The Religion Of Libertarianism

[lpetrich]

End protection welfare!

Abolish all government military and police forces! They must all be turned into private companies or else disbanded.

• Let the market decide. If soldiers' and cops' services have any value, people will hire them, or else people will become vigilantes. Government coercion is unnecessary.
• Government protection is one-size-fits-all. Vigilantism, hired guards, and mercenaries can be adjusted to individuals' protection needs and desires, while government protection cannot.
• Government involvement in protection crowds out private investment in protection solutions, solutions that will inevitably be superior to government ones.
• People who refuse to protect themselves deserve to be conquered and beaten up and stolen from and extorted from and raped and enslaved and murdered and whatever other crimes that they might suffer. Protection laziness ought to have consequences, and government protection protects people from the consequences of their actions.
• Crime victims are really crime enablers, and they deserve to suffer the consequences of their crime enabling.
• The cult of crime victimhood should be recognized for it is: a part of the cult of victimhood, a very popular way for people to try to evade responsibility for their actions.
• Self-protectors should not have to protect non-self-protectors by the government stealing from them to do so. Government protection is governments robbing Peter to protect Paul.
• Individuals are much better at protecting themselves than governments. Therefore, government protection is unnecessary and people should not be stolen from to pay for it.
• Advocates of government military and police forces are very condescending with their insinuation that people have no agency, that they are incapable of protecting themselves.
• If there are any people who are not capable of protecting themselves, then private charities like vigilantes will do much better at protecting them than governments.

 

[untermensche]

The "free market" is shorthand for millions of people making billions of transactions and trillions of decisions every day without being told what to do. Not exactly a deity really. Faith in the free market is actually faith in people.

Virtuous-anarchist idealism. Should I have expected anything more?

What "faith in people" means is faith that the most predatory will not feast on the most vulnerable when government protections are removed.

It is not anarchism.

It is naive childishness.

 

[Bomb#20]

On the other hand, Libertarianism is a <expletive deleted> grab-bag of half-baked and half-assed ideas passing itself off as a political movement glorifying individualism. This one associates with Ayn Rand and other whackadoodle dingbats and regularly demonstrates the oxymoronic value of the adopted name.

I consider myself a libertarian, but a civil one.

Technically, calling people who disagree with you "whackadoodle dingbats" doesn't count as civil.

It does if it is an accurate description.

Um, do you tell ugly people they're ugly and think that's civil?

An aside here...I find it curious that somebody edits emphatic language from my post in a freethought board. Are you a censor?

Can you run that by me again? I'm pretty sure I don't have moderator privileges on this board. And I have no idea how to actually do it, even if somebody authorized me to edit your posts and didn't tell me. In any event, your post says Last edited by whollygoats; 09-10-2018 at 08:16 PM. If I'd edited emphatic language from your post it would probably say Last edited by Bomb#20; 09-10-2018 at 08:16 PM.

Are you one of those people who thinks he's been censored when other people write what they want instead of writing what you wanted them to write?

 

[JohnG]

Just as completely unregulated free speech devolves to a mess of hate and puss, a completely unregulated market would likely devolve into a tangle of warlords, eventually with one giant conglomerate monopoly rising to the top.

I say have faith that we could do better than that. Not perfect, but better than letting chips fall where they may.

Let it fly so long as people's basic rights arent violated, and basic needs are met.

 

[whollygoats]

It does if it is an accurate description.

Um, do you tell ugly people they're ugly and think that's civil?

An aside here...I find it curious that somebody edits emphatic language from my post in a freethought board. Are you a censor?

Can you run that by me again? I'm pretty sure I don't have moderator privileges on this board. And I have no idea how to actually do it, even if somebody authorized me to edit your posts and didn't tell me. In any event, your post says Last edited by whollygoats; 09-10-2018 at 08:16 PM. If I'd edited emphatic language from your post it would probably say Last edited by Bomb#20; 09-10-2018 at 08:16 PM.

Are you one of those people who thinks he's been censored when other people write what they want instead of writing what you wanted them to write?

LOL...

<staff edit>

No moderator was involved in changing my text when you responded to it....you had to do that. I think it amusing. And small-minded. But then, again, I'm not surprised.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

The "free market" is shorthand for millions of people making billions of transactions and trillions of decisions every day without being told what to do. Not exactly a deity really. Faith in the free market is actually faith in people.

Virtuous-anarchist idealism. Should I have expected anything more?

What "faith in people" means is faith that the most predatory will not feast on the most vulnerable when government protections are removed.

It is not anarchism.

It is naive childishness.

You mean like they would with your so-called Democratic system where the majority could vote to oppress the minority?

You have faith in dictators while I have faith in the people.

 

[laughing dog]

What "faith in people" means is faith that the most predatory will not feast on the most vulnerable when government protections are removed.

It is not anarchism.

It is naive childishness.

You mean like they would with your so-called Democratic system where the majority could vote to oppress the minority?

You have faith in dictators while I have faith in the people.

But "the people" have clearly chosen to reject libertarianism as a governing principle and show no sign whatsoever of adopting your religion as a guiding principle.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Ah yes, the inevitable appeal to Ad Populum. So which religion do you belong to, since you can no longer be an atheist?

 

[Elixir]

What "faith in people" means is faith that the most predatory will not feast on the most vulnerable when government protections are removed.

It is not anarchism.

It is naive childishness.

You mean like they would with your so-called Democratic system where the majority could vote to oppress the minority?

You have faith in dictators while I have faith in the people.

But "the people" have clearly chosen to reject libertarianism as a governing principle and show no sign whatsoever of adopting your religion as a guiding principle.

So many self-described "Libertarians" voted for Trump that it is total comedy to see JH saying that "you" (whoever "you" are) have faith in dictators...
Expressing fear of tyrrany of the majority is pretty ironic while standing idly by as a minority is actively grabbing every bit of power they can, by whatever means they can muster no matter how dishonest or illegal...

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So many self-described "Libertarians" voted for Trump that it is total comedy

We told Steve not to, but he did it anyway. Now he represents us apparently.

 

[laughing dog]

Ah yes, the inevitable appeal to Ad Populum.

You're the one having faith in the people. The people reject your religion of libertarianism.

A
So which religion do you belong to, since you can no longer be an atheist?

One you are incapable of comprehending.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

You've found a deliberate misinterpretation. Congratulations. How long do you intend to continue this derail based on that deliberate misinterpretation.

 

[laughing dog]

You've found a deliberate misinterpretation. Congratulations. How long do you intend to continue this derail based on that deliberate misinterpretation.

I have made no misinterpretation, deliberate or otherwise. The OP is about the religion of libertariansim, and I am using the OPs terminology. But tank you for telling me what I think.

I made the valid observation that the people whom you have faith reject the religion of libertarianism. You don't have to like it. And you certainly don't have to respond to it, especially with onset of a hissy fit of stupid accusations and mischaracterizations.

 

[lpetrich]

What "faith in people" means is faith that the most predatory will not feast on the most vulnerable when government protections are removed.

It is not anarchism.

It is naive childishness.

You mean like they would with your so-called Democratic system where the majority could vote to oppress the minority?

You have faith in dictators while I have faith in the people.

But "the people" have clearly chosen to reject libertarianism as a governing principle and show no sign whatsoever of adopting your religion as a guiding principle.

Ah yes, the inevitable appeal to Ad Populum. So which religion do you belong to, since you can no longer be an atheist?

This is fun. First it's "faith in the people", then when many of "the people" reject libertarianism, it's "ad populum".

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

You've found a deliberate misinterpretation. Congratulations. How long do you intend to continue this derail based on that deliberate misinterpretation.

I have made no misinterpretation, deliberate or otherwise.

Post 51 says otherwise.

 

[ZiprHead]

Libertarians In The Age Of Trump.

Wandering and arguing at FreedomFest offered grist for both understandings of how libertarianism relates, or doesn’t, to Trumpism. Plenty of attendees were fiercely #NeverTrump and regarded him as an enemy of their ideals. But there were also plenty of people, like one of my sparring partners, former Libertarian Party V.P. nominee Wayne Allyn Root, ready to defend Trump with a true believer’s gusto.

 

[laughing dog]

You've found a deliberate misinterpretation. Congratulations. How long do you intend to continue this derail based on that deliberate misinterpretation.

I have made no misinterpretation, deliberate or otherwise.

Post 51 says otherwise.

Post 51 does not. Your unsupported opinion of post 51 says so. Since you have had plenty of time to support your opinion, one can reasonably conclude you have no support for it.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Post 51 says otherwise.

Post 51 does not.

Yes it does.

Since you have had plenty of time to support your opinion, one can reasonably conclude you have no support for it.

Since post 51 is directly contrary to what I wrote in this thread, as is evident to anyone (except you) who reads this thread, then by offering this thread as support I demonstrate to everyone (except you) that post 51 does indeed say otherwise.

 

[untermensche]

What "faith in people" means is faith that the most predatory will not feast on the most vulnerable when government protections are removed.

It is not anarchism.

It is naive childishness.

You mean like they would with your so-called Democratic system where the majority could vote to oppress the minority?

You have faith in dictators while I have faith in the people.

Insane objection.

There are no protections from a majority in the US deciding to overturn the slavery Amendments and return the US to a slave society.

No protections from that at all. It just takes a majority that wants to do it.

Are you afraid it is going to happen?

Your "objections" to democracy are paranoid delusions.

When people defend dictatorship with delusion they really must like it.

 

[laughing dog]

Since post 51 is directly contrary to what I wrote in this thread, as is evident to anyone (except you) who reads this thread, then by offering this thread as support I demonstrate to everyone (except you) that post 51 does indeed say otherwise.

You keep repeating the same claim without offering any support.

What do you think in post 51 is directly contrary to what you wrote in this thread, and how is directly contrary? The answer to that question might support your claims. Without it, your claims cannot be taken seriously as anything other than hissy fit generated nonsense from a troll.