You are currently browsing the daily archive for August 24, 2011.
Gleaned from Pharyngula, a post from Jadehawk.
I think that it’s possible to have libertarian values and still like things like governments and taxes and social programs.
yup. That’s called being liberal, progressive, or even anarcho-syndicalist, depending on the exact ratio of “libertarian” values to government/taxes/social programs
I concede the point that the phrase Libertarian has been tainted by the Tea Party
oh it was tarnished way before that, sometime around the time free-marketeers stole the label from what are currently called leftwing anarchists.
This is for reference for those who are curious:
oh FFS. Weve gone over this before. almost every single point is phrased in such a way that it, by omission, permits the limiting of freedoms of the non-privileged. a few examples:
Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual’s right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices. […] Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships.
IOW: if a privately owned hospital wants to deny you visitation rights because you’re gay, well, that’s tough shit: not only can’t the government tell them to stop on principle, you’re not allowed to legally make yourself your loved one’s “next of kin” to gain legal visitation rights on an individual level, because marriages aren’t the government’s business.
Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.
IOW, libertarians don’t want the government to fund PP, because poor women don’t deserve the same right to “conscientious consideration” than rich women do.
The only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights — life, liberty, and justly acquired property — against aggression.
IOW, libertarians support power-balances in negotiations, since only employers are allowed to consist of more than one person; employees may not.
libertarians want all members of society to have abundant opportunities to achieve economic success. A free and competitive market allocates resources in the most efficient manner.
well, too fucking bad then that you can either have a competitive, or a free market, not both, since a free market tends towards monopoly over time, since competition is expensive. And evidence suggests that libertarians in fact support a free, non-competitive market.
Property rights are entitled to the same protection as all other human rights.
IOW, owning shit is just as, or more, important than not starving, not freezing to death, and not dying of preventable disease.
Where property, including land, has been taken from its rightful owners by the government or private action in violation of individual rights, we favor restitution to the rightful owners.
except the Indians. They can’t have America back, we stole it fair and square.
All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor.
except workers, since we’re against the minimum wage. workers should hand over most of the fruits of their labor to their corporate overlords.
We call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution
Education, like any other service, is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality and efficiency with more diversity of choice.
IOW, libertarians know nothing about education, except that poor people don’t need it. Oh, and positive externalities don’t exist, which is why the free market will have no problem allocating the right amount of education to the right people; meaning not-poor people.
We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system.
poor people don’t deserve the freedom that comes from knowing that the next bout of illness isn’t going to kill and/or bankrupt you.
etc. ad nauseam. The fucking platform itself is evidence for what people have been saying on this thread: that libertarianism supports the rights of the dominant group to remain the dominant group; it does not support factual freedom for everyone, only the freedom of those who can buy everything.
Thanks JadeHawk :) Oh and another great summary from the same thread…
John Scalzi wrote the best paragraph ever on glibertarians. Here it is:
I really don’t know what you do about the “taxes are theft” crowd, except possibly enter a gambling pool regarding just how long after their no-tax utopia comes true that their generally white, generally entitled, generally soft and pudgy asses are turned into thin strips of Objectivist Jerky by the sort of pitiless sociopath who is actually prepped and ready to live in the world that logically follows these people’s fondest desires. Sorry, guys. I know you all thought you were going to be one of those paying a nickel for your cigarettes in Galt Gulch. That’ll be a fine last thought for you as the starving remnants of the society of takers closes in with their flensing tools.