Posted on 11/18/2002 7:26:58 AM PST by Jack Black
"...Basically, libertarianism works in a world where people are innately good, without any evil impulses anywhere. Sadly to say, that world does not exist."
Of course libertarian ideas won't work without a moral component. That's been said since the beginning of our country, Poohbah.
I'm too tired to lok for it, but paraphrased, a famous quote from those times said,
"Our society is made for a moral, religious people. If the people abandon their morals, our Republic will not survive."Our founders were libertarian, and everybody the world over knew that their "idealistic" government would not survive.
Said component being notably lacking in libertarian philosophy.
To: exodus
You won't find any libertarian advocating slavery.
The only defense for slavery is economic, and that doesn't fly anymore.
Give me a name, Roscoe. Give me the name of a libertarian who says that slavery isn't an infringement of the rights of man.
Of course libertarian ideas won't work without a moral component.To: exodus
Only if you don't know what morals are, Poohbah.
I bet you can't even define a "right."
The problem with this line of reasoning is that it creates victim constituencies which are the foundation of liberalism in our era. The Liberal Federalist state is always built to provide services to the sick, lame, underprivilaged, underserved, and succeeds in building a larger and less efficient system of delivery with each succeeding generation. FSP's aim is to restore the right of each state to deliver services to it's citizens as it sees fit, in other words deliver services at the lowest level of government. This was the way the founding documents specify that the system works - See Article I Sec 8 & Ammendment 10. In this way a Libertarian state may decide to offer very little in the way of government services and a Democrat State may decide to provide wall to wall coverage of all lifes maladies. Then the residents may vote with their feet. The problem of course, is that the producers will move to the Libertararian State and the non-producers will move to the Democrat State.... Because Socalism is not a sustainable economic system unless the non-producers use the power of government to wring funding from the producers.
From what I've seen, Libertarians sure as hell can't.
Unless it's under the guise of contract.
Would a so-called "Free State" allow indentured servitude?
Main Entry: 1pow·er
Pronunciation: 'pau(-&)r
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French poeir, from poeir to be able, from (assumed) Vulgar Latin potEre, alteration of Latin posse -- more at POTENT
Date: 13th century
1 a (1) : ability to act or produce an effect (2) : ability to get extra-base hits (3) : capacity for being acted upon or undergoing an effect b : legal or official authority, capacity, or right
Our Founding Fathers formed our government based upon libertarian principles. Not surprising, since they WERE libertarians.To: exodus
# 338 by exodus
Why do you feel that sodomy laws have special meaning to me, Roscoe? A more serious violation of libertarian principles was the public acceptance of slavery.
Times change, Roscoe. Religious beliefs in those times considered slavery acceptable, while thinking that sodomy was morally worse than murder. Nowadays that's completely reversed, with sodomy a non-issue with most people, and slavery universally condemned.
Even then, libertarians believed that slavery was evil. They tried to put a stop to it, but the belief that slavery was economically necessary forced them to back down.
As to sodomy, I have never read anything on how the Founders felt about it. Regardless, sodomy is a personnal choice, and even if you shiver at the very thought of it, it's still none of your business.
To: exodusTo: exodus
Said component (morals) being notably lacking in libertarian philosophy.
# 343 by Poohbah
Only if you don't know what morals are, Poohbah.
I bet you can't even define a "right."
# 345 by exodus
I'm a libertarian, and I've defined "rights" on this very thread.
Try it. Define "rights" without looking back to see what I said, and without running to the dictionary.
I bet you can't do it.
You are incorrect on both counts. It has not been taken out of context, and here's why:
"A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned -- this is the sum of good government." - Thomas Jefferson.
If someone voluntarily signs a contract, then he's not a slave. You're an idiot...
And your nutty rantings will be incomprehensible until you regain your sanity. The fact that you based your entire argument upon my screen name clearly shows that you are off your rocker..
45 weeks for the first thousand *outsiders* to sign on, 15 weeks more to reach 2000. No guarantee that rate of growth will continue- or won't- but how many weeks are there from now to the next election? Something like 45 more?
But I have a bet going that there'll be 5000 FSP porkypioneers by mid-April. We'll soon see.
I don't expect most to be relocated to the chosen state in time for the next election, but I wouldn't bet on it being impossible that they may be a factor. And four years, two hundred weeks after that? Oh yes.
Your position stands in contradiction to our 13th Amendment.
Would a so-called "Free State" allow indentured servitude?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.