View Poll Results: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

Voters
53. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    9 16.98%
  • Probably

    2 3.77%
  • Maybe

    8 15.09%
  • Probably not

    0 0%
  • No

    33 62.26%
  • Don't know

    1 1.89%
Page 11 of 35 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 344

Thread: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

  1. #101
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,464

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    So rev... you know how to type a word. Now back it up with explanation and analysis to show the world why my arguments are just strawmen.

    if you are able that is. But I bet you cannot. (just for you since you seem addicted to these smilie faces)

    Let me assist you:

    The argument put forward by Harmarket regarding ________________________ is actually just use of the strawman because ____________________________ and ______________________________________.

    No thanks are necessary.


    Who said:

    Some here have complained that non-libertarians do not really know what libertarians stand for, what they believe, what the support or do not support. This seems to be a continual and nearly constant complaint from libertarians going back years.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  2. #102
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:16 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,770

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Rev
    perhaps you should read the thread. Here is an example of what I was talking about which you falsely labeled as a strawman. you
    Quote Originally Posted by DrunkenAsparagus View Post
    To all kneejerk Libertarian bashers:

    Libertarianism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Minarchism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Read the freaking articles. Many of you have been around here or other debate sites for a long time. You should have a grasp on basic political terms. Your kneejerk equating American-style Libertarianism with Anarchism, Corpratism, or other things that don't involve keeping a small, but still functional government shows nothing but ignorance on your part, willful or otherwise. I'm sick of responding to these kinds of things.
    You see rev, its real, its very very real.

    And I hope you are not under the delusion that libertarianism is only discussed within this message board and only started recently.
    Last edited by haymarket; 11-08-10 at 01:47 PM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  3. #103
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    11-09-10 @ 06:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    67

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    here is an article that identifies a least ten different types of libertarians

    What Kind of Libertarian Are You? - 10 Different Types of Libertarianism

    maybe people are confused because libertarians themselves can be very confusing.

    and of course the famous cartoon giving us a full two dozen libertarian types -- humorously of course

    The 24 Types of Libertarian | Progressive Political Cartoon by Barry Deutsch
    I am an even mix of Anarcho-Capitalism, Civil and Fiscal Libertarianism, and Libertarian Socialism.

    Many of these positions tend to overlap. The only real distinctions lie between left and right libertarians, anarchists and minarchists, moderates and radicals, and the wayward Objectivists.

  4. #104
    Devourer of Poor Children
    DrunkenAsparagus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    DC
    Last Seen
    01-20-16 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,496

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    here is an article that identifies a least ten different types of libertarians

    What Kind of Libertarian Are You? - 10 Different Types of Libertarianism
    This is a site with a predominately American membership. In the US, and in the multitude of threads shown here, it has been pretty explicitly stated that Libertarianism is assumed to mean classical liberalism or something close to it unless otherwise stated. Maybe if you're new and from a part of the world were Libertarianism means something different it's understandable, but otherwise to say that's not what libertarianism means is just being obtuse.
    "Doubleplusungood"

    George Orwell

  5. #105
    Mr. Professional
    Mensch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,666
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    In the world of the 21st century, corporations are amassing wealth and the power that it can purchase at an alarming rate.
    How are wealthy corporations any more or less powerful than their counterparts in the early 20th century?

    The idea that a corporation can tell an employee that a condition of employment is a surrender of their political rights or they risk termination is a reality.
    First of all, give me the names of the corporations in question. Second of all, is that really the violation of freedoms that you were referring to? Does a corporation limit your freedom of mobility by requiring that you show up to work every morning at 8 AM and stay there until 5 PM? The answer is not unless you signed up for it! If your freedoms really were violated, then you would have no alternative. But when you sign up to work for a company, you are sacrificing a portion of your rights in order to cooperate with your employer for a common purpose. It is not a violation of freedom if the company threatens to terminate your employment if you begin working for the competition. It is not a violation of freedom if the military restricts your right to protest in full military garment, because you signed up for it!

    Government, on the other hand, is something you're born into. If the government decides to restrict your freedom of speech, there is no alternative. That's the difference!

    That is the world we live in and the Citizens United decision is not going to help change that. Many progressives like myself have a very strong conviction that it will only be the government representing the will of the majority of the people that can counter balance corporate power. I see no other force with enough resources to do it.
    So, the only means is through government? Then why did the CEO of Target apologize for allowing the company to contribute x number of dollars to an advocacy group that stirred controversy among the LGBT community? If contributing money to politicians goes against the grain of society, then the corporation in question will suffer consequences. But in reality, unions and public employee associations are the biggest contributors to politicians, NOT corporations. And regardless, corporations are associations of free individuals. The government has no authority in establishing ANY law that restricts the freedom of speech for individuals. If a corporation is owned by a number of individuals and those individuals wish to use the resources of that organization to influence the political election, then they have every right.

    If you really want to stop corporations from donating to politicians, then let's agree on a second bill of rights that forbids any merger between state and economic power. In other words, NO subsidies, NO tariffs, NO bailouts, NO excessive regulation, etc. If the government is not acting as a feeding tube for the corporations, then the corporations will have no reason to contribute.

  6. #106
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:16 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,770

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Galt
    you and I don't even live in the same world if you are that clueless about the wealth of corporations today compared to what they were 100 years ago.

    you say this

    If you really want to stop corporations from donating to politicians, then let's agree on a second bill of rights that forbids any merger between state and economic power. In other words, NO subsidies, NO tariffs, NO bailouts, NO excessive regulation, etc.
    As tantalizing as the offer may seem to some, I respectfully turn it down. I happen to think our Founding Fathers were very wise when they included the power to levy a tariff in the Constitution. It is unfortunate that some have forgotten that the power still exists. I also happen to believe they were very wise when they included Article I, Section 8, paragraph 18 in there as well.
    Last edited by haymarket; 11-08-10 at 04:39 PM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  7. #107
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:16 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,770

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by DrunkenAsparagus View Post
    This is a site with a predominately American membership. In the US, and in the multitude of threads shown here, it has been pretty explicitly stated that Libertarianism is assumed to mean classical liberalism or something close to it unless otherwise stated. Maybe if you're new and from a part of the world were Libertarianism means something different it's understandable, but otherwise to say that's not what libertarianism means is just being obtuse.
    So are you contending that the ten types listed in the article do not exist here? And if so what makes you right and the article wrong?
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  8. #108
    Devourer of Poor Children
    DrunkenAsparagus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    DC
    Last Seen
    01-20-16 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,496

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    So are you contending that the ten types listed in the article do not exist here? And if so what makes you right and the article wrong?
    No, I'm contending that on this site and in American Political discussion (again, sorry foreigners, but most DP posters are American) Libertarianism means small government, and free market capitalism unless otherwise stated.
    "Doubleplusungood"

    George Orwell

  9. #109
    Mr. Professional
    Mensch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,666
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Galt
    you and I don't even live in the same world if you are that clueless about the wealth of corporations today compared to what they were 100 years ago.
    Sure, in terms of real dollars, corporations are wealthier today than they were a century ago. But other things remain the same. Corporations then and now continue to try and influence law while the people generally hold them in high suspicion.

    As tantalizing as the offer may seem to some, I respectfully turn it down. I happen to think our Founding Fathers were very wise when they included the power to levy a tariff in the Constitution. It is unfortunate that some have forgotten that the power still exists. I also happen to believe they were very wise when they included Article I, Section 8, paragraph 18 in there as well.
    I bet you haven't read the Federalist papers. Here's an excerpt:
    "No axiom is more clearly established in law or in reason than wherever the end is required, the means are authorized; wherever a general power to do a thing is given, every particular power for doing it is included."

    So, how does the elastic clause have anything to do with the federal government restricting the 1st Amendment rights of Americans? The elastic clause is suppose to help the government execute powers that have been specifically outlined in the constitution, not to help violate the freedoms of individuals. And the power to tariff was necessary at the time to pay off the war debt. But, like all things government, the tariff expanded to such a ridiculous rate that climaxed with the infamous 1828 "Tariff of Abomination." The founders were wise men, but not Gods. And I strongly disagree that we need any sort of tariff system today, for the evidence shows that such measures are detrimental to the economy of this country, as well as the global economy.

  10. #110
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:16 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,770

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Galt -

    I will not ask you to provide numerical evidence of your assertion that

    In terms of real dollars, corporations are wealthier today than they were a century ago. But other things remain the same. Corporations then and now continue to try and influence law while the people generally hold them in high suspicion.
    On its face, it goes against every bit of information I have about the subject. But you are entitled to your beliefs and I strongly suspect it would make no difference to either of us either way.

    Regarding the Federalist Papers: so what? The last time I looked the FP were very interesting historical writings that explained the thoughts of a few people who were part of the much larger group of Founding Fathers.

    The tariff: I also strongly suspect that the parts of the economy you are most strongly concerned about and the parts of the economy that I am most concerned about are not at all the same. I also suspect based on your closing reference to the global economy that we would be miles apart on that issue also.

    I would have a tariff and it would work like this: any company that moves American jobs overseas is now free to sell those products anywhere overseas they want to sell them. I use "overseas" in the broadest sense and would include Mexico and other nations not really overseas at all. If those same products want ot be sold here, then we would have a tariff. I happen to love this country and the American people. I agree with Ross Perot when he predicted the 'giant sucking sound' of good paying manufacturing jobs leaving America if NAFTA were passed. I happen to reside in an area of the country which has been decimated by the economic treason of large corporations. Sorry if I do not welcome their foreign made products back on the shelves of Wal Mart. But I am inclined that way.

    My reference to the elastic clause was in part response to your offer to drop economic regulation.
    Last edited by haymarket; 11-08-10 at 05:01 PM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

Page 11 of 35 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •