Is a "socialist libertarian" a thing?

[Jolly_Penguin]

I have been trying for a while now to identify myself on the political spectrum. I am a libertarian in the sense that I believe in social freedom. I believe people should be allowed to go naked in the streets or wear burqas. I believe prostitution and most drugs should be legalized. I support homosexual marriage. I support euthanasia. But I am also a socialist. I support universal health care and universal basic income.

But when I hear most libertarians speak they are against socialism, and when I hear most socialists speak they say "libertarian" like it is a dirty word. So is Socialist Liberatrian a thing, or is there another common label that fits me better?

 

[RavenSky]

I don't know the answer to your question, but when you find it let me know so I can wear the same label.

I used to be a Libertarian because (back in the late 1970's) libertarianism was explained to me to be "social freedom. I believe people should be allowed to go naked in the streets or wear burqas. I believe prostitution and most drugs should be legalized. I support homosexual marriage. I support euthanasia", etc. Unfortunately, either right-wing conservatives have totally hijacked the Libertarian party, or "libertarian" never meant what it was claimed to mean.

I am also a socialist in terms of universal health care, universal basic income, universal rights, etc.

Not sure if "libertarian socialist" works because, as you note, the hijacking of both words for other purposes and the incorrect connotations. Further, libertarianism tends to reject "state-run" anything which is at odds with the idea of universal health care and universal basic income, which will necessarily need to be state-run. On the flip side, socialism tends to apply to all means of production rather than to the social safety nets you and I seem to be referring to.

Personally, I'm OK with Bernie Sanders term "democratic socialist": http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ic-socialism-you-have-your-choice-of-pajamas/

 

[Harry Bosch]

I have been trying for a while now to identify myself on the political spectrum. I am a libertarian in the sense that I believe in social freedom. I believe people should be allowed to go naked in the streets or wear burqas. I believe prostitution and most drugs should be legalized. I support homosexual marriage. I support euthanasia. But I am also a socialist. I support universal health care and universal basic income.

But when I hear most libertarians speak they are against socialism, and when I hear most socialists speak they say "libertarian" like it is a dirty word. So is Socialist Liberatrian a thing, or is there another common label that fits me better?

The problem is that implementing universal anything (which is impossible) requires a very strong centralized government. As governments become powerful, they generally start trying to force their social agenda.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I have been trying for a while now to identify myself on the political spectrum. I am a libertarian in the sense that I believe in social freedom. I believe people should be allowed to go naked in the streets or wear burqas. I believe prostitution and most drugs should be legalized. I support homosexual marriage. I support euthanasia. But I am also a socialist. I support universal health care and universal basic income.

But when I hear most libertarians speak they are against socialism, and when I hear most socialists speak they say "libertarian" like it is a dirty word. So is Socialist Liberatrian a thing, or is there another common label that fits me better?

The problem is that implementing universal anything (which is impossible) requires a very strong centralized government. As governments become powerful, they generally start trying to force their social agenda.

I see your point, but I don't think that HAS to happen. I think Canada has done pretty well on that front. We have universal health care, but not universal basic income. We have a pretty free society. Women can go topless in Ontario in public if they want, or they can wear burqas. Prostitution was recently made illegal (which I fought against) but marijuana laws are loosening up (which I also fought for). There is currently an election issue of whether or not women should be allowed to wear Islamic face coverings while taking the oath of citizenship, and all but one party is against a ban on it. I think there is hope here that we could become what I envision. I also agree with RavenSky that Bernie Sanders seems to be pushing for the same in the US.

"Democratic Socialist" is Bernie's term? Maybe that is what I am.

 

[untermensche]

I have been trying for a while now to identify myself on the political spectrum. I am a libertarian in the sense that I believe in social freedom. I believe people should be allowed to go naked in the streets or wear burqas. I believe prostitution and most drugs should be legalized. I support homosexual marriage. I support euthanasia. But I am also a socialist. I support universal health care and universal basic income.

But when I hear most libertarians speak they are against socialism, and when I hear most socialists speak they say "libertarian" like it is a dirty word. So is Socialist Liberatrian a thing, or is there another common label that fits me better?

The reason people on the left, so called socialists, criticize "Libertarianism", not "libertarianism", is because capital "L" Libertarianism in the US is an outgrowth from people like Ayn Rand and it is really absolute subjugation to capitalist markets, which is called liberty.

There is nothing free about modern capitalist markets or any potential capitalist markets.

A capitalist market by it's nature gives you more power the more wealth you accumulate. A few with far greater power than the majority is freedom for them and subjugation for everyone else.

 

[Source]

A few with far greater power than the majority is freedom for them and subjugation for everyone else.

Isn't that what we call government. Worse still, governments have legal backing for their ideas.

 

[aeebee50]

I like socialist democrat.

 

[Derec]

I like socialist democrat.

The problem in the context of this thread is that social democrats like to ban personal behaviors they do not approve of, like for example prostitution bans in places like Sweden and France.

 

[dismal]

I have been trying for a while now to identify myself on the political spectrum. I am a libertarian in the sense that I believe in social freedom. I believe people should be allowed to go naked in the streets or wear burqas. I believe prostitution and most drugs should be legalized. I support homosexual marriage. I support euthanasia. But I am also a socialist. I support universal health care and universal basic income.

But when I hear most libertarians speak they are against socialism, and when I hear most socialists speak they say "libertarian" like it is a dirty word. So is Socialist Liberatrian a thing, or is there another common label that fits me better?

It sounds to me like you have some beliefs that are consistent with libertarian principles and some that are not. Being a "libertarian" means you generally have beliefs that are consistent with libertarian principles.

Nothing says you can't call yourself a libertarian without always being consistent with libertarian principles, though you might lose some of the dance-offs with purer libertarians.

"Socialist Libertarian" strikes me as something of an oxymoron. If you support the idea that everyone should be forced into a single government run healthcare system this is a non-libertarian idea, not a Socialist Libertarian idea.

UBI is actually fairly popular among libertarians. Not the hardcore libertarians perhaps, but among those who take it as a given there will be or should be some sort of social safety net. Provided it is in place of other much more non-libertarian safety nets. Milton Friedman was something of an advocate.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

There is libertarianism, and then there is American libertarianism. Noam Chomsky considers himself a libertarian socialist. Ron Paul considers himself an Amercan libertarian.

See the difference?

 

[PyramidHead]

"Socialist Libertarian" strikes me as something of an oxymoron. If you support the idea that everyone should be forced into a single government run healthcare system this is a non-libertarian idea, not a Socialist Libertarian idea.

It depends on what kind of freedom you value most. The freedom to choose one's own health care system in every detail, vs. the freedom to plan for one's future without needing to account for crippling medical bills or loss of insurance. It may be that it is only possible to attain the broader, more valuable freedoms by sacrificing some basic freedoms. In practice it might not work, but this thread is just about the applicability of a label, which describes what someone thinks might work.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I think it's fine to be something like a socialist libertarian. It would basically mean something along the lines of that the government has certain roles to play (healthcare, etc) and it should stay out of everything else.

I was at my local candidates' debate earlier in the week and there was a guy from the Libertarian Party there and that was the gist of his positions. For some of the topics he was on about how they were the job of government and they should be the ones taking care of them and for others he was on about how government has no place in that sort of thing and should stay out of the way. It sounds kind of like what your position.

 

[PyramidHead]

I think it's fine to be something like a socialist libertarian. It would basically mean something along the lines of that the government has certain roles to play (healthcare, etc) and it should stay out of everything else.

I was at my local candidates' debate earlier in the week and there was a guy from the Libertarian Party there and that was the gist of his positions. For some of the topics he was on about how they were the job of government and they should be the ones taking care of them and for others he was on about how government has no place in that sort of thing and should stay out of the way. It sounds kind of like what your position.

Doesn't that describe everyone? By definition, all people have their own opinions about what role government should play and what it should stay out of. They disagree about where to draw the line.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I think it's fine to be something like a socialist libertarian. It would basically mean something along the lines of that the government has certain roles to play (healthcare, etc) and it should stay out of everything else.

I was at my local candidates' debate earlier in the week and there was a guy from the Libertarian Party there and that was the gist of his positions. For some of the topics he was on about how they were the job of government and they should be the ones taking care of them and for others he was on about how government has no place in that sort of thing and should stay out of the way. It sounds kind of like what your position.

Doesn't that describe everyone? By definition, all people have their own opinions about what role government should play and what it should stay out of. They disagree about where to draw the line.

True, but my point was that you can base that line on libertarian principles. Libertarianism is compatible with the government having a strong role in certain areas.

 

[untermensche]

A few with far greater power than the majority is freedom for them and subjugation for everyone else.

Isn't that what we call government. Worse still, governments have legal backing for their ideas.

Government is rule through consent, not through having more money.

Although I know in the present US dysfunction called democracy the line is not that clear.

 

[dismal]

"Socialist Libertarian" strikes me as something of an oxymoron. If you support the idea that everyone should be forced into a single government run healthcare system this is a non-libertarian idea, not a Socialist Libertarian idea.

It depends on what kind of freedom you value most. The freedom to choose one's own health care system in every detail, vs. the freedom to plan for one's future without needing to account for crippling medical bills or loss of insurance. It may be that it is only possible to attain the broader, more valuable freedoms by sacrificing some basic freedoms. In practice it might not work, but this thread is just about the applicability of a label, which describes what someone thinks might work.

You are using the word freedom in ways libertarians don't.

Libertarians place an emphasis on individuals being free to make the decisions that affect themselves.

"I want people to be free to buy whatever healthcare they want" not equal "I want people to be free from paying for healthcare so I will compel others to pay for it".

Jolly Penguin seems to understand the difference between voluntary interaction and compulsion and can advocate compulsion without the need to pretend he isn't by dressing it up as "freedom".

 

[Source]

Isn't that what we call government. Worse still, governments have legal backing for their ideas.

Government is rule through consent, not through having more money.

Although I know in the present US dysfunction called democracy the line is not that clear.

Does Warren Buffet have a greater effect on your life than Barack Obama.

Explain how someone like Warren Buffet rules over you, has power over you and constantly subjugates you more so than Barack Obama who can tax and imprison you.

 

[arkirk]

I have been trying for a while now to identify myself on the political spectrum. I am a libertarian in the sense that I believe in social freedom. I believe people should be allowed to go naked in the streets or wear burqas. I believe prostitution and most drugs should be legalized. I support homosexual marriage. I support euthanasia. But I am also a socialist. I support universal health care and universal basic income.

But when I hear most libertarians speak they are against socialism, and when I hear most socialists speak they say "libertarian" like it is a dirty word. So is Socialist Liberatrian a thing, or is there another common label that fits me better?

The problem is that implementing universal anything (which is impossible) requires a very strong centralized government. As governments become powerful, they generally start trying to force their social agenda.

This is the fundamental flaw in your thinking. Also, a social agenda is all a government is...that and its implementation. You clearly have an agenda and an idea how things ought to be. Unfortunately, you are one of those people whose agenda includes significant sacrifices by others which you think must exist for your brand of enlightenment to carry on. You are relying on government to support your position in society and as your philosophy becomes obsolete and impractical for society as a whole, you will need increasingly powerful and repressive governments to maintain your vision of proper wealth distribution.

Dealing with global warming will require universal cooperation. You better start studying just what that might entail. That is coming your way whether you like it or not.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Socialist libertarian is an oxymoron.

Libertarianism is about keeping government out of one's life as much as is feasible.

Socialism requires major intrusion by government into one's life.


The "socialist libertarian" position seems to be basically about leaving me alone but taking from others to provide me with as much as possible of the necessities of life.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Socialist libertarian is an oxymoron.

Libertarianism is about keeping government out of one's life as much as is feasible.

Socialism requires major intrusion by government into one's life.


The "socialist libertarian" position seems to be basically about leaving me alone but taking from others to provide me with as much as possible of the necessities of life.

Yep. the position would be libertarian with a hypocritical stance on health care.