DU Discusses Libertarianism

I think the wishful thinking is on your part. Its easier to just jump to conclusions and define them away, than it is to look closer at them, identify their values, and address the questions they raise. I've met very few leftists (those who call themselves leftists) who were not anti-statist in their beliefs (actions being another matter). The range of philosophical beliefs supporting their positions, are I would guess, about three times as many as can be found on the right.

I would say, most leftists view the state, not as an ends in and of itself, but as tool to be utilized for bring down, or keep in check, the various establishments which they perceive as being equally as threatening as the state.

It is this view of reality, that makes them easy pickings for both corrupt and ultra state advocates, who will use words such as cooperation, democracy, equality, participation, sharing, etc., while actually intending the exact opposite. I say shame on conservatives for not only letting them get away with it, but actually supporting their effort by citing the terms as taken, and then standing against them.

In 1988, I read a speech delivered by Jesse Jackson, which was as libertarian as any I've read by any Republican in the past three decade. Jackson displayed a deep concern about the survival of the Free Enterprise economic system, and a need to take action to save it. Of course Jackson is a corrupt political manipulator, who will play the socialist card at the drop of a dime. But that is not the point. The audience he was speaking to were democrats.

Likewise, polls taken of Democratic voters have consistently shown an average 15% of them to range from fiscal conservative to full libertarian. Surprisingly, these voters are at the upper end in education among democratic voter.

But none of this has any more to do with leftists, than do television personalities defining what is left and what is not. Today's leftist movement in America is pretty much limited to several hundred magazines and periodicals. The left in America went into a steep decline at the end of the Vietnam War. Then the Aquarian Conspiracy and the voluntarist movement that grew out of it, pretty much captured the rest of them.

What remains of the left is factionalized, ranging from Whole Earth Catalog and Mother Jones reader types, to the radically distort the realty of everything magazines. Of course their are the protest anything type that want to return to the good old days of the late 60s, early 70s, or want to recreate that era, having been born to late and missed out on it. And then their are the usual assortment peace activists. Its not much to be concerned about at this time. But if unified by a single direction, I say this left has tremendous potential, awaiting the right circumstances, and thereby should not be taken lightly. It is only a matter of time, before the next era of 'from the bottom' activism comes out to set in motion the cultural outlook which will define the next era of political reality. Thsi time, the movement for greater liberty must capture that left, or leave the next generation a level of government tyranny beyond anything possible at this time.

Shucks, I seemed to have missed it.

There was an error in processing your request.
Following is the error message:

Script Message: Error in subroutine readdata: Can't open /home/httpd/html/duforum/DCForumID35/Data/10179.txt
System Message: No such file or directory

Please notify the administrator of this site.

Thank you.

Yes, I post over there on occasion. I have been called a "private property absolutist" among other things. Oh, and a "stealth conservative." :P

So would you consider yourself closer to the right or left in the traditional left-right spectrum?

It is a basic truism. If you take from the rich to feed the poor until there are no rich anymore then how do you continue to feed the poor?

I'll tell you this secret once, but don't you ever repeat it here on FR, as I publically denounce all libertarians who do what I'm going to tell you. I usually and quite reluctantly, vote Republican. That decision is based on my own immediate desires, and not based upon any reasoned strategic vision. When I vote, feelings rather than logic take control of me. I am not implying that logic wouldn't result in the same vote. Its just I have never thought about it, so I don't know.

Does that answer your question?

On second thought, I don't think I answered your question.

Dealing with the issues most important to me, the economic issues, I am neither left or right. I'm libertarian, of a more liberal left persuasion.

What that means to me, is that I recognize that changes will by way priority and compromise. Where this is inevitable, I want such done favorable to the left side of the spectrum, but not as defined by the left side of the spectrum.

For example, the old Q & A Brochure of the LP gave examples of the LP freeing up the economy, as opposed to freeing down the economy. Eliminating zoning and licensing laws was the cited example used. This approach to libertarianism, while not set in accordance with any leftist agenda, clearly is of a leftist appeal, and definitely outside the realm of conservative economics.

Another example, is reasons for eliminating the income tax. The conservative thrust here is focuses on ones hard earned money being taken from them. The liberal approach is that it violates a human right to force people to even bother know or keep records of how much money they have or have earned. The later is more directly an act of enslavement.

While on taxes, the whole notion of the government influencing private investment, and favoring one group of human actions over another with write offs, exemptions, are regardless of what the LP platform says, nothing less than government subsidizing one set of actions over another. Shame on the LP for such a nonlibertarian squirming up to conservatives.

Remaining on income taxes. The whole idea of lowering income taxes as a libertarian proposal, I find quite unlibertarian. Libertarians should accept nothing less that the elimination of this forced enslavement.

Am I more on the left side of the spectrum, I guess it depends on how you choose to define it your self.

My reply #227 was meant for you (not me):(

...freeing up the economy, as opposed to freeing down the economy.

Kind of clunky, but I like it. Free up opportunities at the lower rungs first. Worry about free trade for corporations last.

Make zoning a higher priority than NAFTA. Bubble up vs trickle down.

Jackbob, I am still trying to get a handle on your view of the left. Here are a few lines you've written that seem especially salient to me:

As far as leftist governments go, I find the entire idea a contradiction in terms. There is, as I see it, no such thing as a leftist government.

My experience in both the adolescent left and the grown up moderate left, has shown me that their hearts are anti-statist, their minds are anti establishment, and their actions are anti-conservative.

I don't think of leftists as statists in the slightest. But yes, most are easily manipulated into forming alliances with, and often becoming short term anti-statist, statists.

Interestingly, I would agree that many leftists will seek to make government take on the 'role of altruism' and "dispense cosmic justice." But I don't envision them erecting any kind of government or any thing else for that matter.

It is my opinion, the only thing that will work with them, is a continual outright confrontation of the statists who manipulate them, right on the leftwing stage itself.
I would say, most leftists view the state, not as an ends in and of itself, but as tool to be utilized for bring down, or keep in check, the various establishments which they perceive as being equally as threatening as the state.

And this one really jumped out at me. I think it captures pretty well the gist of what you've expressed in your posts so far about your view of the left:

I've met very few leftists (those who call themselves leftists) who were not anti-statist in their beliefs (actions being another matter).

Would it be safe to say that leftists are statists who believe they are anti-statists, while rightists are statists who know they are statists? And would it be correct to say that your left/right scale is more a guage of how statist or anti-statist people are in their hearts, and not in their actions?

If this is the case, then I can understand how you can regard leftists as anti-statist even though, functionally, they are statists.

Or is it that the degree of their statism at a given moment is determined by their feelings about the establishment at that moment? i.e. if they fear that the establishment is threatening people's liberties, then they'll use the state to hem in the establishment; if they're happy with the establishment, then they feel no need for the government to have a strong presence.

If this is the case, then the question is: can leftists ever feel comfortable with the establishment? My guess is that this is not possible, and that the very existence of the establishment will keep the left in its statist mode. And even if they were satisfied with the establishment, and their statism was in remission, you'd still have to consider them statists since they would use the government to reign in the establishment if, and as soon as, it threatened them again.