fix
Member
Note to self: Never take advice on how to win friends and influence people from Libertarians.
This is why they will never be of any consequence.
"Little l" Libertarians, what parts of the party platform do you DISAGREE with?
- Thread starter WonderNine
- Start date
- Status
Note to self: Never take advice on how to win friends and influence people from Libertarians.
This is why they will never be of any consequence.
I dont either. I was speaking of positive incrementalism as something we should all be doing as an alternative to the "pie in the sky" LP promises of a utopian freedom.
And in an earlier post, which I expect no one to remember, I actually declared myself to be a former Libertarian who has decided it was best to throw his efforts into the RLC because, among other things, they can get elected!
Go Ron Paul!
Oleg Volk
Moderator Emeritus
I actually agree with LP on every point. Scary. I just wish they advertised more effectively. Perhaps I need to start making libertarian posters, not just pro-RKBA graphics.
Skytrooper
Member
(1) Of course, you had no problem with the person (excuse me, buffoon) I was responding to using [tinfoil_hat_mode] as a pejorative in his post.
(2) I am not a Libertarian; I am a libertarian. It is unfortunate if the distinction is too subtle for you to appreciate.
(3) I do not seek to "win friends" with totalitarians and other people who fail to recognize unalienable individual rights and politicians, judges, and LEOs who constantly betray their oaths to support the U.S. Constitution.
____________________________________________________________
To argue with a man who has renounced his reason is like giving medicine to the dead. - Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason
fix
Member
Confirmed.
Skytrooper
Member
To Bartholomew Roberts,
I received your pm.
Evidently it was OK for the poster I responded to using [tinfoil_hat_mode] to denigrate libertarians, but "obnoxious" for me to reply in kind.
Having read many of your posts and seeing you held the position of "moderator," I knew my days on THR would be short-lived. I bow to your authority. I will no longer make any political posts on THR. Since I suffer from a terminal condition thanks to people who share your political beliefs, I will not be making posts anywhere much longer.
How the children of the American Revolution can have sunk to such depths of docility and ignorance is beyond my comprehension. May you and your kind be comfortable with the police state you zealously defend.
I received your pm.
Evidently it was OK for the poster I responded to using [tinfoil_hat_mode] to denigrate libertarians, but "obnoxious" for me to reply in kind.
Having read many of your posts and seeing you held the position of "moderator," I knew my days on THR would be short-lived. I bow to your authority. I will no longer make any political posts on THR. Since I suffer from a terminal condition thanks to people who share your political beliefs, I will not be making posts anywhere much longer.
How the children of the American Revolution can have sunk to such depths of docility and ignorance is beyond my comprehension. May you and your kind be comfortable with the police state you zealously defend.
fix
Member
"Because you do not agree with me, you must be an idiot" appears to be the standard Libertarian response for an awful lot of things.
Oleg Volk
Moderator Emeritus
Well, there's always "stooge of the evil UN overlords" explanation Let's keep this chat friendly or at least civil.
Let's keep this chat friendly or at least civil.TallPine
Member
So I take it that you would like to make adultery illegal also ...?
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
The reason it was a pm was to spare other members an off-topic dialogue that only involves us. It was intended a courtesy both to them and to you.
If you believe that a personal attack has been made on a member of THR, please use the "Report this post to a moderator" function rather than respond in kind.
Self-martyrdom will not be necessary. Please simply refrain from making personal attacks on other members whether you feel justified in the effort or not.
Now if you would like to discuss small "L"-libertarianism, this is the thread for it. If you have issues with my moderation here, I'd ask you to please PM me as a courtesy to the other users who don't care to read about that topic.
RealGun
Member
I am not so sure, based upon observing that the RLC adopted the LP platform verbatim, still unwilling to adapt to any world other than their perfect one and failing to demonstrate any real intent to truly integrate into the Republican Party. Without making some common ground more obvious, fundamental conservatism basically, I don't see them being influential. They will go off and have their little caucus meeting and not be relevant to the party. Their first order of business should have been where to compromise and how their culture would need to adapt. It's just all to radical and cult like to suit me.
Like others, the open borders thing killed it for me. I lost all my house money in California to fallig property value, because my 500 unit condo was taken over by young Nicaraguans, sometimes 20-30 to a unit and nothing but mattresses but only legal for a "single family". Tell me we need that. I don't think so.
Glock Glockler
Member
So I take it that you would like to make adultery illegal also ...?
Adultery is a contract violation and would thus be a civil and not a criminal issue.
My beefs with the LP are in 1) foreign policy, 2) abortion, and 3) borders.
The isolationist policy simply does not work, we cannot completely insulate ourselves from the happenings of the world. I'm not trying to justify the imperialist Neo-con policy but I do believe we ought to have at least one finger in the pie to prevent it from being thrown in our faces. I think we could and should SEVERELY cut back our global meddling and try to dominate the planet economically through trade instead of flexing our muscles and sending in the military to stabalize a region every a few men in some 3rd world craphole get into a dispute over a goat.
Abortion - not that I want to get into this subject per se but I have heard very convincing arguements on both sides of the issues on libertarian grounds. The party would be infinately getter off if they said as much and left that position to the individual candidate, as there are both pro-life and pro-choice libertarians. Imagine that, giving individuals the choice instead of a centrally planned position.
As far as border control goes, I certainly don't think we should allow hordes of people to come into the country, I'd prefer a somewhat cherry picked immigration policy that focused on people with in demand skills that were not avowed socialists but it seems that the powers that be do everything to keep quality people out but will roll out the red carpet for an illegal Mexican criminal. I know very people that have jobs waiting for them along with relatives here for support but they happen to be white, Christian and educated.
Adultery is a contract violation and would thus be a civil and not a criminal issue.
My beefs with the LP are in 1) foreign policy, 2) abortion, and 3) borders.
The isolationist policy simply does not work, we cannot completely insulate ourselves from the happenings of the world. I'm not trying to justify the imperialist Neo-con policy but I do believe we ought to have at least one finger in the pie to prevent it from being thrown in our faces. I think we could and should SEVERELY cut back our global meddling and try to dominate the planet economically through trade instead of flexing our muscles and sending in the military to stabalize a region every a few men in some 3rd world craphole get into a dispute over a goat.
Abortion - not that I want to get into this subject per se but I have heard very convincing arguements on both sides of the issues on libertarian grounds. The party would be infinately getter off if they said as much and left that position to the individual candidate, as there are both pro-life and pro-choice libertarians. Imagine that, giving individuals the choice instead of a centrally planned position.
As far as border control goes, I certainly don't think we should allow hordes of people to come into the country, I'd prefer a somewhat cherry picked immigration policy that focused on people with in demand skills that were not avowed socialists but it seems that the powers that be do everything to keep quality people out but will roll out the red carpet for an illegal Mexican criminal. I know very people that have jobs waiting for them along with relatives here for support but they happen to be white, Christian and educated.
Chris Rhines
Member
I haven't read the LP platform lately, so I wandered over to www.lp.org/issues/ and took a look around.
Their position statements are excessively complex and mealy-mouthed, but I find little to disagree with in practice. In principle, the LP does not go far enough in eliminating coercive government and establishing a fully voluntary society.
- Chris
Their position statements are excessively complex and mealy-mouthed, but I find little to disagree with in practice. In principle, the LP does not go far enough in eliminating coercive government and establishing a fully voluntary society.
- Chris
priv8ter
Member
Hmmmm
Lillysdad said:
Having had many friends who have returned from happy trips to Amsterdam, I am going to disagree with your statement. If someone wants to be a 'philandering spouse' they are going to do it whether it's with a prostitute or not. I do a gree with you...Adultery
As for the 'aftermath of heroin addition' unless that person was strapped down to a bed, and addicted to that drug against their will, then becomming adicted was a choice they made.
I think all drugs should be legal, but that doesn't mean I have any intention of trying any recreational drugs. I've made it almost 30 years without smoking pot...I think I can make it another 60...
But, if someone wants to help control the population by wasting their life in a stoned(but Legal!) haze...good for them.
greg
Lillysdad said:
Having had many friends who have returned from happy trips to Amsterdam, I am going to disagree with your statement. If someone wants to be a 'philandering spouse' they are going to do it whether it's with a prostitute or not. I do a gree with you...Adultery
As for the 'aftermath of heroin addition' unless that person was strapped down to a bed, and addicted to that drug against their will, then becomming adicted was a choice they made.
I think all drugs should be legal, but that doesn't mean I have any intention of trying any recreational drugs. I've made it almost 30 years without smoking pot...I think I can make it another 60...
But, if someone wants to help control the population by wasting their life in a stoned(but Legal!) haze...good for them.
greg
Thank God the LP has absolutely no traction...Americas drug problem is probably the number one reason I got into law enforcement, and the one thing that makes it so important....I dont care how "harmless" it is, I dont want it in my town, or in my state, or in my nation.
I dont want my child thinking its "ok" to only harm yourself, which is never true, it harms the family and friends of that person far more than the person themselves.
Prostitution is a whole other matter. Sure, it will never go away, but is that any reason to make it OK? Hell no its not...as long as people do itm they should be punished.
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
I find little to disagree with in the Libertarian platform. I simply have issues with the way that the party itself has been managed. Harry Browne did a wonderful job of siphoning money out of the LP coffers and doing very little with it to further LP gains. Now that he seems to be mostly out of the picture, I'd like to think that the LP will make some headway.
Regardless of my disagreements with the party, at this point I'm far more likely to cast a vote for Badnarik than Bush come November.
I'd also like to note that it's really not an all-or-nothing proposition. People talk about electing a libertarian or two, and all of the chicken littles start shouting about how the sky is falling. Personally, I think that electing a libertarian or twelve to the Congress could only serve for positive ends. You know, inject a bit of much-needed free-thinking, pro-individual thought into the process. I hardly think such a proposition would be the end of the world.
Regardless of my disagreements with the party, at this point I'm far more likely to cast a vote for Badnarik than Bush come November.
I'd also like to note that it's really not an all-or-nothing proposition. People talk about electing a libertarian or two, and all of the chicken littles start shouting about how the sky is falling. Personally, I think that electing a libertarian or twelve to the Congress could only serve for positive ends. You know, inject a bit of much-needed free-thinking, pro-individual thought into the process. I hardly think such a proposition would be the end of the world.
priv8ter
Member
Okay then!
Then take the time to raise your children right! Show your children what happens to people that become addicted to drugs. I am sick of seeing my state and nation waste tax money fighting a problem that will NEVER go away when they could be making tax money off legally selling the product. Of course, then people like you could never enter law enforcement just to fight this 'problem' that will never go away.
So. An attractive young lady has a product/commodity to offer up for sale, and she should be punished for trying to get fair market value for said product/commodity? I'm sure all those ladies that used to work at the Mustang ranch would much rather clean houses for $8 an hour.
sigh
greg
Then take the time to raise your children right! Show your children what happens to people that become addicted to drugs. I am sick of seeing my state and nation waste tax money fighting a problem that will NEVER go away when they could be making tax money off legally selling the product. Of course, then people like you could never enter law enforcement just to fight this 'problem' that will never go away.
So. An attractive young lady has a product/commodity to offer up for sale, and she should be punished for trying to get fair market value for said product/commodity?
I'm sure all those ladies that used to work at the Mustang ranch would much rather clean houses for $8 an hour.sigh
greg
I have no desire to see my government run on tax dollars made form drugs...and the problem may not go away, but is subsiding, at least in my microcosm..and thats all I can do. As long as the mindset you and your party perpetuate, you are right, it will not go away, it will only be rationalized. Again, I am glad this party has no momentum, as anarchy is the last thign I care to see.
BTW, I am raising my child right..but if a behavior is accepted in culture, a child can be shown right from wrong, but ince they leave the home, there are no consequences.
I , for one, have no problems with the jails being full of drug users, whether they be "social" pot smokers, or dealers.
BTW, I am raising my child right..but if a behavior is accepted in culture, a child can be shown right from wrong, but ince they leave the home, there are no consequences.
I , for one, have no problems with the jails being full of drug users, whether they be "social" pot smokers, or dealers.
Zundfolge
Member
Thats my biggest problem with the LP as well. That and the fact that the LP seems to see Republicans as a greater threat to liberty then Democrats.
On a personal level, most of the folk I've dealt with in the Libertarian Party have an almost phobic reaction to Christians and Christianity ... not just that they want separation of church and state, but that being a person of faith should preclude you from holding public office because they might allow their faith to influence an official decision.
On the open borders thing, I'll agree with them after we've dismantled the welfare state and rid ourselves of all gun laws but not a second before.
On drug legalization ... I agree with them, but they have to stop treating those who wish to see drugs stay illegal as the equivalent of book burners or slave traders.
On isolationism, I believe that as believers in liberty it is our duty to spread liberty all over the globe ... clearly there is a bit too much adventurism and not enough thinking behind some of our international exploits but by God we should be willing to help those out there who want liberty and be ready to kill those who get in our way.
The "all or nothing" attitude of many in the LP is typical of ideologs who put doctrinal purity above pragmatism, and the exuberance with which many in the GOP leadership pander to and compromise with the left is typical of the GOP's lack if ideological commitment.
In short, the LP is too idealistic and not realistic enough ... the GOP tends toward being too willing to compromise their ideals in the name of pragmatism. Thats why I see the RLC as the best of both sides, and the best group to reconcile the LP and GOP.
In the grand scheme of things it really doesn't if us "small 'l' libertarians" agreed with the LP platform 100% ... I don't believe they have a snowball's chance in hell of actually implementing any of it under the LP banner (note that Ron Paul has done more to implement libertarian ideals as a Republican then an Libertarian).
Glock Glockler
Member
I , for one, have no problems with the jails being full of drug users, whether they be "social" pot smokers, or dealers.
That's brilliant, now just substitute "drug users" for "gun owners" and you'd make a magnificent anti.
That's brilliant, now just substitute "drug users" for "gun owners" and you'd make a magnificent anti.
WonderNine
member
All drugs will eventually be legalized as will prostitution. Someday pawns of the drug companies will be a thing of the past and this part of our history will be looked at as a strange chapter just as Alcohol Prohibition is looked at now.
You're fighting a hopeless and ridiculously costly battle against some drugs which the government ships in themselves anyways. There are more drugs on the streets than ever before as well as more people in prison. More cops getting killed. More abuses of power and more infringements against our rights as a result of this silly war on yet another vice of certain people. Most of the prison population is locked up over drug offenses. Imagine the resources that could be freed up to solve REAL crime. I'd rather have a murderer behind bars than two recreational pot smokers, but that's just me.
To bad most of your "real crimes" are a byproduct of drugs....ya'll really ought to take the tin foil off for a while...life is not a conspiracy, and I pray to God (yeah, Im a Christian) that you are incorrect, ad drugs/prostitution is not legalized in my lifetime. We will have truly lost our nation at that point.
Zundfolge - I'm just reading Hugh Hewitt's "If It's Not Close, They Can't Cheat - Crushing the Democrats in Every Election and Why Your Life Depends Upon It."
You may not agree with everything he says, but his analysis of the interaction between party regulars, occasional voters, principled pragmatists, movement activists, and fanatics is worth reading.
You may not agree with everything he says, but his analysis of the interaction between party regulars, occasional voters, principled pragmatists, movement activists, and fanatics is worth reading.
- Status
Similar threads
