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 25 of 35 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 344

Thread: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

  1. #241
    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
    I am glad to see you are no longer insisting that the Founding Fathers were all libertarians. I would say that some of them had certain libertarian tendencies. However, that does not make them libertarians as we know them today.
    True. I would argue that they’re closer to “libertarian” than they are to “republican” or “democrat.”

    I do not see how people who prize liberty and freedom can participate in the ownership of slaves.
    That was the custom of the day. Again, the founders were not perfect in the least. But compared to their contemporaries, they were far superior. As you may know, the founders were quite conflicted over this issue, and T.J. himself wrote the abolishment of slavery in the first draft (he was also instrumental in banning the importation of slaves, first as a Virginia legislator and later as president). Also, Frederick Douglass advocated the ratification of the constitution with the compromise of keeping slavery intact in the South, for the alternative would be two different competing nations (and Douglass also feared that the Confederate South would expand their slavery empire to the far southern tip of South America).

    It is such a contradiction that - in my opinion - it completely invalidates and negates any claim a person can make to being a lover of liberty or freedom.
    Are you KIDDING?! The way to oppose slavery is to oppose the idea of liberty? Is that what you’re saying?

    It goes beyond common political hypocrisy. And then to take the issue beyond mere ownership of another person and institutionalize it in the new constitution you are writing is a bridge too far.
    Are you talking to me or about the founders? Again, you don’t have to hate the founders and everything they stood for because they made some very bad decisions regarding slavery. Do you hate FDR completely because of his Executive Order 9066? Do you hate Gandhi for beating his wife or Barack Obama for allowing the outsourcing of torture? We can’t make excuses for the founders, but we also can’t totally condemn them for they did lay the groundwork for this free nation.

    The very idea that someone can claim to cherish liberty and freedom while owning another human being is simply all the evidence needed to deny anyone the mantle of a freedom lover.
    In 1776, not many governments were willing to let you practice your own religion, or to speak freely or to assemble peaceably to make your grievances known without decapitation, or many other liberties you seem to take for granted.

    Perhaps you can offer your views on a related subject to your claim about libertarians today. It is no secret that modern libertarians in the USA find themselves on the opposite side of almost every issue that the Civil Rights community favors and advocates for.
    Bull****! That is a lie. If you’re talking about Rand Paul’s not-so-distant controversy regarding his civil rights law comment, it was specifically in regards to private business. Paul stated he would personally boycott any and all private businesses that refused service based on color, but that the federal government had no authority to tell individual businessmen who they could and could not conduct business with. Do you ever walk into a restaurant or store and see a sign that says: “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone”? Do you believe such a right shouldn’t exist? The idea of free trade is that you are free to trade with whomever you wish to trade with. It is not the role of government to force businesses to service everyone, regardless of circumstances. And this dealt strictly with certain parts of a single title within the historic legislation. ALL other titles of the act, Paul supported.


    This includes the various Civil Rights laws of the Sixties, affirmative action and lots of other laws and programs that African Americans have supported and labored for as a group for all of my lifetime. But almost as a universal bloc, modern libertarians find reasons to oppose these.
    Bringing up affirmative action into the debate is really hurting your argument. Affirmative Action is opposed by lots of people, not just libertarians. Many liberals, blacks, and other Americans oppose Affirmative Action for its unconstitutionality and political privileging. However, let’s go back to civil rights and race relations.

    Would you care to look back before the civil rights law passed, and examine the harsh reality of prejudism and KKK activism that plagued society in the early 20th century? Who was the progressive, liberal president that praised A Birth of a Nation and said it was like writing history with lightning? Woodrow Wilson. On the other hand, which U.S. president from the 20th century could be most closely identified with free-market libertarians? Obviously, it was Calvin Coolidge. Please read this little snippet from Wikipedia about his civil rights record: Calvin Coolidge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    REMEMBER the time period. Coolidge openly supported civil rights for African-Americans and Catholics in the 1920s! Politicians wouldn’t have the guts to do that until way later, arguably the mid 1950s. He also granted full citizenship to Native Americans while permitting them to retain tribal land and cultural rights. He also championed for anti-lynching legislation, which was ultimately shut down by congress. Say what you want about his economic policy, Coolidge (one of a libertarian’s favorite U.S. presidents, alongside Jefferson, Madison, Jackson, Lincoln, and Cleveland) was a fighter for civil rights.

    Do you understand why many people who have no axe to grind against libertarianism see your comments as hollow regarding the libertarian love of freedom for all people?
    Was it just because I called the founders libertarians? Otherwise, I don’t understand how one might see a libertarian love of freedom for all people as hollow. Libertarians are the only ones who actually follow through with their principles. Libertarians do not compromise on the issue of liberty, for it is the basis of the entire movement. There are no exemptions to liberty.

    Here are some more points in my favor:

    I’ve already mentioned that FDR was bigot who imprisoned innocent civilians without just cause.

    Jim Crow laws, black codes, and other legislation that violated people’s civil rights were handed down by government officials, NOT by individual businessmen. Businesses were at the forefront of change. Who was it that was offering blacks first-class seats on trains, because the company knew there was profit to be made? The first integrated schools were privately-run!

    As for the elastic clause - it is relevant. There is no shortage of libertarian opinion about it painting it to be the cause of many of the ills of 20th century government. The Supreme Court has issued many rulings using it as authority for Congress to pass many laws and create many programs that libertarians object to.
    It’s gone both ways. Precedence doesn’t sway me either way. The precedence is only as stable as the logic used to interpret the law. If precedence were so important, we’d still be stuck with segregation.

    This clause was not a 20th century amendment but part of the document as written in 1787. I am sure you are going to tell me that the men in 1787 would not interpret it in the way that we have done for the last century and thus they would not have objected to it. You are entitled to that defense. Truthfully, it simply does not pass the smell test.
    No, but the elastic clause DOES have to do with something regarding the specific governmental powers drawn out in the constitution. If politicians decide to give the government powers it is deemed not to have by the constitution, then no amount of interpreting the elasticity clause will justify the new expansion in power. How does the elasticity clause justify drug prohibition or prohibition against prostitution? How does it justify a national healthcare system?


    I enjoy discussing this with you. thank you.
    I have as well. Thank you.
    Last edited by Mensch; 11-11-10 at 06:55 AM.

  2. #242
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:54 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,930

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    from El Galt on slavery at the time of the writing of the US Constitution

    That was the custom of the day.
    Many nations had already abolished slavery or the slave trade. That list included
    Sweeden, Japan, Poland, Lithuania, Chile, Japan, Russia, Portugal and Scotland among others. I would hardly call that the custom of the day.

    I offered this on the idea of lovers of liberty allowing slavery to be placed in the new Constitution

    It is such a contradiction that - in my opinion - it completely invalidates and negates any claim a person can make to being a lover of liberty or freedom.

    the response for Galt
    Are you KIDDING?! The way to oppose slavery is to oppose the idea of liberty? Is that what you’re saying?
    No. I am not kidding. The want to advance liberty is not on the backs of a race of people being held in a condition of slavery. To write lofty statements about the equality of man and the equality of all mankind while personally owning slaves and enshrining a system of slavery into the national Constitution is a serious contradiction that goes far beyond mere political hypocrisy. It seriously calls into question the merit of such a label as 'lover of freedom' or 'lover of liberty' and demonstrates why it is hollow at best.

    It is not BS that most modern libertarians have found themselves on the opposite side of a long list of issues advocated by African Americans and the American civil rights community. And I refer to much much more than a single law about a business practice. If you take almost every issue regarding African Americans and the effort to attain full equality, libertarians have been in lockstock with the most right wing of conservatives on them. They certainly come up with loftier reasons then the Bull Conners and George Wallaces of the world - but in the end they come down on the same side as that crowd.

    Affirmative action is but a single item on a much larger list which would include almost every Civil Rights Law from the Sixties through today, laws passed to aid African Americans, and programs aimed at helping them. You mention Ron Paul and I cannot help but think of this hypocrisy in refusing to allocate any monies for medals for Rosa Parks and others claiming there is not any Constitutional language for that expenditure while co-sponsoring and voting for striking of coins to raise money for a private organization - the Boy Scouts at the same time. And there is not language in the US Constitution to allow the printing of coins to raise extra money for a private organization. But he found a way to do it.

    I will grant you the point that one can oppose some affirmative actions programs without being a racist or even a conservative on civil rights. Yes, that is true and liberals also find reasons to oppose it. However, there is a very extensive list of civil rights laws and programs that are opposed by libertarians that go far beyond affirmative action and I believe we both know that.

    How does the elasticity clause justify drug prohibition or prohibition against prostitution? How does it justify a national healthcare system?
    The US Supreme Court has heard those arguments and has held that the use of Article I, Section 8, paragraph 18 does indeed come into play and permit these things. Rather than me simply parrot the Court - and do a far less extensive and thorough job in the task - I would recommend that if you want to know those answers you refer to the specific controversy and the SC ruling that approved the programs that you are opposed to. Your objections have been dealt with in the Court for a long time now.

    But we are going astray from the main point here.

    The people who wrote the US Constitution were complex men who harbored a variety of ideologies and opinions about government and other issues. I have no doubt that some of them did harbor ideas that would be in sync with some ideas of some modern libertarians. They also possessed ideas which greatly put them out of sync with the beliefs of modern libertarians - if we take those beliefs at face value. Even so, that does not make them libertarians. That does not make the Constitution a libertarian document. And it certainly does not give license to modern libertarians to claim it as a libertarian work product or any sort of a validation of their current belief system.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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. #243
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Will the 5 folks that voted yes in this poll please cite any examples of libertarianism enabling facsism?


    My money is on not getting a response to this query.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  4. #244
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:54 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,930

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by ReverendHellh0und View Post
    Will the 5 folks that voted yes in this poll please cite any examples of libertarianism enabling facsism?


    My money is on not getting a response to this query.
    This thread has already run 25 pages. A look through ONLY the first five pages show that the following posts speak to your challenge and have already put forth their ideas on this:

    posts #11, 15, 18, 21, 23, 30, 34, 40, 44

    and that is only in five pages. feel free to examine the last 20. As i am sure you are well aware, threads with a longer shelf life often begin to explore other areas of the topic and branch off. This thread is no different.

    The thread is more of a speculative one that applies to future possible developments rather than a "has this happened in the past" sort of thread. For my two cents, i would prefer that a discussion revolve around modern libertarianism leading us down The Road to Serfdom rather than a use of the loaded word fascism..... although I do understand what the opening thread and the writer of it meant.
    Last edited by haymarket; 11-11-10 at 11:01 AM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  5. #245
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    This thread has already run 25 pages. A look through ONLY the first five pages show that the following posts speak to your challenge and have already put forth their ideas on this:

    posts #11, 15, 18, 21, 23, 30, 34, 40, 44

    So the answer is no. there is now examples of libertarians enabling fascism from the 5 of you who voted yes. thank you for your concession.


    and that is only in five pages. feel free to examine the last 20. As i am sure you are well aware, threads with a longer shelf life often begin to explore other areas of the topic and branch off. This thread is no different.

    The thread is more of a speculative one that applies to future possible developments rather than a "has this happened in the past" sort of thread. For my two cents, i would prefer that a discussion revolve around modern libertarianism leading us down The Road to Serfdom rather than a use of the loaded word fascism..... although I do understand what the opening thread and the writer of it meant.

    Oh so its conjecture and speculation about a philosophy and political ideology you really do not understand. Gotcha.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  6. #246
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:12 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,589

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    The Road to Serfdom
    Summarize "The Road to Serfdom" as actually spelled out by its author. Can you? You keep using that phrase as though you think it's a zinger.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  7. #247
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:54 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,930

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by ReverendHellh0und View Post
    So the answer is no. there is now examples of libertarians enabling fascism from the 5 of you who voted yes. thank you for your concession.





    Oh so its conjecture and speculation about a philosophy and political ideology you really do not understand. Gotcha.
    Sorry Rev but the problem here is your intentional misreading of the opening post. Here is what the opening post asks

    Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism by making institutions weak and vulnerable to private violence?
    You are taking to mean "HAVE liber..... etc....." You want proof that it has happened when that is not what the thread is asking. Good reading skills are always an asset in life.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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. #248
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:54 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,930

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Summarize "The Road to Serfdom" as actually spelled out by its author. Can you? You keep using that phrase as though you think it's a zinger.
    Harshaw - when I use the phrase "the Road to Serfdom" I a clearly using it in the context that libertarianism will lead to an existence of many people that will resemble the horrid state of serfdom. Was than unclear to you? I hope that clears it up.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  9. #249
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Sorry Rev but the problem here is your intentional misreading of the opening post. Here is what the opening post asks



    You are taking to mean "HAVE liber..... etc....." You want proof that it has happened when that is not what the thread is asking. Good reading skills are always an asset in life.


    If you answer yes, you need to provide examples. I'd retort about your reading skills, but you seem to whine alot when someone throws your behavior back in your face.

    Now reading that phrase, if you answered "yes" it does "enable fascism", you need to cite real world examples.

    Can you do this? yes or no?
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  10. #250
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Do libertarians inadvertently enable fascism?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Harshaw - when I use the phrase "the Road to Serfdom" I a clearly using it in the context that libertarianism will lead to an existence of many people that will resemble the horrid state of serfdom. Was than unclear to you? I hope that clears it up.



    How?

    ......
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

Page 25 of 35 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... 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
  •