If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Salon)   I used to be a Libertarian, but I got better   (salon.com) divider line 732
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

6252 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Dec 2013 at 7:39 PM (35 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



732 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-28 05:58:31 PM
I voted for Ron Paul as President in 1988, the first time I was old enough to vote.

Oh yeah, I got better.
 
2013-12-28 06:01:55 PM
Let me guess- you turned 12?
 
2013-12-28 06:11:26 PM
NON PAUL!
 
2013-12-28 06:11:33 PM

rumpelstiltskin: Let me guess- you turned 12?


39. Close enough, I guess.
 
2013-12-28 06:13:21 PM
The problem with libertarianism is it doesn't work in reality. But try telling that to a libertarian.
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2013-12-28 06:24:09 PM

Confabulat: The problem with libertarianism is it doesn't work in reality. But try telling that to a libertarian.


Same is true for objectivism, Ayn Rand's abomination.
 
2013-12-28 06:26:54 PM

Confabulat: The problem with libertarianism is it doesn't work in reality. But try telling that to a libertarian.


Libertarianism doesn't even work in theory. It's the product of ignorance, greed and a deranged world-view. If you actually believed in maximizing personal freedom you'd be in favor of a strong central government with transparent (and functional) checks and balances and ed-emphasis of laissez-faire economics through increased regulation and a well funded, comprehensive social safety net......basically the opposite of what the libertarian party advocates.
 
2013-12-28 06:44:13 PM
Perhaps the truest statement in that story was "...the size of the federal government is almost irrelevant. The real question is: what does society need and how do we pay for it?" If you truly believe that the poor and the sick should be allowed to suffer because that's just the way things are and your bottom line trumps any issues of compassion or charity--and that is apparently what you believe if you are a genuine Ayn Rand libertarian--then you are beneath contempt. I don't care if I personally can contribute more in taxes if I want to, because individual efforts will not solves these problems. It is precisely the people who are unwilling to contribute more--specifically who easily can contribute more but choose not to do so--who must be obliged to contribute more no matter how indignant or victimized that makes them feel. I will cheerfully vote to raise my own taxes, and I will cheerfully vote to raise yours. I will cheerfully vote to raise the taxes of the wealthy by an "unfair" amount, not because they deserve to be punished but because more money is needed to run the country, and that money is both available and underutilized in the savings accounts of the wealthy. By all means, fight this tooth and nail, but keep in mind that if an increase to a 40% tax rate for the wealthy is defeated now, a 50% tax rate will be needed in another five years, and a 60% tax rate a few years after that. Unless you propose to overthrow the government and turn us into a straight-up plutocracy, taxes will inevitably go up on the wealthy (and after the economy becomes healthy, the rest of us). Deal with it now or deal with it later. Or stick your head in the sand and deal with the consequences.
 
2013-12-28 06:49:47 PM
I still have a lot of libertarian tendencies, for example I think drugs should be legal (the hours in cuffs last night surely has nothing to do with that opinion I'm sure), I do believe in minimal government interference in daily life, etc., etc.

But libertarians would even take away basic environmental regulations and turn our country into a cesspool, and they'd call it private industry. They forget private industry will destroy and exploit anyone and anything in the name of a profit, and unregulated private industry is a bigger monster than a democratically-elected government will ever be, as all they are beholden to is money, and ethics and morals are just stumbling blocks along the way.
 
2013-12-28 06:58:30 PM
Ayn Rand isn't libertarianism any more than President Obama is a socialist.
 
2013-12-28 07:02:05 PM

Confabulat: I still have a lot of libertarian tendencies, for example I think drugs should be legal (the hours in cuffs last night surely has nothing to do with that opinion I'm sure), I do believe in minimal government interference in daily life, etc., etc.

But libertarians would even take away basic environmental regulations and turn our country into a cesspool, and they'd call it private industry. They forget private industry will destroy and exploit anyone and anything in the name of a profit, and unregulated private industry is a bigger monster than a democratically-elected government will ever be, as all they are beholden to is money, and ethics and morals are just stumbling blocks along the way.


Yeah, the guy mentions agreeing with their stance on drug laws, gay rights and a reluctance to engage in foreign adventurism (which I also agree with), but it's still not enough to make up for the detestable nature of their core beliefs.
 
2013-12-28 07:02:59 PM
Yet I don't want to gloss over the good things about libertarians. They are generally supportive of the gay community, completely behind marijuana legalization...

Except, that's not really true, either.
 
2013-12-28 07:15:35 PM
I see no practical difference between Libertarianism and Communism. Both rely on a non-existent aspect of human nature: total mutual cooperation. Unless they are Ayn Rand idiots, in which case there is no cooperation, and the poor literally starve on the streets. At which point they rise up and kill the successful ones.
 
2013-12-28 07:29:35 PM
Sarah Palin turned me into a newt!
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2013-12-28 07:31:27 PM

Confabulat: But libertarians would even take away basic environmental regulations and turn our country into a cesspool, and they'd call it private industry. They forget private industry will destroy and exploit anyone and anything in the name of a profit, and unregulated private industry is a bigger monster than a democratically-elected government will ever be, as all they are beholden to is money, and ethics and morals are just stumbling blocks along the way.


THIS THIS THIS MY GOD, THIS!
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2013-12-28 07:43:23 PM

foo monkey: Ayn Rand isn't libertarianism any more than President Obama is a socialist.


All the media Libertarians espouse the "genius" of Ayn Rand.  The basic principles of libertarianism come right out of her ramblings.
 
2013-12-28 07:44:35 PM
I used to be a libertarian, and now...oh wait, yeah, I still believe in liberty.
 
2013-12-28 07:45:07 PM
I suffered Libertarian Simplicity Derangement (LSD) until I started volunteering at Meals on Wheels. Many people need help and the government is better than charity at delivering it. Why? They both have the same fundamental flaw of "spending other people's money". But government gets more oversight from the press and voters.
 
2013-12-28 07:45:34 PM

NFA: Confabulat: But libertarians would even take away basic environmental regulations and turn our country into a cesspool, and they'd call it private industry. They forget private industry will destroy and exploit anyone and anything in the name of a profit, and unregulated private industry is a bigger monster than a democratically-elected government will ever be, as all they are beholden to is money, and ethics and morals are just stumbling blocks along the way.

THIS THIS THIS MY GOD, THIS!



But they talk about legal weed and legal prostitution, so they'll always keep idiots falling for their BS.
Plus, it's a nice cover party for people who don't want to admit they are Republicans.
 
2013-12-28 07:47:41 PM
I used to be a libertarian, but then I took an arrow to the knee.
 
2013-12-28 07:48:53 PM

NFA: foo monkey: Ayn Rand isn't libertarianism any more than President Obama is a socialist.

All the media Libertarians espouse the "genius" of Ayn Rand.  The basic principles of libertarianism come right out of her ramblings.


And they conveniently ignore her atheism and all the government handouts she took when she needed them.
 
2013-12-28 07:48:57 PM

Voiceofreason01: Libertarianism doesn't even work in theory. It's the product of ignorance, greed and a deranged world-view.


I wouldn't even go that far. But it's fundamentally flawed because it's based on the honor system and relying on people not taking advantage of it.

In other words, it only works in a world where people aren't assholes.
 
2013-12-28 07:49:47 PM

SevenizGud: I used to be a libertarian, and now...oh wait, yeah, I still believe in liberty...unless it's on the State level.


FTFY
 
2013-12-28 07:51:04 PM
I thought being a libertarian was just a way to avoid admitting to being a Republican.
 
2013-12-28 07:51:18 PM

Confabulat: The problem with libertarianism is it doesn't work in reality. But try telling that to a libertarian.


Example please.
 
2013-12-28 07:51:44 PM

foo monkey: Ayn Rand isn't libertarianism any more than President Obama is a socialist.


This.

The last time this many straw men were torched, it involved multiple reshoots with Ray Bolger and Margaret Hamilton.

How curious that the writer can get through all this blithering about his former libertarianism without mentioning the Libertarians' 2012 candidate (Gary Johnson) who did a shiatload better than RON PAUL ever did - and without all that teabaggy unpleasantness.
 
2013-12-28 07:52:15 PM

Mrtraveler01: Voiceofreason01: Libertarianism doesn't even work in theory. It's the product of ignorance, greed and a deranged world-view.

I wouldn't even go that far. But it's fundamentally flawed because it's based on the honor system and relying on people not taking advantage of it.

In other words, it only works in a world where people aren't assholes.


I've always had a hard time reconciling the Pollyanna-ish worldview necessary for libertarian thought with modern conservatism. They're such cynical farks about everything else.
 
2013-12-28 07:52:25 PM

AntiNerd: I thought being a libertarian was just a way to avoid admitting to being a Republican.


The ones I know seem to be more liberally socially but I guess they're more conservative on fiscal matters.

If the GOP would dump the Tea Partiers and the Moral Majority, they might have a better chance to adapt to a younger demographic.
 
2013-12-28 07:53:38 PM

Phil McKraken: I suffered Libertarian Simplicity Derangement (LSD) until I started volunteering at Meals on Wheels. Many people need help and the government is better than charity at delivering it. Why? They both have the same fundamental flaw of "spending other people's money". But government gets more oversight from the press and voters.


Sure it does.  I like charities because if they waste the money, I can choose to donate to another or withhold it until they get their act together.  Kind of hard to do that with taxes.
 
2013-12-28 07:53:58 PM

pedrop357: Confabulat: The problem with libertarianism is it doesn't work in reality. But try telling that to a libertarian.

Example please.


It's true, I've tried telling them it doesn't work many times and it NEVER sinks in.
 
2013-12-28 07:54:23 PM

SevenizGud: I used to be a libertarian, and now...oh wait, yeah, I still believe in liberty.


This.

The amount of left-statist derp is pretty thick here.
 
2013-12-28 07:54:45 PM

Confabulat: The problem with libertarianism is it doesn't work in reality. But try telling that to a libertarian.


I have never, personally, met a libertarian that wasn't the product of a well-off family. They mostly seem to either work for or gain from a family business, or stand to inherit much from said family. They seem to view wealth as a zero sum game. "If you take more from me and mine, that's more for you and less for me, forever, until you have as much as I do, and that's not fair." The idea that so long as you continue to be productive and continue benefiting economically more than the poors, they will NEVER be anywhere near as comfortable as you, doesn't seem to compute. It really is two things. One- "My family worked hard for this money, and I'm not giving it up." and part two- "I plan on milking this thing for as long as I can. F*ck taxes."

Most folks who actually produce understand the need for law, infrastructure, and taxes.
 
2013-12-28 07:55:41 PM

fusillade762: pedrop357: Confabulat: The problem with libertarianism is it doesn't work in reality. But try telling that to a libertarian.

Example please.

It's true, I've tried telling them it doesn't work many times and it NEVER sinks in.


How about an example of it being tried in reality?

Most of what is labeled 'libertarian' by lefties is the kind of stuff even mild libertarians are opposed to.  Cronyism, government cover for bad acts, etc. are not libertarian.
 
2013-12-28 07:56:15 PM

pedrop357: Confabulat: The problem with libertarianism is it doesn't work in reality. But try telling that to a libertarian.

Example please.


Since you can't prove a lack of something, it would be more appropriate for you to list an example of libertarianism working.

We'll wait.
 
2013-12-28 07:57:04 PM
Oblig:

i44.tinypic.com
 
2013-12-28 07:57:09 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-12-28 07:58:53 PM

Kid Lester: Confabulat: The problem with libertarianism is it doesn't work in reality. But try telling that to a libertarian.

I have never, personally, met a libertarian that wasn't the product of a well-off family. They mostly seem to either work for or gain from a family business, or stand to inherit much from said family. They seem to view wealth as a zero sum game. "If you take more from me and mine, that's more for you and less for me, forever, until you have as much as I do, and that's not fair." The idea that so long as you continue to be productive and continue benefiting economically more than the poors, they will NEVER be anywhere near as comfortable as you, doesn't seem to compute. It really is two things. One- "My family worked hard for this money, and I'm not giving it up." and part two- "I plan on milking this thing for as long as I can. F*ck taxes."

Most folks who actually produce understand the need for law, infrastructure, and taxes.


That's funny because nearly every liberal I've bumped into treats wealth as zero-sum.

Libertarians are rarely anarchists and do understand the need for law, infrastructure, and taxes.  They just don't agree with you on how those things should be implemented and/or how much of them should be done by government and/or how much should be done on a smaller level whether that be county relative to state, city to county, town to city, etc. 
They're also the only movement with a party that understands freedom is a broad thing and not confined to just a woman's womb or just her gun safe.
 
2013-12-28 07:59:33 PM
3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-12-28 08:00:02 PM
Before I understood the economic, environmental, and labor implications of libertarianism, I thought I was one. Then I learned the difference between personal liberty, and libertarianism.
 
2013-12-28 08:00:02 PM

Hollie Maea: pedrop357: Confabulat: The problem with libertarianism is it doesn't work in reality. But try telling that to a libertarian.

Example please.

Since you can't prove a lack of something, it would be more appropriate for you to list an example of libertarianism working.

We'll wait.


I'm not the one saying it doesn't work in reality.
 
2013-12-28 08:00:11 PM

pedrop357: fusillade762: pedrop357: Confabulat: The problem with libertarianism is it doesn't work in reality. But try telling that to a libertarian.

Example please.

It's true, I've tried telling them it doesn't work many times and it NEVER sinks in.

How about an example of it being tried in reality?

Most of what is labeled 'libertarian' by lefties is the kind of stuff even mild libertarians are opposed to.  Cronyism, government cover for bad acts, etc. are not libertarian.


Ah yes, the "No True Scotsman" approach.

So is there any example of Libertarianism actually working in a modern society?
 
2013-12-28 08:02:17 PM

Mantour: [i.imgur.com image 667x400]


That quote is actually from a guy named John Rogers, iirc.
 
2013-12-28 08:02:48 PM

pedrop357: Hollie Maea: pedrop357: Confabulat: The problem with libertarianism is it doesn't work in reality. But try telling that to a libertarian.

Example please.

Since you can't prove a lack of something, it would be more appropriate for you to list an example of libertarianism working.

We'll wait.

I'm not the one saying it doesn't work in reality.


No, you are the one who thinks that you can win an argument by asking for proof of a negative.

You aren't very well educated, are you?
 
2013-12-28 08:02:56 PM

pedrop357: Libertarians are rarely anarchists and do understand the need for law, infrastructure, and taxes.  They just don't agree with you on how those things should be implemented and/or how much of them should be done by government and/or how much should be done on a smaller level whether that be county relative to state, city to county, town to city, etc.


That's the other problem with Libertariansm, that line is never clearly drawn which is why you get factions insisting that state issues be handled on a county level, how county issues should be handled on a city level, etc.

It gets so wishy-washy and abstract that its incredibly difficult to clearly define how a model Libertarian society would work.
 
2013-12-28 08:03:37 PM
I used to be a liberal, and then a conservative, but then I realized that many of their programs hurt more than they help, and that some liberals and conservatives are really thinking "What's in it for me?" (Like loan forgiveness for college loans or increasing taxes.)   

Now I just evaluate each problem and proposed solution without resorting to labeling and ad hominem attacks.  Pity that some people cannot think.
 
2013-12-28 08:04:10 PM

Teufelaffe: [3.bp.blogspot.com image 500x336]



Libertarians don't need to wait for permission or orders before helping someone in need.  A counter example would say that liberals make poor lifeguards if their supervisor and union handler aren't there to tell them when they're allowed to jump in and/or ensure that their lifeguard apparel is in safe working order.

The only party more in love with bureaucracy and red tape than the Republicans are the Democrats

I love leftie thinking though - anyone who disagrees with me automatically believes the exact opposite of me.  There is more than one way to help people, and someone who disagrees with how you want to help is not necessarily against helping people at all.
 
2013-12-28 08:04:47 PM

Hollie Maea: pedrop357: Hollie Maea: pedrop357: Confabulat: The problem with libertarianism is it doesn't work in reality. But try telling that to a libertarian.

Example please.

Since you can't prove a lack of something, it would be more appropriate for you to list an example of libertarianism working.

We'll wait.

I'm not the one saying it doesn't work in reality.

No, you are the one who thinks that you can win an argument by asking for proof of a negative.

You aren't very well educated, are you?


I'm asking them to back their assertion.
 
2013-12-28 08:05:09 PM
I once self identified as liberal - I once self identified as libertarian. Now I don't self identify.

What I say now is adults should be free to act like adults, and I don't hate government spending money, what I hate is what government spends money on. I don't know what the makes me label-wise but it's what I believe.

Stop war and build infrastructure. That's all I want.
 
2013-12-28 08:05:32 PM
My college roommate went full Ron Paul in 2008. He left a database programming gig in Manhattan that had him living in lower Manhattan to follow the Paul campaign around. He eventually settled in to a political think tank in NE Virginia. Every single one of his facebook posts is something about supporting tea party candidates or how the democrats are absolutely awful. Then, two weeks before each election, he reluctantly talks about how the GOP isn't all bad.

He's a republican that supported Bush until mid-2008 and now wants nothing to do with any of the government because they all do things wrong.

Now, personally, I've seen him support gay rights among his real life friends, admonish idiocy from the GOP, and seem reasonable about any number of things. But, some of the people he hangs out with can't string two sentences together without claiming the federal government is out to kill us all.

And, when you talk about things like gay rights or affirmative action or the civil rights act or poor people not having jobs, their reasonable solution is "well, people should just move, because it should be up to the states". Telling people to move is not a solution.

Libertarians are a-ok with government control as long as the government controlling them is small enough to let the nutjobs have control.
 
2013-12-28 08:05:55 PM
pedrop357:

Libertarians are rarely anarchists and do understand the need for law, infrastructure, and taxes.  They just don't agree with you on how those things should be implemented and/or how much of them should be done by government and/or how much should be done on a smaller level whether that be county relative to state, city to county, town to city, etc.

They also believe that law should be remedial rather than preventative, that perfect markets largely exist, that money cannot buy influence and that economics of scale don't promote monopolies, and that consumers vote with their conscience and not their wallets.
 
Displayed 50 of 732 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report