Libertarianism-The Unwitting Ally of Tyranny

[GHook93]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready ROFLMAO at the Libertarian "hate thread". Not much to debate in this thread, since there isn't really a coherant point.

This is always your response. Remember months back when I started a similar thread that true Libertarisim is radical, you came back in a similar fashion.

Why don't you rebuttel and say why the concept works?

[grandpa]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Libertarianism and Tyranny are like oil and water...... they don't mix.

Your definition of "Libertarianism," where immigrants should be rounded up and deported, is tyrannical enough.

Grandpa h.

[Osborn F Enready]

I am not answering in this thread because it is moronic, and below the respect of a reply that contains logic, something most of the proponents in here deny exists. (Isbskins, Gramps, Sdbest)

However, thanks for the laughs....

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I am not answering in this thread because it is moronic, and below the respect of a reply that contains logic, something most of the proponents in here deny exists. (Isbskins, Gramps, Sdbest) However, thanks for the laughs....

People show how unchecked Libertarianism can--and probably inevitably does--lead to tyranny and you deem, because you can't refute their analysis, the thread "moronic." Perhaps it's time for you to become more critical of your own beliefs. Libertarianism is not a religion, then again perhaps for some it is.

Regards
S.

[Osborn F Enready]

Oh, I could refute their analysis if it was based on logic, facts and not emotion. Since it is based in emotion, it really doesn't deserve to be refuted, since it isn't proving anything except how they "feel".

Libertarianism as a religion?

ROLFMAO.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Oh, I could refute their analysis if it was based on logic, facts and not emotion. Since it is based in emotion, it really doesn't deserve to be refuted, since it isn't proving anything except how they "feel".

So you never get emotional in your responses? That's news to me.
On top of that, why assume that emotion, moral appeals, etc. cannot be paired with logic?

For example, my argument that there's nothing "Libertarian" about rounding up and deporting people is based on sound analysis. It doesn't mean I'm totally neutral on the subject emotionally. By applying logic, I know such behavior is indeed despotic and creates far more problems than it solves.

Grandpa h.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: grandpa For example, my argument that there's nothing "Libertarian" about rounding up and deporting people is based on sound analysis. It doesn't mean I'm totally neutral on the subject emotionally. By applying logic, I know such behavior is indeed despotic and creates far more problems than it solves.

Hmmm, is it "despotic", or within the "legal duty" of the elected officials?


As a matter of fact, isn't it a deriliction of duty not to round these people up under the current law? Why yes, I believe it is.

[lsbskins1]

Quote by: Milton Bradley Hmmm, is it "despotic", or within the "legal duty" of the elected officials? As a matter of fact, isn't it a deriliction of duty not to round these people up under the current law? Why yes, I believe it is.

So you are all for the violent state oppression as long as the state is enforcing the law as YOU see fit, but against violent enforcement if they are collecting taxes you don't want to pay? Is that how your version of the Libertarian ideal works? I could be misreading your point here. This is about libertarian ideals. If you aren't a libertarian and just think the government should round up all illegal immigrants, then the question/point wasn't aimed at you. If you are a libertarian and hold all those "the state should not be in the violent enforcement business" ideals, then the point is very relavent. That would be tyranny, under the logical extention of points libertarians claim to hold dear.

[Chris the Chees]

So you are all for the violent state oppression as long as the state is enforcing the law as YOU see fit, but against violent enforcement if they are collecting taxes you don't want to pay? Is that how your version of the Libertarian ideal works? I could be misreading your point here.

I was just thinking along similar lines. How can one be a libertarian, a position of unbridled individual liberty and freedom, while refusing to allow people the right to simply change the country they call home?

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Chris the Chees I was just thinking along similar lines. How can one be a libertarian, a position of unbridled individual liberty and freedom, while refusing to allow people the right to simply change the country they call home?

It's the same stumbling block your side trips over every single time, the law. It's the damn law!


Imagine, a person of libertarian persuasion actually desiring an environment of law, and order, or a government holding up it;s end of the agreement.


You people are priceless.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: lsbskins1 So you are all for the violent state oppression as long as the state is enforcing the law as YOU see fit, but against violent enforcement if they are collecting taxes you don't want to pay?

Where is the violent oppression of known criminals hiding from the law? We are just advocating putting them back where they belong.


Laws must be constitutional before I can cheerlead from the sidelines, so there is little I can can say about the tax comment without completely diverting the topic.

[lsbskins1]

Quote by: Milton Bradley Where is the violent oppression of known criminals hiding from the law? We are just advocating putting them back where they belong. Laws must be constitutional before I can cheerlead from the sidelines, so there is little I can can say about the tax comment without completely diverting the topic.

It would only divert because it is a logical inconsistency. Explain to me how, a human walking across an imaginary line harms you. If you say it harms your economic interests, that is the area the government is, according to every posting I have read by the libertarians on the board, most certainly banned from touching. The"market" will take care of that. In the end, it comes down to the cold hard fact that, you at least, seem to have no problem with the government enforcing, as long as it is enforcing what YOU want it to enforce. But you do not get to make the rules. We live in a democracy. Is it perfect? No. Would I change lots of particulars? Yes. Do I believe that the government is evil because it does not do things only in line with my ideological bent? No. Neither should you.

[lsbskins1]

Quote by: Milton Bradley Where is the violent oppression of known criminals hiding from the law? We are just advocating putting them back where they belong. Laws must be constitutional before I can cheerlead from the sidelines, so there is little I can can say about the tax comment without completely diverting the topic.

Oh, I almost missed saying this:

Where is the violent oppression when known criminals (tax evaders) are arrested and put in jail for breaking law that is just as established and binding as immigration law?

You do not have to agree with the law. You can work to change the law. Those are your rights as a citizen. It is not my, your or any one else's right to ignore the law because we do not like it. That is not your right as a citizen. Vote, petition, organize - all those are protected rights. And historically speaking, if you think your only option is rebellion, you better win.

[5010]

I'm still waiting for someone to address my point that calls the whole theory into question.

Let's make it simple. The entire population of the planet is destroyed and there are only 5 people living on an island. How does this tiny nation become libertarian? By the support of 3 of the natives who have strong libertarian principles. Now with that in place, tell me how anyone becomes a tyrant of the island.

Now, if it is hard to be a tyrant when you are 1 against five. Consider how much harder it would be if you are 1 against a hundred million people with strong libertarian principles.

Or... tell me how a nation can become purely libertarian without such a majority.

[lsbskins1]

Quote by: 5010 I'm still waiting for someone to address my point that calls the whole theory into question. Let's make it simple. The entire population of the planet is destroyed and there are only 5 people living on an island. How does this tiny nation become libertarian? By the support of 3 of the natives who have strong libertarian principles. Now with that in place, tell me how anyone becomes a tyrant of the island. Now, if it is hard to be a tyrant when you are 1 against five. Consider how much harder it would be if you are 1 against a hundred million people with strong libertarian principles. Or... tell me how a nation can become purely libertarian without such a majority.

Read The Lord of the Flies and you will have your answer.

[5010]

Thanks lsb, and good point.

So then consider the nation that becomes libertarian because a majority with no strong principles exists and is convinced by a minority of libertarians with strong principles. In this case, the libertarians won't necessarily be able to defend from a tyrant who woos the weakly principled majority.

But could one not say the same about any ideology?

[lsbskins1]

Quote by: 5010 Thanks lsb, and good point. So then consider the nation that becomes libertarian because a majority with no strong principles exists and is convinced by a minority of libertarians with strong principles. In this case, the libertarians won't necessarily be able to defend from a tyrant who woos the weakly principled majority. But could one not say the same about any ideology?

No form of governance is fullproof against tyranny. The OP simply stated Libertarianism is more likely to fall prey. Our system has been pretty good specifically because of the features alot of people on this site rail about. Enshrining minority protections is one example. Even if the nation is 99% Christian, our Constitution tries to assure that the 1% are not oppressed. That is how our system avoids the "tyranny of the majority" of which you speak. The written constitution, the voting rights, the checks and ballances between state, local and federal jurisdictions and the checks and ballances between the various branches, all work towards that end. Is it perfect? Nope. Has anyone figured out anything better? Nope.

[Osborn F Enready]

This whole thread is "speculative", "hypothetical" nonsense, which is the main reason I have avoided it.

It is a denial of common sense, a travesty of logic.

Every single shred of Libertarianism prevents tyranny, and it is the concept of Libertarianism and objective law that brought us to the realization of individual rights, and equality UNDER the law.

Some of the more emotional in here claim Libertarians have no respect for the law, or that they are truly anarchists who don't believe in law, which is as far from the truth as one could possibly stray.

Property rights and individual rights are fundamental to a nation of law where individuals are viewed as responsible citizens.

Does anyone have any legitimate questions about Libertarianism?

“Free men are not equal. Equal men are not free.”

“The new version of rights are not any kind of rights that our founders fought for and created a government over, and the idea that law should be an instruction manual telling us exactly how high our railings should be and how many square feet the nursery school is, is not anything that existed in our country when I was growing up. It's a brand new invention, and it doesn't work.”
-Philip Howard, author of The Death of Common Sense: How Law Is Suffocating America, on C-SPAN's Booknotes 1995-Feb-12

[lsbskins1]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready This whole thread is "speculative", "hypothetical" nonsense, which is the main reason I have avoided it. It is a denial of common sense, a travesty of logic. Every single shred of Libertarianism prevents tyranny, and it is the concept of Libertarianism and objective law that brought us to the realization of individual rights, and equality UNDER the law. Some of the more emotional in here claim Libertarians have no respect for the law, or that they are truly anarchists who don't believe in law, which is as far from the truth as one could possibly stray. Property rights and individual rights are fundamental to a nation of law where individuals are viewed as responsible citizens. Does anyone have any legitimate questions about Libertarianism? “Free men are not equal. Equal men are not free.” “The new version of rights are not any kind of rights that our founders fought for and created a government over, and the idea that law should be an instruction manual telling us exactly how high our railings should be and how many square feet the nursery school is, is not anything that existed in our country when I was growing up. It's a brand new invention, and it doesn't work.” -Philip Howard, author of The Death of Common Sense: How Law Is Suffocating America, on C-SPAN's Booknotes 1995-Feb-12

You have made no case for your position. It is not enough to say "This is not logical." Your pronouncement does not make it fact. If the rule of law is so important to the libertarian, why is he so afraid to allow the law to have teeth? If everyone is bound by the market to behave responsibly, why should the market fear law? Zoning (how high the railing should be) exists to stop those who would not be responsible. If you build a pool in a neighborhood, and that pool is on the route to the local middle school, and you are a responsible actor, why should you care if local zoning requires you to build a fence around the pool that will keep the kids from wandering onto the property and falling in the pool? You would do that anyway, right? It is those who not only are NOT responsible, but wish to avoid any legal repercusions for that lack that fear zoning. That is a resonable question for you to answer. Why do you fear the law having enforcement capability?

[5010]

Let's compare: miles of fences along roads to keep other's dumb kids from getting run over, or a small fence around your swing set to protect your kids from wandering off and hurting themselves not only at roads but also swimming pools, trees, rivers, cliffs, and wandering pedofiles.