you for eloquently expressing my opinion.

[brien]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Great answers on Education there Brien, and I meant to answer but had to leave before I could. There is such misunderstanding of libertarian principles, and it is all so much misinformation. Thank you for eloquently expressing my opinion.

Thank you for your support Osborn. I believe Libertarians understand the misinformation floating about with regard to Education in America today. The government education department is filled with fakers, phonies, sham artists, and people who only care about perpetuating a job for themselves at the taxpayer's expense. But the real horror of the entire system is that it is producing generations of barely literate citizens, who have no chance in the world, when it comes to competing with students from Japan, China. India, and other nations that produce excellent students through meaningful education.

I say it is the Socialists who want everyone to be more equal rather than be more competitive. Today's philosophy in the schools is to let little Johnny and Melissa feel good about themselves rather than learn something meaningful. For example in sports, the philosophy of including everyone in the game, whether or not they can play that game, is absurd. It defeats the lesson of competition and winning or losing. It teaches nothing in terms of winning or losing in life experiences in our capitialist system. It merely teaches the least common denomonator is the best for a "feel good" society.

Same too, for reading, spelling and grammar Today's educational theories suggest that it is better to let student make mistakes in these areas, and the teacher's will accept them, so long as they can offer something to the class, even it is incorrect in grammar, spelling or composition. Well, this is dead wrong. It compromises the standard of education and dumbs down the rest of the student expectations. This "no fail / feel good" policy only cheats all students. For obvious reasons, it sends some students out into society only prepared for unquestioned acceptance that never materializes. It is rather like:

Students go to school and say:

"Toto, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore."

Education needs to get back to the basics that worked up until socialist theories infiltrated the education system

It is time for Education to click their heels three times and repeat:

"There is no place like home, there is no place like home, there is no place like home"

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: brien The existence of the LP is autonomous and growing. The Republicrats will continue to lose membership as the younger voters become disallusioned with the old garde and politics as usual.

Keep dreaming.

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: someguymp3 Are you seriously, with a straight face, suggesting that home schooling is appropiate for the poor?

Does anyone really have an authority to decide what's "appropriate" for anyone else?

[Osborn F Enready]

T-Man said:
Keep dreaming.

I say:
As I could well say to you...... POINT?

[Boetie]

I am not a Libertarian. I do have some questions. Please answer so that I might be able to better understand Libertarianism.

When you speak of individualism, do you mean that it(individualism) emerges when social hierachies begins to disentgrate? the state becomes increasingly centralized? and equality of conditions is established?

Do you mean withdrawl into private life? ie individuals turn in upon themselves, pursuing only their own, private interests.

Do you advocate limited participation in communal activities and little interest in maintaining ties to the collectivity?

[RickSp]

Quote by: Boetie I am not a Libertarian. I do have some questions. Please answer so that I might be able to better understand Libertarianism. When you speak of individualism, do you mean that it(individualism) emerges when social hierachies begins to disentgrate? the state becomes increasingly centralized? and equality of conditions is established? Do you mean withdrawl into private life? ie individuals turn in upon themselves, pursuing only their own, private interests. Do you advocate limited participation in communal activities and little interest in maintaining ties to the collectivity?

No. No. No.

Libertarianism, like Classical Liberalism, considers the individual to be the basic unit of society. Any and all interactions between individuals is fine, indeed tends to serve the benefit of each, so long as no force or fraud is used.