Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Caros
May 14, 2008

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZvUMmDF0I4

That video is the be all end all of this discussion. Feel free to read several hundred pages if you remain interested after listening to us snicker for two hours.

Since there is currently a giant clusterfuck going on in the US Politics thread, it probably wouldn't hurt to have our quarterly Libertarian/An Cap/Unmedicated Sociopath thread, if only so that Xylo has a conveniently easy thread to gas. Frankly I'd been pondering starting up something similar to this since I've bumped into a whole bunch of 'interesting' libertarian media as of late that I thought would make for good discussion.

So with that out of the way I'd like to introduce some of the many, many flavors of Libertarian thought to those of you who don't already know everything about this:



The Libertarian Party

By far the most mainstream form of Libertarian out there. The Libertarian Party 'brand' is closest to what I'd call 'constitutional libertarianism' or 'minarchism'. Specifically they tend to occupy a space in american policy far to both the right and to the left of Conservatives and Democrats respectively. Libertarians believe in ending the prohibition on illegal drugs, supporting gun ownership, ending foreign wars, reducing the military and so on while at the same time lobbying for fiscal policies that include opt out social security, ending medicare and medicaid, abolishing all forms of welfare and so on.

The libertarian party is the third largest party in the US, and has ironically been the only party to ever have an electoral vote cast for a woman (vice president), in 1972. Which is cool I suppose. Less cool is the noted addition of David Koch in 1980 as vice presidential candidate.

The typical flavor of the american mainstream libertarian can be summed up as 'go away'. They want the government to be reduced to an extent that even republicans are unwilling to speak of publicly. This puts them in the weird position of being very agreeable to both liberals and conservaatives, though their harsh policies on fiscal spending tend to run them further away from left wingers than their social policies effect on conservatives.

The libertarian party is typically the political banner for a variety of types of libertarian such as Minarchists (Get the government out of everything but security), Libertarian Conservativism (Ron Paul), and Objectivism which I will disucss.


Anarcho-Capitalists

AnCaps are perhaps the most hardcore of the libertarian sub-groups, and certainly the most vocal. As suggested by their name, Anacho-Capitalists want a stateless society run solely according to principle of voluntary trade and what they call the Non-Agression Principle which I will get to below.

As I mentioned, An Caps are very vocal online. Despite being a splinter group of an already slim minority the vast majority of internet libertarians seem to be of the An Cap variety. Typically they hold to a set of ethics based solely around the lack of coersion, and are of the belief that more or less any and every problem in our current society can be traced back to the state in some form or another. I could really go on for weeks about these guys, but I don't want the OP to be terribly biased against them.

The most notable and cited An Cap thinkers are Triple H (Hans Herman Hoppe), Walter Block (Hey hey hey hey hey! Shut up!) and Murray (I can't believe I forgot him) Rothbard. Occationally included on this list is Lew Rockwell, but mostly because his website tends to host An Cap thinkers, while I'd personally put him as a Libertarian Conservative.


Voluntarists

Often closely associated with rear end Cancer survivor, Men's Rights Activist and noted Cult Leader Stephan Molyneux, Voluntarists are more or less interchangable with An Caps. They tend to focus more on the Voluntary aspect of things (as befits their name) and those who follow Molyneux tend to be a little bit more into the 'philosophy' and ethics side of things.

On a personal note for this one, I'll be honest. I do not like Molyneux. The man runs a borderline cult, holding just enough charisma to rope in followers with superficially bright ideas while extorting cash from them to support his lifestyle. Most recently he has been on a stint talking about how women use sexual currency in the form of makeup and pushup bras to take advantage of men, along with a video entitled "Why men don't want to get married." wherein it was determined that we don't want to get married because then our wife can hold us hostage with alimony. Yeah.


Libertarian Conservatives

Also sometime known as paleo-conservatives and/or Neo-Confederates, this group is composed of the 'serious' libertarians in American politics. Most of the 'famous' libertarians you've heard of who are not Anarcho-Capitalists probably fall into this group. Libertarian Conservitives typically function much like the libertarian party, but with the exception that they prefer everything be brought down to states rights wherever possible, and that they are totally okay with segregating blacks, stopping abortions and so forth so long as it is done on the state level.

Membership, such as it is, includes such luminaries as Ron Paul (Have your read the constituuuuushun?), Rand (totally not an Ayn Rand thing) Paul, Thomas (Lincoln was the real bad guy) DiLorenzo, Lew Rockwell (who totally didn't ghostwrite those newsletters) and so on.


The Austrian School

Largely the brain child of Ludwig von Mises, the Austrian School of Economics is the dominant view of economics held by more or less every major Libertarian group in existence. The Austrian school of economics emerged in the late 19th century with the work of several major economists, such as Carl Menger and Freidrich von Wieser. During its early years it came up with several major contributions that we still consider today, such as the subjective theory of value, Price marginalism and the idea of the calculation problem in regards to centrally planned economics. The group that created those theories however, has little to do with the modern Austrian School.

The 'modern' Austrian School for lack of a better term came into itself in the late 1940's with the publication of Human Action by Ludwig von Mises, which clarified his subjectivist approach he called Praxeology. Put simply Praxeology is the 'scientific' study of human action by which an observer can deduce a priori truths about how people act when dealing with one another in an economic sense. In Mises' own words:

“Praxeology is a theoretical and systematic, not a historical, science. Its scope is human action as such, irrespective of all environmental, accidental, and individual circumstances of the concrete acts. Its cognition is purely formal and general without reference to the material content and the particular features of the actual case. It aims at knowledge valid for all instances in which the conditions exactly correspond to those implied in its assumptions and inferences. Its statements and propositions are not derived from experience. They are, like those of logic and mathematics, a priori. They are not subject to verification or falsification on the ground of experience and facts. They are both logically and temporally antecedent to any comprehension of historical facts”

Due to this anti-evidence based form of Economics, the Austrian School is largely ignored by the economics field. Despite this it is still a favorite of Libertarian groups the world over, with many of their beliefs, arguments and methods coming straight from Mises' work.

The two most famous Austrian school economists of note would be Friedrich Hayek and of course Ludwig von Mises of the ubiquitous Mises.org.


Objectivists

The disciples of likely sociopath Ayn Rand, Objectivists are really more of a complimentary line of thinking when compared to libertarians. Sort of a all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles squares sort of thing.

Objectivism holds, more or less, that rational self interest is the best and most logical driving force behind all humanity. That selfish action is better than selflessness, that selflessness is in fact immoral an irrational. Furthermore Ayn Rand supposed that reality is in fact objective rather than subjective, that knowledge and values are something that can be logically reasoned out and ultimately determined to be real. Atlas Shrugged, her seminal work qualifies Objectivism as such:

"My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute."

There is a whole lot more to the philosophy than can be covered in one post, frankly I think I've given it more attention than it deserves, but I know I'd get some complaints if I didn't include it in the OP. Noted Ayn Rand lovers include Paul Ryan, Ron Paul and every bookish teenager who never got to read lord of the rings.


Freemen on the Land

Since I included Objectivists I might as well add these guys. Freemen on the Land believe that the government is illigitimate for... uh... reasons. They aren't so much an ideology as a psuedo-legal tactic that has never functioned in court. They typically get tazered, beaten or otherwise inconvenienced by police after a little while of trying to pull their poo poo.

The big reason I include them is that we recently had a major incident in the US involving a form of Freeman on the Land. Cliven Bundy, Nevada rancher who knows at least two things about the Negro belongs to a movement called Posse Comitatus, a group that draws its name from a reconstruction era law meaning "Force of the county." Posse Comitatus is a group who believe in localism, that the county sheriff is the supreme authority. Many Freeman groups are offshoots of Posse Comitatus groups, which are of course offshoots of good old white supremacy.

The Non Aggression Principle

Also known as the NAP, the Non-Aggression Principle is the guiding light for An Caps, Voluntarists and some other minor flavors I didn't bother to mention. The gist of it is that force/coercion is never justified, under any circumstance. When coupled with their belief that the primary function of government is that it has a "Monopoly on force in a designated geographical area" An Caps use the NAP to argue that government is inherently illegitimate.

They argue that all government intervention is based around force in one fashion or another. Don't pay your taxes and you'll get a letter, don't respond to the letter, police will show up, don't obey police and they will have to arrest you, don't let yourself get arrested and the police will use violence.

Property Rights

The issue of Property Rights varies from group to group in libertarian circles, but the general rule among them is that property rights should be inviolable. If you own something you should be able to do what you want with it, where you want with it provided it is not impacting others.

The extreme of this set of beliefs is found most often in the work of Murray Rothbard. Rothbard loves to make every human interaction into some sort of transaction, and thus everything and everything must be property to be transacted with. All I know is that when you start talking about free flowing markets in children things are getting a bit... weird.

Self Ownership

Self Ownership is exactly what it sounds like. It is one of the beliefs typically held by libertarians that is also frequently held by liberals, anarchists and a whole host of left wing groups. The gist of Self Ownership is that you own your own body, and provided you are not hurting yourself, you should more or less be able to do whatever the hell you want.

Many libertarian groups take the idea of self ownership quite literally. Since all rights are property rights, they argue, it stands to reason that you must own yourself, and thus everything produced by yourself.

Who the gently caress is jrodefeld?

JRod is one of the forms most beloved Libertarian posters, along with other alumni such as LolitaSama** and that other guy I can't remember. He 'terrorized' the forums several times over the last few years with page long diatribes and a wonderful habit of replying to each and every post in order, despite being up to a dozen pages behind. Don't be like him. Conversely, don't poo poo up the thread and be assholes if libertarians come in to discuss their viewpoints. Try not to anyways.

Sept 30 Edit: It turns out that another of our libertarian forum dwellers, LolitaSama, has gotten off the crazy train of libertarianism. Huzzah!

March 31st Edit: We now have a Wiki of our very own for mocking information on retarded prominent libertarians.

Caros fucked around with this message at 18:32 on Mar 31, 2016

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Tezzor
Jul 29, 2013
Probation
Can't post for 3 years!

Caros posted:

They argue that all government intervention is based around force in one fashion or another. Don't pay your taxes and you'll get a letter, don't respond to the letter, police will show up, don't obey police and they will have to arrest you, don't let yourself get arrested and the police will use violence.

They're right. This is hardly a controversial or even libertarian ideal. Mao said something similar.

Joementum
May 23, 2004

jesus christ
It's interesting that the Libertarian Party platform is being made into a campaign issue in the US election this year instead of just being ignored as usual.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRnNJ9lUBMg

MLKQUOTEMACHINE
Oct 22, 2012

Some motherfuckers are always trying to ice-skate uphill
I've always wanted to ask a libertarian this (but I know few in real life because they're crazy fuckers and tend to be racist): Why would a minority want to forgo government protection of their rights in order to embrace the libertarian "get government out of everything so I can be a feudal lord" creed? I think it's an important question, as demographics begin to skew more in favor of non-whites libertarians will have to convince non-whites that their policies will actually benefit the traditionally disenfranchised.

Caros
May 14, 2008

nutranurse posted:

I've always wanted to ask a libertarian this (but I know few in real life because they're crazy fuckers and tend to be racist): Why would a minority want to forgo government protection of their rights in order to embrace the libertarian "get government out of everything so I can be a feudal lord" creed? I think it's an important question, as demographics begin to skew more in favor of non-whites libertarians will have to convince non-whites that their policies will actually benefit the traditionally disenfranchised.

I actually had a discussion with a Canadian libertarian the other day on this very subject. The answer I got, more or less, was that they believe their ideas are so good and so self evident that why wouldn't a minority go after them? And if the minority is effectively bought out, then the libertarians simply need to focus on getting more people who they can readily sway.

Incidentally the Canadian libertarian party earned 0.04% of the total vote in our last election.

quote:

They're right. This is hardly a controversial or even libertarian ideal. Mao said something similar.

Its also a massive oversimplification of something that is complex, which in my experience tends to be the libertarian M.O. I'd argue in the taxation argument for example, that it would actually be the taxpayer who is initiating force by their definition by effectively stealing from his fellow citizens.

Caros fucked around with this message at 00:26 on May 23, 2014

LogisticEarth
Mar 28, 2004

Someone once told me, "Time is a flat circle".

Caros posted:

Conversely, don't poo poo up the thread and be assholes if libertarians come in to discuss their viewpoints. Try not to anyways.

Sure, and while we're at it lets all wish that democratic control over capital would have a favorable outcome. :v:

EDIT: For content it might be worth adding Self Ownership to the OP along with the NAP if we're focusing on the An-cap/voluntarist flavor here.

LogisticEarth fucked around with this message at 00:26 on May 23, 2014

reignonyourparade
Nov 15, 2012

Caros posted:

JRod is one of the forms most beloved Libertarian posters, along with other alumni such as Lolita-Sama and that other guy I can't remember. He 'terrorized' the forums several times over the last few years with page long diatribes and a wonderful habit of replying to each and every post in order, despite being up to a dozen pages behind. Don't be like him. Conversely, don't poo poo up the thread and be assholes if libertarians come in to discuss their viewpoints. Try not to anyways.

That's not true, he skips everything he doesn't have a "decent" argument against.

Caros
May 14, 2008

LogisticEarth posted:

Sure, and while we're at it lets all wish that democratic control over capital would have a favorable outcome. :v:

EDIT: For content it might be worth adding Self Ownership to the OP along with the NAP if we're focusing on the An-cap/voluntarist flavor here.

Good Call. I've got a few other things including some videos I want to add before the end of the day.

LogisticEarth
Mar 28, 2004

Someone once told me, "Time is a flat circle".
I'd also suggest taking Mises and Hayek out of the straight-up An-Cap territory. While they're held up frequently by Mises.org and other an-cap havens, both of them were minarchists at the least. I think in a previous thread someone tried to argue that Hayek wasn't even libertarian and was instead a liberal when I cited him as a notable right-libertarian who supported a basic income.

I would also suggest maybe including market anarchists and/or modern mutualists in the list if we're not just going to have a big rag-fest on :ancap:

LogisticEarth fucked around with this message at 00:33 on May 23, 2014

AYC
Mar 9, 2014

Ask me how I smoke weed, watch hentai, everyday and how it's unfair that governments limits my ability to do this. Also ask me why I have to write in green text in order for my posts to stand out.
All of these groups, IMO, are united under a large group I refer to as the Starry-Eyed Twentysomethings. Along with their far left counterparts, they want to destroy our entire socioeconomic order, but are vague and naive-sounding when pressed for specifics. Ultimately, their policies are centered far more around nice-sounding ideas than any realistic policies.

Not surprisingly, they have zero relevance in the political world, and you will likely never encounter more than a tiny handful outside of the Internet.

AYC fucked around with this message at 00:38 on May 23, 2014

Kiwi Ghost Chips
Feb 19, 2011

Start using the best desktop environment now!
Choose KDE!

aren't you 17

Captain_Maclaine
Sep 30, 2001

Every moment I'm alive, I pray for death!
Since you mentioned JRod and Lolita-sama, other old-school libertarian posters who used to poo poo up every thread they touched contribute meaningfully to discussion include Qualnor, CZAR, and Calenth. The first two have been thankfully absent for years, and the latter reformed himself some time ago.

It's also a pity that archives are down, for it's a damned shame those who weren't around back in the LF golden period can't see examples of libertarianism taken to its logical extreme in the form of legendary troll poster TobleroneTriangular. When he finally came clean, he described his MO (which had most of us convinced he would one day be taken out by the FBI for trying to blow up the Federal Reserve) as starting with a seeming-plausible libertarian premise and taking it as far as he could, which usually resulted in something like demanding Wolf Blitzer be publicly decapitated.

VitalSigns
Sep 3, 2011

nutranurse posted:

I've always wanted to ask a libertarian this (but I know few in real life because they're crazy fuckers and tend to be racist): Why would a minority want to forgo government protection of their rights in order to embrace the libertarian "get government out of everything so I can be a feudal lord" creed?

The naive Libertarian will say that racism is impossible in the free market because markets punish irrationality, and it's only government that makes racism possible.

Then you've got Libertarians like Hoppe who dont care what minorities think because they believe the "natural social elites" should establish covenant communities that ban anyone from selling or renting their private land to inferior mud races.

Spangly A
May 14, 2009

God help you if ever you're caught on these shores

A man's ambition must indeed be small
To write his name upon a shithouse wall

VitalSigns posted:

The naive Libertarian will say that racism is impossible in the free market because markets punish irrationality, and it's only government that makes racism possible.

I've heard this in real life from minorities.

There will always be class traitors and thus all minorities who are just better than equally paid white people must be hired. When pressed on "what about poor education standards already existing", there is no answer. Once I had someone say "it's a small price to pay".

Captain_Maclaine
Sep 30, 2001

Every moment I'm alive, I pray for death!

Spangly A posted:

I've heard this in real life from minorities.

There will always be class traitors and thus all minorities who are just better than equally paid white people must be hired. When pressed on "what about poor education standards already existing", there is no answer. Once I had someone say "it's a small price to pay".

Those sort of prices always seem small to libertarians as they erroneously believe they will never be the ones paying them.

Caros
May 14, 2008

LogisticEarth posted:

I'd also suggest taking Mises and Hayek out of the straight-up An-Cap territory. While they're held up frequently by Mises.org and other an-cap havens, both of them were minarchists at the least. I think in a previous thread someone tried to argue that Hayek wasn't even libertarian and was instead a liberal when I cited him as a notable right-libertarian who supported a basic income.

I would also suggest maybe including market anarchists and/or modern mutualists in the list if we're not just going to have a big rag-fest on :ancap:

Did make the first change since I added a section on the Austrian school.

Not sure what I'd add about market Anarchists or Mutualists since truth be told I've never encountered an example of either in the wild so I have no frame of reference for what to say about them.

Crowsbeak
Oct 9, 2012

by Azathoth
Lipstick Apathy
You may want to add a section on the Chicago school, even tough most of them just vote straight republican, and may actually occasionally support some form of social programs.

Phyzzle
Jan 26, 2008

Caros posted:


The Non Aggression Principle

Also known as the NAP, the Non-Aggression Principle is the guiding light for An Caps, Voluntarists and some other minor flavors I didn't bother to mention. The gist of it is that force/coercion is never justified, under any circumstance. When coupled with their belief that the primary function of government is that it has a "Monopoly on force in a designated geographical area" An Caps use the NAP to argue that government is inherently illegitimate.

They argue that all government intervention is based around force in one fashion or another. Don't pay your taxes and you'll get a letter, don't respond to the letter, police will show up, don't obey police and they will have to arrest you, don't let yourself get arrested and the police will use violence.


To expand on this, they believe that the initiation of force (or a threat to that effect) is never justified. Pacifists are a type of libertarian, in that they oppose aggressive force. What makes them pacifist is an extra opposition to defensive force.

There is a third type of force that is rarely mentioned: retributive force. Libertarians tend to believe that the government alone has the right to seek vengance for aggressive attacks. Anarcho-capitalists want to privatize that as well.

LogisticEarth
Mar 28, 2004

Someone once told me, "Time is a flat circle".

Crowsbeak posted:

You may want to add a section on the Chicago school, even tough most of them just vote straight republican, and may actually occasionally support some form of social programs.

Pretty sure the Chicago School is neo-liberal, not libertarian.

Phyzzle posted:

There is a third type of force that is rarely mentioned: retributive force. Libertarians tend to believe that the government alone has the right to seek vengance for aggressive attacks. Anarcho-capitalists want to privatize that as well.

The idea behind libertarian state/law violence isn't generally about vengeance, but restitution. If you break someone's window you pay to fix it, and maybe some extra for lost time, inconvenience, etc.

im gay
Jul 20, 2013

by Lowtax
What is the libertarian answer to environmental issues such as climate change that require international responses?

Nessus
Dec 22, 2003

After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!



im gay posted:

What is the libertarian answer to environmental issues such as climate change that require international responses?
I believe they feel that the market will present a solution to such problems if we just get out of the way and cut back on regulations.

CharlestheHammer
Jun 26, 2011

YOU SAY MY POSTS ARE THE RAVINGS OF THE DUMBEST PERSON ON GOD'S GREEN EARTH BUT YOU YOURSELF ARE READING THEM. CURIOUS!

im gay posted:

What is the libertarian answer to environmental issues such as climate change that require international responses?

After enough time passes and everyone notices that something is up, we will voluntarily pool resources to try and stop it.

That is usually the local but I don't see why it couldn't be applied nationally.

I mean it is dumb either way, but no more than the original version.

CharlestheHammer fucked around with this message at 02:32 on May 23, 2014

Caros
May 14, 2008

Nessus posted:

I believe they feel that the market will present a solution to such problems if we just get out of the way and cut back on regulations.

Its pretty much this. They would be really, really bad at handling distributed problems like that. Even local changes like smog or polluted rivers would be a pain provided you couldn't solely identify one or more people.

woke wedding drone
Jun 1, 2003

by exmarx
Fun Shoe

Nessus posted:

I believe they feel that the market will present a solution to such problems if we just get out of the way and cut back on regulations.

If the earth can't defend itself then it's asking for it.

cheese
Jan 7, 2004

Shop around for doctors! Always fucking shop for doctors. Doctors are stupid assholes. And they get by because people are cowed by their mystical bullshit quality of being able to maintain a 3.0 GPA at some Guatemalan medical college for 3 semesters. Find one that makes sense.

Crowsbeak posted:

You may want to add a section on the Chicago school, even tough most of them just vote straight republican, and may actually occasionally support some form of social programs.

I don't think the Chicago School stands for what you think it stands for...

Sharkie
Feb 4, 2013

by Fluffdaddy
So have any libertarians attempted to account for something like Jim Crow or anti-miscegenation laws? I feel like hatelaughing.

Joementum
May 23, 2004

jesus christ

Sharkie posted:

So have any libertarians attempted to account for something like Jim Crow or anti-miscegenation laws? I feel like hatelaughing.

Those appear to be laws passed by the government and not actions performed by the market.

A Winner is Jew
Feb 14, 2008

by exmarx

SedanChair posted:

If the earth can't defend itself then it's asking for it.

If the earth is legitimately getting raped though, I hear she can just shut the whole thing down.

Sharkie
Feb 4, 2013

by Fluffdaddy

Joementum posted:

Those appear to be laws passed by the government and not actions performed by the market.

Oh yeah, duh, obviously it's government, the source of all evil and woe. But not all segregation can be blamed on the evil government who forced those poor shop owners to turn away customers on the basis of race:


A sign in a state without forced segregation laws for businesses.

Joementum
May 23, 2004

jesus christ

Sharkie posted:

A sign in a state without forced segregation laws for businesses.

Clearly the business with that sign was edged out by competition that catered to the entire population.

BUSH 2112
Sep 17, 2012

I lie awake, staring out at the bleakness of Megadon.

A Winner is Jew posted:

If the earth is legitimately getting raped though, I hear she can just shut the whole thing down.

She can just take the day after tomorrow pill :v:

exmarx
Feb 18, 2012


The experience over the years
of nothing getting better
only worse.

im gay posted:

What is the libertarian answer to environmental issues such as climate change that require international responses?

Buy The Earth A Gun

Gen. Ripper
Jan 12, 2013


Aren't "freemen on the land" the British side of the sovereign citizen bullshit? :confused:

Nessus
Dec 22, 2003

After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!



Gen. Ripper posted:

Aren't "freemen on the land" the British side of the sovereign citizen bullshit? :confused:
Nope, they're American - though people in other nations use American arguments! Which was really great when some judge in Canada pointed out to the guy, "You realize this isn't the US, right?"

I'm told there's a German variant where they say that the last legitimate supreme leader of Germany was Karl Doenitz, and since the U-Boat Commander didn't pass the baton off, they don't have to pay speeding tickets.

LogisticEarth
Mar 28, 2004

Someone once told me, "Time is a flat circle".

im gay posted:

What is the libertarian answer to environmental issues such as climate change that require international responses?

A libertarian-ish solution reliant on state power would probably be some kind of a universal carbon tax, the revenue from which would be returned to the general population via a no-strings-attached citizen's dividend. Make problem (carbon) more expensive but don't try and jury rig the market via industry or product subsidies, or heavy planning. A non-state solution would probably involve innovating our way out of it.

Generally you can get a decent idea of potential libertarian solutions through the following preferences:

Market control > Democratic/political control
Spontaneous order from a number of decentralized small private planning groups > Centrally planned solutions from a national authority with a final say.

Lustful Man Hugs
Jul 18, 2010

Nessus posted:

Nope, they're American - though people in other nations use American arguments! Which was really great when some judge in Canada pointed out to the guy, "You realize this isn't the US, right?"

I'm told there's a German variant where they say that the last legitimate supreme leader of Germany was Karl Doenitz, and since the U-Boat Commander didn't pass the baton off, they don't have to pay speeding tickets.

I'm pretty, pretty sure that regime collapsed. I don't know for sure though, it's kind of an obscure topic.

CharlestheHammer
Jun 26, 2011

YOU SAY MY POSTS ARE THE RAVINGS OF THE DUMBEST PERSON ON GOD'S GREEN EARTH BUT YOU YOURSELF ARE READING THEM. CURIOUS!

LogisticEarth posted:

A libertarian-ish solution reliant on state power would probably be some kind of a universal carbon tax, the revenue from which would be returned to the general population via a no-strings-attached citizen's dividend. Make problem (carbon) more expensive but don't try and jury rig the market via industry or product subsidies, or heavy planning. A non-state solution would probably involve innovating our way out of it.

Generally you can get a decent idea of potential libertarian solutions through the following preferences:

Market control > Democratic/political control
Spontaneous order from a number of decentralized small private planning groups > Centrally planned solutions from a national authority with a final say.

That seems to be manipulating the market pretty heavily so I don't think many libertarians would support that.

Typical Pubbie
May 10, 2011
Hell yes, I've been waiting for this thread! Have some Libertarian YouTube poop:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQBTbsnbuc4 - "My retarded friend wasn't allowed to work for sub minimum wage!" :qq:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nASPjBVQkQk - "The reason there aren't more female libertarians is because women are shallow idiots!" :qq:

nutranurse posted:

I've always wanted to ask a libertarian this (but I know few in real life because they're crazy fuckers and tend to be racist): Why would a minority want to forgo government protection of their rights in order to embrace the libertarian "get government out of everything so I can be a feudal lord" creed? I think it's an important question, as demographics begin to skew more in favor of non-whites libertarians will have to convince non-whites that their policies will actually benefit the traditionally disenfranchised.

As demographics skew more towards non-whites, Libertarian principles will become more palatable to traditional minorities as FYGM thinking intensifies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0zoee4k7yE - "I don't care if Cliven Bundy is racist. He has a point!" :qq:

Yiggy
Sep 12, 2004

"Imagination is not enough. You have to have knowledge too, and an experience of the oddity of life."

im gay posted:

What is the libertarian answer to environmental issues such as climate change that require international responses?

I only know two libertarians in real life (well, one and his GF who is a little codependent and accepted the others political views wholesale). Anyways, he's a Von Mises fanatic and former hardcore Ron Paul supporter (listening to them rationalize how he hoodwinked the movement can be painful). Whenever climate change comes up they go full denial, and start repeating an episode of Penn and Teller's bullshit. Its a bit of a non sequitur leap from "someone has a conflict of interest in supporting cap and trade, therefore, climate change is a hoax."

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Mahuum Aqoha
Jan 15, 2004

SHEPARD!
Do it for the universe!
Fun Shoe
Here's a situation I have for the libertarian crowd, even though I'm pretty sure I know what the response is going to be.

My sister is 25 and has severe autism. The severely OCD, mostly non-verbal, aggressive behaviors kind of autism and not the Sonic the Hedgehog Wiki editing kind. What happens to her? Because right now, she collects Social Security, goes to a day program, and has PCA's (two of them at once, one of two adults in my county!) Would my family be expected to pay out of pocket for all of that stuff? What happens if we can't, do we have to cut our own time at work to stay at home with her?

This kind of stuff keeps me up at night and it's almost the sole reason I will never be right-of-center aligned. Of all the conservatives I've talked to about this, a whopping three of them were okay with those kind of services - my grandpa that watches 8-10 hours of Fox News every day, some randoms that I talked to in the line at a pawn shop, and my state representative (and even he made some horrible comment a couple years ago about how some handicapped people don't work hard enough or something to that effect).

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply