What is Libertarianism?

[SimpleDon]

What we need most in this thread is a reference to at least ONE Libertarian writer, so people can find out for themselves what it is all about.

Who are the great thinkers of Libertarianism?

Try John Locke, Voltaire, James Madison, or Thomas Jefferson.

Do you have anyone who is alive or lived in the 20th century who might be a little more in tune with modern society and the modern economy?

Is Milton Friedman someone you rely on? What about Hayek, Rothbard or von Mises?

What about the late 19th century individualistic anarchists, Lysander Spooner, Josiah Warren, et. al.

 

[arkirk]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism



What is libertarianism?

Who are libertarians?

What libertarian beliefs do libertarians hold?


I don't think wearing seatbelts in a car should be mandated by the law. Is that a libertarian belief? How many more libertarian beliefs do I need before I am a libertarian?

I think it's hilarious how libertarians can be so incredibly rigid on freedoms and deregulation except when it comes to property rights. I can't see any logic to that. BTW "libertarian socialists" are just called anarchists. This is the only thing that sets anarchists apart from libertarians, and anarchists are left and libertarian right.

At least anarchism has a logical internal structure. Libertarians just seem to be for injustice for the hell of it. Because unfairness is fun or something. I don't get it. I've read up on natural rights and it baffles me how anybody finds it persuasive.

I think more than anything, what is needed is sufficient democracy combined with the power to properly regulate and distribute the output of society. Everybody needs a piece of the pie. So what we need mostly is as Einstein pointed out so long ago...imagination and a social will to cooperate. This sure seems like not a lot to ask, but you will find some Libertarians who are perfectly willing to toss much of society under the bus. Their reasoning is that they "can't afford a free meal for every beggar that comes along." They regard unemployment for many as just deserts. That is the true nature of Libertarianism. It really has nothing to do with universal human values or rights.

 

[untermensche]

What we need most in this thread is a reference to at least ONE Libertarian writer, so people can find out for themselves what it is all about.

Who are the great thinkers of Libertarianism?

Try John Locke, Voltaire, James Madison, or Thomas Jefferson.

2 of these were slave owners.

So Libertaranism is a pre-capitalist slave owning philosophy?

 

[skepticalbip]

Try John Locke, Voltaire, James Madison, or Thomas Jefferson.

2 of these were slave owners.

So Libertaranism is a pre-capitalist slave owning philosophy?

Cute, so you judge philosophical ideals by the societal norms of the era?

You asked for great thinkers so you could understand what libertarianism was about. Their writing is what it is about. Their writings don't discuss economics or slavery. They deal with their ideal form of government - essentially, "That government is best which governs least."

Their idea is that the people specify what powers they will allow the government to exercise as opposed to the government deciding what freedoms the people will be allowed have.

 

[untermensche]

2 of these were slave owners.

So Libertaranism is a pre-capitalist slave owning philosophy?

Cute, so you judge philosophical ideals by the societal norms of the era?

You asked for great thinkers so you could understand what libertarianism was about. Their writing is what it is about. Their writings don't discuss economics or slavery. They deal with their ideal form of government - essentially, "That government is best which governs least."

Alexander Hamilton and John Adams did not own slaves.

Morality was the exact same thing back then. People knew slavery was immoral. They knew beating their wife was immoral.

But it was legal.

If you have a work, a writing, from these people that is the foundation of Libertarianism tell us, but simply name dropping, especially the names of slave owners, is zero help.

 

[skepticalbip]

Cute, so you judge philosophical ideals by the societal norms of the era?

You asked for great thinkers so you could understand what libertarianism was about. Their writing is what it is about. Their writings don't discuss economics or slavery. They deal with their ideal form of government - essentially, "That government is best which governs least."

Alexander Hamilton and John Adams did not own slaves.

Morality was the exact same thing back then. People knew slavery was immoral. They knew beating their wife was immoral.

But it was legal.

If you have a work, a writing, from these people that is the foundation of Libertarianism tell us, but simply name dropping, especially the names of slave owners, is zero help.

So you can't get to judging philosophy for your insistence on judging people. So try the political philosophy of John Locke or Voltaire, or do them being English and French make them sub-human in your eyes?

ETA:
Oh, by the way, John Adams wanted the US to be set up as a monarchy rather than a constitutionally limited republic. Not owning slaves doesn't mean that his political philosophy was enlightened. Thankfully, Madison's and Jefferson's political philosophy prevailed rather than that of Adams.

 

[untermensche]

Alexander Hamilton and John Adams did not own slaves.

Morality was the exact same thing back then. People knew slavery was immoral. They knew beating their wife was immoral.

But it was legal.

If you have a work, a writing, from these people that is the foundation of Libertarianism tell us, but simply name dropping, especially the names of slave owners, is zero help.

So you can't get to judging philosophy for your insistence on judging people. So try the political philosophy of John Locke or Voltaire, or do them being English and French make them sub-human in your eyes?

ETA:
Oh, by the way, John Adams wanted the US to be set up as a monarchy rather than a constitutionally limited republic. Not owning slaves doesn't mean that his political philosophy was enlightened. Thankfully, Madison's and Jefferson's political philosophy prevailed rather than that of Adams.

Madison specifically said he designed the Constitution so the rich could rule the nation. Those that own the nation aught to rule it.

Is this Libertarianism?

 

[Togo]

If you have a work, a writing, from these people that is the foundation of Libertarianism tell us, but simply name dropping, especially the names of slave owners, is zero help.

So you can't get to judging philosophy for your insistence on judging people.

He was asking for the philosophy, after having been given only people.

Oh, by the way, John Adams wanted the US to be set up as a monarchy rather than a constitutionally limited republic. Not owning slaves doesn't mean that his political philosophy was enlightened. Thankfully, Madison's and Jefferson's political philosophy prevailed rather than that of Adams.

I think the US would have been better off as a constitutionally limited monarchy. Given the nation's bizzare tendency to idolise high office, a constituional monarch may have limited government executive power far more than a republic did.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

It seems the fierce combat with strawmen will not end, so there's no longer any point in waiting.

Libertarian thought did not spring forth fully formed, it developed to its current state over time from earlier writers who would be considered good but not perfect. Such an example is Thomas Jefferson, who had faults but his writings were rather good. Note, at the time of the passage of the Constitution, those known as "anti-federalists" would be the proto-libertarians and their opposite number, the "federalists" would not be so known. In general we like Jefferson and dislike Hamilton. As for their own philosophical roots, we like Locke and dislike Hobbes. My own personal favorite is Lysander Spooner.

Expecting the early proto-libertarians to be like a fully formed ones is like saying Newton couldn't have been a genius because Newtonian Mechanics didn't include Relativity.

So yeah, Thomas Jefferson, with his faults, is definitely an early libertarian thinker - IN SPITE OF being a slave owner and not because of it.

 

[untermensche]

Jefferson is claimed by everybody.

He is stale bread.

The only thing anybody remembers from him is the idea that humans are born equal, which is a lie.

And Hamilton is the essential thinker in the early nation, not Jefferson.

Without the economic system established by Hamilton there may never have been a Jefferson presidency. A system Jefferson, in his ignorance, fought. Until he was president that is.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Oh, so you DO like it when the government intervenes on behalf of corporations? You do like government favoritism and benefits for the wealthy at taxpayer expense?

That's what Hamilton liked.

Or is this a case of "Libertarians don't like him so he has to be good for something."

 

[arkirk]

2 of these were slave owners.

So Libertaranism is a pre-capitalist slave owning philosophy?

Cute, so you judge philosophical ideals by the societal norms of the era?

You asked for great thinkers so you could understand what libertarianism was about. Their writing is what it is about. Their writings don't discuss economics or slavery. They deal with their ideal form of government - essentially, "That government is best which governs least."

Their idea is that the people specify what powers they will allow the government to exercise as opposed to the government deciding what freedoms the people will be allowed have.

It is fair to judge people on what they do and why they say they do it. The idea of government governing the least intended to keep it from interfering with the slavery they were actually practicing. What you actually do counts far more than any disembodied writing you may create.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Liking Thomas Jefferson is a definition, or distinct characteristic of libertarianism?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

It seems the fierce combat with strawmen will not end, so there's no longer any point in waiting.

You still have not said anything about what libertarianism is.

 

[Earl IV]

Oh, so you DO like it when the government intervenes on behalf of corporations? You do like government favoritism and benefits for the wealthy at taxpayer expense?

That's what Hamilton liked.

Or is this a case of "Libertarians don't like him so he has to be good for something."

Hmm, now who's constructing strawmen?

 

[arkirk]

Liking Thomas Jefferson is a definition, or distinct characteristic of libertarianism?

When I was a boy I respected Jefferson. Not so much anymore. He was a fucking slaver. His actions negate any principle he was trying to establish regarding human rights. He was a hypocrite. On the other hand Hamilton was just a cold calculating capitalist. Neither of these two men had anything about them that made them special human beings.

They were capable of making high sounding pronouncements against tyranny then practicing tyranny.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Jason Harvestdancer

Will you define what libertarianism is for the thread, what its basic principles are, and who are the major professed libertarian thinkers of today?

Thank you.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I am currently at the Libertarian Party booth at tbe State Fair. They seem.to have some pretty good talking point and aren't shy about telling me about what Libertarianism is.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Now that I've gotten all the preliminaries out of the way, I will finally come out and describe libertarianism itself. It actually starts from some simple premises, and everything is derived from them.

One way would be to say that libertarianism is the political philosophy dedicated to maximizing the rights of the individual. Another way is with the NAP or ZAP, which means "Non-Aggression Principle" or "Zero-Aggression Principle." This means that no person has the right to initiate aggression against another person. And no, owning private property is NOT an aggression. Proudhon's declaration against Earl Grey Tea is nonsense to us. That is a joke, Earl Grey is Proper Tea.

A key word is "initiate". The NAP is not pacifism. A person is completely within his rights to defend himself.

What makes libertarianism fairly unique in the political sphere is that said principle is applied to the government, instead of always carving out exceptions for the government.

Since no person has the right to initiate aggression, no person may delegate that right. Not even if they get together in a large group and do so by voting.

Everything else libertarian derives from that.

It's not that we are anti-government. It is just that while there are various people or groups that feel they do have a right to initiate aggression, one entity does so on a scale far beyond the rest and therefore must be most carefully watched and guarded against. Who killed more people, Adolph Hitler or Charles Manson?

This is why we are in favor of gay marriage and drug legalization. People have a right to do whatever they want as long as they don't violate the rights of others, and it would take an act of aggression to prevent or punish those who wish to engage in gay marriage or drug legalization.

It's also the reason we are in favor of the free market. If two people voluntarily enter a transaction, no third party has any authority or right to say otherwise and it takes an act of aggression to say otherwise.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

So the first and foundational principle of libertarianism is what your mom told you growing up, that you didn't have the right to hit people, at least not first,

AND

The only limitations people need on what they can and cannot do is whether or not their actions harm someone else?