I was not aware that Libertarians wanted to be dependent on the govt. I always thought they wanted only the thinnest threadbare govt possible, if that.
Is it possible the author doesn't know what Libertarians actually want/are?
The Founders had the time and the intelligence to think it all through. They understood human nature. Times have surely changed, but people don't. They understood the perils of centralized power and how to avoid it.
There seems to be two definitions of a libertarian. One is the classic definition and one is the rewritten version that the liberals have created. I am not a liberal libertarian.
I read revolutionary times book that said patriots would sometimes fly a flab that said “Liberty Unity”. A more popular flag said “Don’t tread on Me”! I am a libertarian of the patriotic and founding Fathers type.
Yet I am not a fan of public roads. The big problem with private roads is the interaction of liability for long term risks and tort law. One can cut corners in construction, look good for a decade or so, and then go out of business leaving the users and property owners in the lurch. Fixing those old problems is VERY expensive. I have a pending landslide on part of my property caused by that old road construction that may cost me $10,000 just to slope, pack, and vegetate. Of course, I could just let it fail and the County would then come in and do a crappy emergency job of it and leave it until it fails again. It's just how things are.
Those of you interested in the details can view images and discussion of these problems here (13MB file).
Now if they can point to an example of a private highway that was built WITHOUT seizing land (or at least threatening to such), then it would be a PRIVATE highway.
...otherwise it is political gift to a well-connected person (or company).
Aren’t all the roads in gated communities private roads?
*** First, it took only 10 days and £150,000 to build the road. If the government did it, it would take 20 times as long and cost 30 times as much.***
Same in the USA. In Oklahoma, I’ve seen it take 20 years to build half of an 80 mile stretch of public road, the the other half was built as a toll road and it was in in less than 5 years.
Obama’s foreign policy is very close to libertarian in nature.
I like basic libertarian ideas on domestic policy, but not on foreign policy.
BTW, the idea that one need only follow the Constitution to reach national nirvana is a huge oversimplification. Following the Consitution is just one step towards sanity.
The country can be harmed greatly and even destroyed while following the Constitution, just as you can wreck a car while following the speed limit.
BTW, when I read the title of the thread, I presumed it might be about Iraq, because current events there in some respect resemble the “great power” vacuum libertarians prefer to direct involvement.
If we do not police our own, the lib/commies will do it for us and cause us embarrassment or worse!
I've never heard anyone say that.
The biggest fear that these LIBERALS have against LIBERTARIANS, is that should LIBERTARIANS win, they will lose their CONTROL over the population. Almost every GOVERNMENT ENTERPRISES can be done better by “PRIVATE ENTERPRISES”, except fighting wars ( ARMY, NAVY, AIR FORCE), police and fire fighters. Other than those, “PRIVATE ENTERPRISES” can do a better and cheaper, and less intrusive.
The trouble with libertarianism is that it is not a single thing.
“Libertarianism is a classification of political philosophies that uphold liberty as their principal objective.
“Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, emphasizing political freedom, voluntary association and the primacy of individual judgment.
“While libertarians share a skepticism of authority, they diverge on the scope of their opposition to existing political and economic systems.
“Various schools of libertarian thought offer a range of views regarding the legitimate functions of state and private power, often calling to restrict or even to wholly dissolve pervasive social institutions.
“Rather than embodying a singular, rigid systematic theory or ideology, libertarianism has been applied as an umbrella term to a wide range of sometimes discordant political ideas.”
Importantly, to understand libertarianism, it also helps to understand that conservatism is also not monolithic in its view. Various major branches of conservatism include:
1) “True definition” or “status quo” conservatives, who are apprehensive about radical change in any direction. They believe that change in any direction must be slow and methodical, a process of half-steps, lest it make things markedly worse from where they are right now.
2) “Classical” or “pragmatic” conservatives see *recent* change as having been for the worse, so wish to rescind it. They are not reactionaries, but regard change as experimental, that should be reversed if it fails.
3) Truly reactionary conservatives are so staggered by the magnitude of government overgrowth and failure that they want to substantially prune decades of bad policies. The left is frightened of them, because they could undo much of what the left has created, so they have tried to demean the word “reactionary”, to make it sound impossible or radical.
4) The “Military-Corporate-Intelligence-Law Enforcement” conservatives, who are willing to pour vast amounts of money into these four things, at the expense of all other government functions. They are not really conservatives, but rally with them.
5) “Faith” or “Social” conservatives, who want to reverse the harm caused by government to religions and morality. They see the purpose of government through this lens, which is their right.
6) Other forms of conservatism and blends of the above.
Libertarians are just Democrats who feel bad about being greedy.
Don't be too sure. Can't these be rented out as franchises to the local towns and police?
Libertarian Dream: 12 year old drug addicted prostitutes for everyone
Libertarianism?
COMPLETE PLATFORM TEXT
INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND CIVIL ORDER
IMMIGRATION:
“”The Issue: We welcome all refugees to our country and condemn the efforts of U.S. officials to create a new “Berlin Wall” which would keep them captive. We condemn the U.S. government’s policy of barring those refugees from our country and preventing Americans from assisting their passage to help them escape tyranny or improve their economic prospects.
The Principle: We hold that human rights should not be denied or abridged on the basis of nationality. Undocumented non-citizens should not be denied the fundamental freedom to labor and to move about unmolested. Furthermore, immigration must not be restricted for reasons of race, religion, political creed, age or sexual preference. We oppose government welfare and resettlement payments to non-citizens just as we oppose government welfare payments to all other persons.
Solutions: We condemn massive roundups of Hispanic Americans and others by the federal government in its hunt for individuals not possessing required government documents. We strongly oppose all measures that punish employers who hire undocumented workers. Such measures repress free enterprise, harass workers, and systematically discourage employers from hiring Hispanics.
Transitional Action: We call for the elimination of all restrictions on immigration, the abolition of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol, and a declaration of full amnesty for all people who have entered the country illegally.””