• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Question for Libertarians

Is the Libertarian Party a close relative of the GOP in ideology?

  • I'm a Libertarian and the Libertarian Partyand like the GOP is part of conservatism.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I'm a Libertarian and there is no commonality between the Liberarian and Republican parties

    Votes: 6 46.2%

  • I'm a Republican and see the Libertairan Party as somewhat similar to the GOP

    Votes: 3 23.1%

  • I'm a Republican and the Liberarian Party and the GOP are like night and day

    Votes: 1 7.7%

  • I'm a Democrat and see the Libertarian Party as somewhat similar to the GOP

    Votes: 2 15.4%

  • I'm a Democrat and see the Libertarian Party as very different than the GOP

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • Total voters
    13
Henrin said:
I'm guessing they never think of the downside of shared property either.
Click to expand...

"Shared property" is beneficial to one of the two people involved in the marriage. You just have to make sure that the one to gain is the one better versed in manipulation.

People generally don't do anything for the reason of "I have the right to do this". Why would it be different for marriage?
Click to expand...

Oh you haven't met me then. I often flex my right to be obnoxious. Today's society demands this, being what it's become today.
 
Gipper said:
No, I don't view law enforcement as a reason for government. I think the basis of government is to promote general (and limited) welfare, defend the peace, and to uphold liberties.
Click to expand...
I didn't say law enforcement (i.e. policing), but to enforce the rule of law (without which you could simply pick and choose which laws you wished to follow). I see that as critical in both "promoting the general welfare," and in "upholding liberties."

Gipper said:
I've never railed against fair trial. What I do not call a right, as opposed to a privilege, is any allotment of taxpayer funds.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that any trial is going to require an "allotment of taxpayer funds" and by necessity, will at the very least compel participation.
 
Taylor said:
I didn't say law enforcement (i.e. policing), but to enforce the rule of law (without which you could simply pick and choose which laws you wished to follow). I see that as critical in both "promoting the general welfare," and in "upholding liberties."


It seems to me that any trial is going to require an "allotment of taxpayer funds" and by necessity, will at the very least compel participation.
Click to expand...

I swear to God, this is turning into a "LIBERTARIANS ARE ANARCHISTS" rant yet again. I am beyond tired of this.
 
Gipper said:
I swear to God, this is turning into a "LIBERTARIANS ARE ANARCHISTS" rant yet again. I am beyond tired of this.
Click to expand...
I don't see what this has to do with anarchy. Most libertarians recognize that you can't have government if you don't give up some liberty, and simply want to minimize that as much as possible (i.e. willingly trade some of their liberty in order to enjoy the benefits of government).
 
Taylor said:
I don't see what this has to do with anarchy. Most libertarians recognize that you can't have government if you don't give up some liberty, and simply want to minimize that as much as possible (i.e. willingly trade some of their liberty in order to enjoy the benefits of government).
Click to expand...
Why does one have to give up liberty? The laws we need are those who punish those infringing on other people's liberty.

I saw something to the effect in these forums: "Your rights end where mine begin." Do you consider punishing people for taking away the liberties, property, etc. of another, a reduction of liberty?
 
Taylor said:
I don't see what this has to do with anarchy. Most libertarians recognize that you can't have government if you don't give up some liberty, and simply want to minimize that as much as possible (i.e. willingly trade some of their liberty in order to enjoy the benefits of government).
Click to expand...

It's the logical order of things when you start going into "libertarians don't want trial by jury because it may cost a few bucks". After that, it's bound for anarchy slippery-slope fallacies.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Why does one have to give up liberty? The laws we need are those who punish those infringing on other people's liberty.
Click to expand...
Someone invades my home and steals a loaf of bread. Am I free to punish him or otherwise seek redress on behalf of myself? If I consent to be governed under rule of law, I'm giving up my authority to determine this manner and instead defer to the judgment of another or perhaps a group of my peers. I am no longer at liberty to punish this individual as I see fit. In return, I am protected from undue or unfair punishment from others for perceived grievances.
 
In theory the parties are quite different. In reality, many Republicans started calling themselves "libertarians" during the GWB years because they were embarrassed to identify themselves as Republicans. You can always spot the difference between a true Libertarian and a closeted Republican though.
 
Last edited:
Taylor said:
Someone invades my home and steals a loaf of bread. Am I free to punish him or otherwise seek redress on behalf of myself? If I consent to be governed under rule of law, I'm giving up my authority to determine this manner and instead defer to the judgment of another or perhaps a group of my peers. I am no longer at liberty to punish this individual as I see fit. In return, I am protected from undue or unfair punishment from others for perceived grievances.
Click to expand...
Shoot them when they are in your house.
 
Guy Incognito said:
It's actually about fifty-fifty. The republicans are like the libertarians on economic issues, the democrats are like libertarians on social issues, for the most part. There are anomalies, such as gun rights, which is technically a social issue. But generally the rule holds.
Click to expand...
Gun rights are the tie breaker.

Edit: Lately, we've also seen liberals trying to ban large sugary drinks and stuff like that.
 
Last edited:
Taylor said:
Almost all government is "funded by taxes, coerced by government" - the fact that you pay for something in that manner doesn't make it an "economic issue." They are social issues. A true libertarian has no use for qualifiers on liberty. "Social liberty" is the idea that securing individual rights does not guarantee liberty - that extra steps are required to be sure that "everyone has a fair shake" or whatever it is that Obama is always saying. "Social liberalism" is what brings us concepts like "the right to housing" and "the right to healthcare"
Click to expand...
If those aren't economic issues, there are no economic issues.
 
:2wave: A Libertarian is just a Republican who wants to smoke pot and get laid.:2wave:
:lamo
 
mpg said:
If those aren't economic issues, there are no economic issues.
Click to expand...
Why is it that so many so-called libertarians have only a crude understanding of libertarianism? I think it's an age thing. The typical clueless variety being college-aged males who are attracted to a super-simple philosophy that helps them reconcile their natural inclinations with the social agenda they've been fed throughout their public education. It's this latter group of cartoon libertarians that you see claiming that libertarians are much like Democrats on social issues.
 
Taylor said:
Why is it that so many so-called libertarians have only a crude understanding of libertarianism? I think it's an age thing. The typical clueless variety being college-aged males who are attracted to a super-simple philosophy that helps them reconcile their natural inclinations with the social agenda they've been fed throughout their public education. It's this latter group of cartoon libertarians that you see claiming that libertarians are much like Democrats on social issues.
Click to expand...
Why is it that people think they liberalism is a stringent lockstep thought on points?

Where is the liberty of individualism in that?
 
Taylor said:
Why is it that so many so-called libertarians have only a crude understanding of libertarianism? I think it's an age thing. The typical clueless variety being college-aged males who are attracted to a super-simple philosophy that helps them reconcile their natural inclinations with the social agenda they've been fed throughout their public education. It's this latter group of cartoon libertarians that you see claiming that libertarians are much like Democrats on social issues.
Click to expand...
You're right about liberty being a simple concept. There is some disagreement about what 'liberal' means, but not much. If you accept the conventional definition, then liberals are libertarian on the majority of social issues. Of course, the Democratic Party isn't 100% liberal.
 
mpg said:
You're right about liberty being a simple concept. There is some disagreement about what 'liberal' means, but not much. If you accept the conventional definition, then liberals are libertarian on the majority of social issues. Of course, the Democratic Party isn't 100% liberal.
Click to expand...
May I suggest you have that backwards?

Seems to me that most libertarians are liberal on most social issues.
 
Lord of Planar said:
May I suggest you have that backwards?

Seems to me that most libertarians are liberal on most social issues.
Click to expand...
It would've been correct either way, but I worded it the way I did because libertarianism is much older than liberalism.
 
There was a time when the words Libertarian Party would have been considered a contradiction in terms. The only motive a genuine libertarian could possibly have for participating in modern electoral politics would be so as to be in a position to disband it. Anything else would be hypocrisy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom