Libertarians?

[REB]

We laugh at the arguments but know the meaning. Well, we think we know but leave it up to you to decide......

REB

1-2-3-BRONCOS!!!!!!!

oh yeah.......

www.lp.org

[watermock]

Your not going to carry the day with no argument and a link. That was pathetic.

[watermock]

We laugh at the arguments but know the meaning.

Your going to laugh all the way to the bank huh buddy. Arrogant ignorance.

Hey buddy, your irrelevant.

[alkemical]

reb,

i vote lp on 90% of local elections

[Hogan11]

I tend to largely agree with the Libertarian viewpoint...hence I vote that way....it's much better than throwing my vote away on the GOP and the DNC, especially since I don't believe in either of them or what they stand for.........voting for whom represents your viewpoint is never wasting your vote......voting for the lesser of two supposed evils always wastes your vote.

If you don't like that........... I don't care.

[Pat Bowlen]

I tend to largely agree with the Libertarian viewpoint...hence I vote that way
Could you give me the Libertarian viewpoint in 90 seconds or less? I'm interested to know more about it but don't feel like wading through that site yet.

[kappys]

Could you give me the Libertarian viewpoint in 90 seconds or less? I'm interested to know more about it but don't feel like wading through that site yet.

Lower taxes, drop most free services, stop war, increase Bill of Rights protections, end patriot act, decrease sie of government by large margin, more power to local governments and states to decide what to do. Essentially limit federal government as much as possible(including social services, armed services, etc.), shift power back to local communities, and increase bill of rights protections.

Overall I agree with the majority of their policies, although i think in some areas they are too etreme to be practical. But given that they would never get the most extreme points out anyways, I am happy to give them my vote.

[Sodak]

Word...
F*ck the two party scam/system.
The two party system gives me ONE more choice than they had in the Soviet Union, where you either vote for or against a candidate. The Republicrats are really no choice at all...

Vote Libertarian.

[enjolras]

To get a good idea of where they stand:

http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/09/20/1423219&tid=11&tid=219

[enjolras]

more goodness (from http://badnarik.org/libertarian.php)

Despite this confusion, the Libertarian philosophy is really very easy to understand. Libertarians are, quite simply, people who believe in "Self-Ownership": You own yourself, and no one else on Earth has a higher claim to your body or your labor than you do. So long as people act in a way that doesn't interfere with anyone else's freedom, Libertarians believe that they should be free to do what they please.

The idea of "Self-Ownership" is what distinguishes us from both liberals and conservatives. Every political position that Libertarians take can be traced back to this simple idea. For example, Libertarians are opposed to "liberal" attempts to use the government to regulate people's buying practices, by imposing tariffs on certain goods & industries. We oppose this kind of regulation not because we think that all goods & industries are equally wonderful, but because we believe that people own themselves, and should be allowed to buy what they like, based on their own beliefs and values. If for some people that means buying fair-trade coffee at the local co-op grocery store, then that's great—just as long as they don't use the government's power to force other people to do the same.

Likewise, Libertarians are opposed to "conservative" attempts to use the government to regulate people's morality, by imposing laws that restrict their behavior on the Sabbath, or at the pharmacy, or in the bedroom. We're opposed to these kinds of legal restrictions not because we think that all lifestyle choices are equally worth pursuing, but because we believe that people own themselves, and should be allowed to decide how to live their lives as they see fit, so long as they aren't hurting anyone else in the process.

[Hogan11]

Wow, what a bunch of lunatics eh? ::)

[ClevelandBronco]

The Libertarians are a great idea for a party, but the people they appeal to most are among the least able to sustain the idea of a party. A party made up of individualists ends up being an oxymoron in practice.

[Rohirrim]

The Framers derived this government from a basic set of understandings about human nature. They did not have a "warm and fuzzy" view of humanity. They understood that if human beings have an avenue to grab unlimited power and wealth, they will take it - and the hell with everybody else. This is why they set up a government of "checks and balances" with judicial, executive and legislative powers separated. This concept has also guided the evolution of regulations that control the excesses of government, industry and wealth.

The Libertarians have a rosy view of humanity, kind of like Marxists. Their view is that humans, if given the choice, would be like the Marlboro Man, wandering out on the prairies, going it alone, respecting other's rights as they want their own respected - living by the Golden Rule. Everybody would do the honorable thing because, heck, that's just the way us humans are.

I'll take the philosophy of the Framers, thank you. I've been around.

[enjolras]

The Libertarians have a rosy view of humanity, kind of like Marxists. Their view is that humans, if given the choice, would be like the Marlboro Man, wandering out on the prairies, going it alone, respecting other's rights as they want their own respected - living by the Golden Rule. Everybody would do the honorable thing because, heck, that's just the way us humans are.

I'll take the philosophy of the Framers, thank you. I've been around.

I disagree..

Libertarians do see personal responsibility as paramount to good policy, true. However, they aren't anarchists (as they are often mistaken for). Rather their policy centers on the interactions between people.. in short government should be organized to ensure that fundamental rights and liberties aren't violated by others. In this respect Libertarianism is completely about those basic checks and balances. According to the liberatarian philosophy grabbing unlimited wealth is absolutely ok, but the role of government should be to check the power that comes with it.

What I really like about liberatarianism is that it has tolerance for others built in. It's a social contract that says 'I'll live MY life according to my own ideals, and you live according to yours.' It is this basic ideal of tolerance that scares people. They see ME living according to my own moral code as somehow forcing my ideals on them. That the very existence of a differing moral code somehow means that it threatens their own. It goes back to so many discussions we've had on this board.. I have no problem with a Christian living according to his own set of Christian morals, yet they seem to have a lot of trouble with me doing what I feel is right for me primarily BECAUSE it differs from them.

[W*GS]

The Framers derived this government from a basic set of understandings about human nature.

With which the libertarians are in agreement.

They did not have a "warm and fuzzy" view of humanity.

Neither do libertarians.

They understood that if human beings have an avenue to grab unlimited power and wealth, they will take it - and the hell with everybody else.

Why do you think libertarians are so set on reducing the size and power of government? It's the "avenue" most likely, by far, to "grab unlimited power and wealth". Name me one entity other than a government that has nuclear weapons, for example.

This is why they set up a government of "checks and balances" with judicial, executive and legislative powers separated.[QUOTE]

Those lines have become blurred over the decades - do you agree?

[QUOTE]This concept has also guided the evolution of regulations that control the excesses of government, industry and wealth.

To a point. The government is extremely poor at regulating itself, and, I don't think the Framers had in mind that so many people would receive employement and sustenance from the government that said people would naturally strongly resist any reduction in the ability of government to provide for them.

The Libertarians have a rosy view of humanity, kind of like Marxists.

Actually, it's the liberals who have the naive view - that man is perfectable.

Their view is that humans, if given the choice, would be like the Marlboro Man, wandering out on the prairies, going it alone,

Libertarians are not strong believers in the hermits-alone-in-caves model of human society and sociability.

respecting other's rights as they want their own respected - living by the Golden Rule. Everybody would do the honorable thing because, heck, that's just the way us humans are.

Usually, but not always. I've always wondered why liberals believe that we can have a powerful government that somehow always remains in the hands of those who only have the best intentions, yet those with economic power (which is always much less in strength and scope than State power) are almost inevitably going to go bad. Is there something about having State power at one's disposal that makes the craven side of human nature go away, whereas merely being wealthy insures that the one possessing it will almost always be evil?

I'll take the philosophy of the Framers, thank you. I've been around.

Then why are you a liberal?

[alkemical]

I view the amish as pretty much libertarians that work in a community in benifit for themselves.