• 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!

How Libertarians Rationalize Slavery

haymarket said:
It sure as hell does. Here are some examples of your freedom which I be deathly afraid of

*** your freedom to drive how you want to, going over the yellow dividing line and killing me and my family because you do not like the government coercion of telling you what to do with your property
*** my kid getting deathly ill or dying because you had the freedom to make drugs or medicines without interference or regulation from the government and you poison her
*** my family getting cancer because you wanted the freedom to put toxic chemicals in the water, air and land free from government regulation
*** someone in my family taking a bullet in the brain because you wanted the freedom to bear arms as you wish and your target practice in your yard went into mine
*** people not being able to get a meal or lodgings because you wanted the freedom to discriminate against people not white enough for your tastes or belief system
*** children growing up ignorant and maimed because you wanted the freedom to hire who you wanted at the lowest possible price regardless of age
*** women being treated like something in between a human and livestock because you want the freedom to control discriminate against them

yup - lots of the freedoms you crave scare the living hell right out of me.
Click to expand...

More stupidity-no one with a brain sees these as legitimate expressions of freedom. The right to bear arms is not the right to shoot even annoying internet trolls for example. The right to travel is not a freedom to run over someone on the sidewalk. However, many believe private businesses should be able to serve whom they choose and there is nothing in the constitution that empowers the government to properly sanction such behavior. Besides, an innkeeper who discriminates against paying customers is cutting his own throat.

but there are other freedoms that terrify you-such as the freedom to decide where my estate goes after I die or whether I choose to participate in the ponzi scheme known as SS. Your crowing praise of your union membership pretty much suggests a sheep rather than a free man
 
Troubadour said:
It goes like this: According to libertarians, the fundamental basis of all rights is property. Not humanity, property. Human beings only have rights because we are each our own property. But...wait a second...if we are our own property, then we have to a right to sell ourselves to someone else, don't we? Uh-oh. This sounds like it's going in a dangerous direction. And if we can sell ourselves to someone else, then that person can in turn sell us to yet another person. In fact, if they own us, don't they also own whatever we produce, whether it be work or children? Oops. It seems we've gone full circle - the libertarian claim to be against slavery actually ends up rationalizing slavery.

The lesson is this: Our rights are based on our humanity, not on the idea of property. You do not steal because stealing hurts people, not because it would violate some abstract absolute of possession. You do not kill because killing destroys people, not merely because rules of property do not permit you that prerogative. You pay taxes that fund government programs because they serve people, and property-based complaints are trivial next to that fact. You do not wield absolute power over your children because they are not your property, they are people whose interests are held in trust by you, not something you own because you created them.

To the extent property helps people, it is to be protected. To the extent it does the opposite, as in the reasoning above - which drove the ideology of the Confederacy, and motivates so much conservative/libertarian politics today - it is subordinate to humanity. Either humanity is the absolute right or property is, and if property is then you support slavery. There is no escaping it.
Click to expand...

far be it from me to deny the existance of a moral law which is the absolute in this world. however, your claim would be stronger if you could cite, you know, some libertarians actually arguing this.

SOME might point out that some of your rights are what we call "inalienable".
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
Selfishness is the basis of libertarianism. Its the lipstick on the pig named MEMEME.
Click to expand...



Intelligent and witty..... :doh:



Libertarianism is self determination. freedom, and liberty, not infringing on others "rights"..... you call that selfish, well if it is, Its a good thing.
 
Troubadour said:
It goes like this: According to libertarians, the fundamental basis of all rights is property. Not humanity, property. Human beings only have rights because we are each our own property. But...wait a second...if we are our own property, then we have to a right to sell ourselves to someone else, don't we? Uh-oh. This sounds like it's going in a dangerous direction. And if we can sell ourselves to someone else, then that person can in turn sell us to yet another person. In fact, if they own us, don't they also own whatever we produce, whether it be work or children? Oops. It seems we've gone full circle - the libertarian claim to be against slavery actually ends up rationalizing slavery.
Click to expand...

Parents do not own their children. No libertarian argues that. And if you want to sell yourself into indentured servitude that's your choice. But you can't call it slavery because slavery involves coercion. Indentured servitude is a voluntary choice. Besides, how prevalent would it be? What benefit would the servant really get?

The lesson is this: Our rights are based on our humanity, not on the idea of property. You do not steal because stealing hurts people, not because it would violate some abstract absolute of possession. You do not kill because killing destroys people, not merely because rules of property do not permit you that prerogative. You pay taxes that fund government programs because they serve people, and property-based complaints are trivial next to that fact. You do not wield absolute power over your children because they are not your property, they are people whose interests are held in trust by you, not something you own because you created them.
Click to expand...

Stealing hurts people because it violates their property rights. Killing is also a violation of property rights. Taxation is a violation of property rights. And again, no serious libertarian argues that parents own their children.

To the extent property helps people, it is to be protected. To the extent it does the opposite, as in the reasoning above - which drove the ideology of the Confederacy, and motivates so much conservative/libertarian politics today - it is subordinate to humanity. Either humanity is the absolute right or property is, and if property is then you support slavery. There is no escaping it.
Click to expand...

Not in the straw-man scenario that you set up. In the real world, this is not an issue. Try again.
 
Guy Incognito said:
The U.S. was emphatically not libertarian in those days. Libertarianism is about social freedom as much as it is about economic freedom. Don't let Republicans masquerading as libertarians fool you, spud. Real libertarians support equality first and foremost.
Click to expand...

Equity, not equality.
 
Troubadour said:
It goes like this: According to libertarians, the fundamental basis of all rights is property. Not humanity, property. Human beings only have rights because we are each our own property. But...wait a second...if we are our own property, then we have to a right to sell ourselves to someone else, don't we? Uh-oh. This sounds like it's going in a dangerous direction. And if we can sell ourselves to someone else, then that person can in turn sell us to yet another person. In fact, if they own us, don't they also own whatever we produce, whether it be work or children? Oops. It seems we've gone full circle - the libertarian claim to be against slavery actually ends up rationalizing slavery.

The lesson is this: Our rights are based on our humanity, not on the idea of property. You do not steal because stealing hurts people, not because it would violate some abstract absolute of possession. You do not kill because killing destroys people, not merely because rules of property do not permit you that prerogative. You pay taxes that fund government programs because they serve people, and property-based complaints are trivial next to that fact. You do not wield absolute power over your children because they are not your property, they are people whose interests are held in trust by you, not something you own because you created them.

To the extent property helps people, it is to be protected. To the extent it does the opposite, as in the reasoning above - which drove the ideology of the Confederacy, and motivates so much conservative/libertarian politics today - it is subordinate to humanity. Either humanity is the absolute right or property is, and if property is then you support slavery. There is no escaping it.
Click to expand...

Dude, did expect to completely fabricate an ideal and claim a particular group espouses it, and think people would believe you? Do you think anyone, much less the libertarians around here, would say "Oh, libertarians are pro-slavery. Down with the Libertarians! Viva la revolucion!"

You need to get a dose of reality before you fall off the left side of the planet.....
 
Last edited:
You know what Dude. I bet lots of decent folks here are damn well sick and tired of being sick and tired of you using terms like STUPID AND MORONIC just because somebody takes a position that differs from your right wing extremist ideology. The comfort I get is that in knowing every time you use such a personal insult, it degrades what little remains of your credibility.

Everything on my list is something that libertarians have whined like little girls about being denied the freedom to do. They have advocated getting rid of the FDA and drug regulation. They have advocated against pollution laws. They argue against firearms laws. They argue against child labor laws. They argue against minimum wage laws. They argue against civil rights laws. They argue against pretty much every reform of the 20th century. I have even read some argue that they should be able to disobey traffic laws if they endanger nobody at that particular time.

And this is the group you seem to think stands for freedom.


You people need to get yourself your own island far far away from the rest of us.
 
Last edited:
i suspect some here would call Clinton a "right wing Extremist"

it would be moronic and stupid but it would happen
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Yeah - I don't recall ever hearing a single libertarian making such an argument to begin with.
Click to expand...

I haven't either. I would like to know how the OP came to his incorrect conclusion.
 
I came to this thread thinking…do I teach the foundations of libertarianism or am I wasting my time with a fundamental?
 
peepnklown said:
I came to this thread thinking…do I teach the foundations of libertarianism or am I wasting my time with a fundamental?
Click to expand...


You would be wasting your time. Close minded folk don't get, nor want liberty, they are happy in thier collective sheep existance and have nothing better to do than to whine and bitch about those who believe we are the masters of our own domain. :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom