• 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!

A Liberal Defends Libertarianism

TeleKat said:
A Liberal Defends Libertarianism*|*David Vognar

I could have easily written this article myself. Your thoughts?
Click to expand...

I think that it is curious that a liberal would defend libertarianism. Libertarianism assumes things that are demonstrably false like: both sides in any transaction have perfect knowledge; or that corporations will behave in a socially responsible way. That is why the are mostly against any type of government regulations. When I buy a pain reliever, I am very glad that there is a government agency that is responsible for the quality of that product and that it isn't that likely to kill me. Before there was an FDA, those assurances were not there and people did die from tainted drugs. Industries cannot self regulate. It is contrary to the interests of their shareholders. Industry will pollute because disposing industrial waste in a responsible way is not cost effective. We need government to "promote the general welfare" because companies have proven time and again that they will not do it. Liberals tend to recognize that there is a need for an adversarial relationship between government and industry. That doesn't meant that the intent should be to prevent new companies from starting or to prevent them from making money, but they should not do that at the cost of the general welfare. Libertarians don't understand that, just like we need laws to prevent/regulate individuals (speeding, murder, etc.) there is a need for regulation of other aspects of society, especially corporations.
 
zip98053 said:
I think that it is curious that a liberal would defend libertarianism. Libertarianism assumes things that are demonstrably false like: both sides in any transaction have perfect knowledge; or that corporations will behave in a socially responsible way. That is why the are mostly against any type of government regulations. When I buy a pain reliever, I am very glad that there is a government agency that is responsible for the quality of that product and that it isn't that likely to kill me. Before there was an FDA, those assurances were not there and people did die from tainted drugs. Industries cannot self regulate. It is contrary to the interests of their shareholders. Industry will pollute because disposing industrial waste in a responsible way is not cost effective. We need government to "promote the general welfare" because companies have proven time and again that they will not do it. Liberals tend to recognize that there is a need for an adversarial relationship between government and industry. That doesn't meant that the intent should be to prevent new companies from starting or to prevent them from making money, but they should not do that at the cost of the general welfare. Libertarians don't understand that, just like we need laws to prevent/regulate individuals (speeding, murder, etc.) there is a need for regulation of other aspects of society, especially corporations.
Click to expand...

Libertarians, from what I've seen, are not against all regulation, just excessive regulation.
 
TeleKat said:
Libertarians, from what I've seen, are not against all regulation, just excessive regulation.
Click to expand...

While there is truth to that, it's a pretty meaningless statement due to the lack of definition concerning "excessive".

It comes down to the difference in how libertarians and liberals view the role of govt.
 
TeleKat said:
Libertarians, from what I've seen, are not against all regulation, just excessive regulation.
Click to expand...
Of course, who decides what "excessive" means? That is the problem. While even Adam Smith, the father of capitalism, would agree that government regulation is legitimate and necessary, people disagree with the extent of regulation. Industry self-regulation does not work and it puts too much responsibility on the part of the consumer to know what a company is doing. Imagine if there was no aircraft maintenance regulations. Every passenger would need to become an expert in maintenance to know that their airliner was safe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom