P5 Guy
Member
Libertarian, the government that governs the least governs the best.
Which political party(s) do you side with most?
- Thread starter joey93turbo
- Start date
- Status
My take on the slavery issue:
www.dictionary.com:
Slave: One bound in servitude as the property of a person or household.
Under Libertarian rules, yes, there could be people bound as "slaves", however, it would be a very complex contract, wouldn't be hereditary, and quite likely not very enforceable in court. Any contract can be broken. I imagine that the contract could be broken simply by doing the equivalent of breaking the contract and declaring bankruptcy.
Sure, you probably leave the court with nothing but the clothes on your back, if not wearing cloths just donated to you from a sympathetic source, but the contract would be broken and you'd be free.
www.dictionary.com:
Slave: One bound in servitude as the property of a person or household.
Under Libertarian rules, yes, there could be people bound as "slaves", however, it would be a very complex contract, wouldn't be hereditary, and quite likely not very enforceable in court. Any contract can be broken. I imagine that the contract could be broken simply by doing the equivalent of breaking the contract and declaring bankruptcy.
Sure, you probably leave the court with nothing but the clothes on your back, if not wearing cloths just donated to you from a sympathetic source, but the contract would be broken and you'd be free.
Selfdfenz
Member
Firethorn,
Thanks for responding.
Your points are good ones and you actually answered the question ie. there is nothing in Lib political philosopy that would prevent contractual slavery.
The thread was getting tired but I think my question raised a issue that put it to sleep.
Perhaps the more vocal Libertarian supporters would rather not admit that if their free-wheeling positions on issues drugs, assisted suicide and so forth were applied to something as universally inhuman as slavery it would have to be "an option", at least intellectually.
Again, thanks
S-
Thanks for responding.
Your points are good ones and you actually answered the question ie. there is nothing in Lib political philosopy that would prevent contractual slavery.
The thread was getting tired but I think my question raised a issue that put it to sleep.
Perhaps the more vocal Libertarian supporters would rather not admit that if their free-wheeling positions on issues drugs, assisted suicide and so forth were applied to something as universally inhuman as slavery it would have to be "an option", at least intellectually.
Again, thanks
S-
308win
Member
I selected Libertarian but I consider myself a 'classic' conservative. My definition of classic conservative is simply: individual freedom and responsibility/accountability for one's actions; minimal federal govenrment intervention in one's lifestyle/choices; fiscal restraint and few, low, and equitable taxes.
The Democrates have been hijacked by radical socialists and the Republicans by radical authoritarians with the only difference being the beliefs/value systems they are respectively attempting to impose through government fiat.
As for the most dangerous party to the 'American' way of life, I believe it is the Republican Party in its current form of domination by the 'American Taliban'.
The Democrates have been hijacked by radical socialists and the Republicans by radical authoritarians with the only difference being the beliefs/value systems they are respectively attempting to impose through government fiat.
As for the most dangerous party to the 'American' way of life, I believe it is the Republican Party in its current form of domination by the 'American Taliban'.
mercedesrules
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2003
- Messages
- 1,010
Voters trust politicians.
Anarchist.
Anarchist.
727 torqueflight
Member
conservative republican
- Status