Libertarians: the dangers of unfettered self interest

[Chaigidel]

continuation of an earlier thread


it has been stated that libertarians support total freedom as long as that freedom infringes upon no others

if that is the case then how can you propose unfettered growth is somehow detached from affecting everyone and every future generation on this planet?

I am stating that libertarianism is perhaps the most dangerous modern idea infecting america, whose adherents openly espouse violence in response to recent world developments in financial regulation.

representative government must be adjusted yet libertarianism is the absolute wrong way to go, and will lead to disaster if pursued seriously by anyone.

unfettered capitalism leads only to exploitation on the grandest scales, the industrial revolution people possessed a great deal of the libertarian ideal and we had children working as slaves in factories until they died.

we had slavery, torture, butchery of the worst kind all in the name of monetary gain ; colonial activity in africa and india and china all reflect this idea of unfettered growth, the idea that it is acceptable to exploit those who have less value than you in a bid to gain more wealth yourself.

in short libertarian ideals espouse exploitation of any and everything in the name of unfettered self interest and there is nothing more dangerous to the modern society, wherein we are poised on the edge of a new age where resources grow short, and progress must be limited according to necessity and not personal want.

[Justinian]

I have nothing against a discussion of the pros and cons, or the moral worth, of a philosophy like libertarianism. As long as this thread does not stray where the first one did, into downright hate speech, then we won't have any problems -- but consider this the only warning there will be in this thread before infraction points are handed out. TWC has zero tolerance for hatespeech. The same thing goes for insulting others.

[Chaigidel]

yes yes

I invite any libertarians to defend this ideal.( though I know you cannot)

[bigfootedfred]

something i posted in a older thread seems relevant to this discussion.

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=228975 (US states Demand Sovereignty)

Text of resolution in New Hampshire
Quote:
That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:


I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.


II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.


III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.


IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.


V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.


VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and


That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legi...9/HCR0006.html


and this from the campaign for libertys site:

http://documents.scribd.com/docs/1xd...npsq67kt0c.pdf

As most readers of this are probably aware, the Campaign for Liberty has been singled out, along with a few other political groups, in a leaked Missouri state government report, "The Modern Militia Movement." The document tells state officials to be on the lookout for violent extremists while conflating them with pretty much anyone who criticizes the government. Perhaps most troubling, the information apparently comes from the Department of Homeland Security, meaning that similar documents could be circulating in states other than Missouri.

and

The call by some right wing leaders for rebellion and for the millitary to refuse the commander in chief’s orders is joined by Chuck Norris

who claims that thousands of right wing cell groups have organized and are ready for a second American Revolution.

During an appearance on the Glen Beck radio show he promised that if things get any worse from his point of view he may “run for president of Texas.” The martial artist/actor/activist claims that Texas was never formally a part of the United States in the first place
and that if rebellion is to come through secession
Texas would lead the way.

He continues; calling on a second American Revolution; “…we've bastardized the First Amendment, reinterpreted America's religious history and secularized our society until we ooze skepticism and circumvent religion on every level of public and private life.

How much more will Americans take? When will enough be enough? And, when that time comes, will our leaders finally listen or will history need to record a second American Revolution? We the people have the authority according to America's Declaration of Independence, which states: That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…”
http://www.examiner.com/x-2071-DC-Special-Interests-Examiner~y2009m3d9-Chuck-Norris-claims-thousands-of-right-wing-cell-groups-exist-and-will-rebel-against-US-government

this PDF here
http://documents.scribd.com/docs/1xd...npsq67kt0c.pdf
is some kind of report on the supposed 'growing threat of the revitilized militia movement'

[Groenepuntmuts]

yes yes

I invite any libertarians to defend this ideal.( though I know you cannot)

There's a difference between European and American ones. for example, in America, a "liberal" is something we'd call extreme right-wing in The Netherlands.

read this.

unfettered capitalism leads only to exploitation on the grandest scales, the industrial revolution people possessed a great deal of the libertarian ideal and we had children working as slaves in factories until they died.

we had slavery, torture, butchery of the worst kind all in the name of monetary gain ; colonial activity in africa and india and china all reflect this idea of unfettered growth, the idea that it is acceptable to exploit those who have less value than you in a bid to gain more wealth yourself.

Now read This.

it has been stated that libertarians support total freedom as long as that freedom infringes upon no others

Slavery, obviously, hurts others, no sane libertarian pursuits the right to slavery. or torture. Altough this already defends common libertarianism, I'd also like to point out that the freedom liberals seek is mostly in unlimited freedom of speech and religion etc.

disclaimer: I think I might have gotten confused with liberals and libertarians, in which case my whole point is useless.

[Panzerbear]

disclaimer: I think I might have gotten confused with liberals and libertarians, in which case my whole point is useless.

libertarians and liberals have very little in common. the first ones are for individual liberties and freedoms, the second ones are for statism and regulations in the name of "fairness".

i.e. the libertarians are for reducing the govt and reducing taxes while maintaining a necessary legal framework, while liberals are for expanding the govt and increasing taxes while making more "fair" laws.

[Chaigidel]

excellent I am nothing but pleased they recognize the threat to america that is the libertarian movement.

and NH can write whatever it wants, the constituion rules supreme and if obama steps out of line he can be brought back in, just like was done to bush, he pushed too much and the courts ruled him down.

there will be no violent revolution but I must ask why libertarians are so quick to call for one yet did not call for one under bush when he infringed upon your rights moreso than obama.

[bigfootedfred]

excellent I am nothing but pleased they recognize the threat to america that is the libertarian movement.

and NH can write whatever it wants, the constituion rules supreme and if obama steps out of line he can be brought back in, just like was done to bush, he pushed too much and the courts ruled him down.

there will be no violent revolution but I must ask why libertarians are so quick to call for one yet did not call for one under bush when he infringed upon your rights moreso than obama.

they would argue that obama has kept all the bush stuff and is moving forward his own agenda that would make things yet worse still, like the mandatory service acts.
im not an american so its not really for me to say these things, but i think your lumping unfairly 'extreme nutjobs' with 'libertarians', much as that government report did.

[Chaigidel]

but the mandatory service act would provide college education in exchange for the service-- germany is the 4th largest economy in the world and it has no problem with mandatory service.

when you are 18 you need to serve something other than yourself, it builds a better society.

either the military or civil service if you are apacifist; being such a miltary power mandatory service would only benefit us.

[pnokey]

but the mandatory service act would provide college education in exchange for the service-- germany is the 4th largest economy in the world and it has no problem with mandatory service.

when you are 18 you need to serve something other than yourself, it builds a better society.

either the military or civil service if you are apacifist; being such a miltary power mandatory service would only benefit us.

It is not government that creates a 'better society' and therefor should not be something government works towards. People make societies, not government.

[Justinian]

I'll point out the "mandatory" part was retracted from the GIVE Act.

Another victory for democracy.

[Vercingetorix_Defeated]

I'll point out the "mandatory" part was retracted from the GIVE Act.

Another victory for democracy.

When did that happen? I hadn't heard about there being any mandatory part to it at all. Quite concerning that there was one in consideration for some time at least.

[Chaigidel]

but certainly there is nothing that conflicts with democracy in civil service.

[Justinian]

Democracy represents the will of the people and the vast majority of Americans oppose mandatory servitude. Therefore, a victory for democracy.

[Enemy of the State]

"Whenever anyone wants others to do their work they call upon their Altruism. 'Never mind your own needs,' they say, 'Think of the needs of... of whoever. Of the state. Of the poor. Of the Army, of the King. Of God.' The list goes on and on. How many catastrophes were launched with the words 'Think of yourself?' It's the king and country crowd who light the torch of destruction."

I never thought I'd quote anything for a political discussion from a video game...

[Kiljan Arslan]

I never thought I'd quote anything for a political discussion from a video game...

Don't quote Ryan the guy is Ayn Rand but male. quote Spooner, or how about Hayek.

[Chaigidel]

I would advise you look at the rest of the game for the result of that ideal played out

[Valiant Champion]

the governor of missouri stopped circulation of the document to Missouri state police, gave an apology and also put the man who printed and distributed the document on unpaid leave.

but certainly there is nothing that conflicts with democracy in civil service.

I agree with that.

However it is unconstitutional and violates the rights of an individual.


That is what makes this country unique from any other. Liberty/powerful bill of rights is to keep Democracy in check.

[Chaigidel]

then why do you think there will be violent revolution in response to obama taking your rights away?

and it is not unconstitutional, the constitution only speaks on a few things I dont think that is one of them.

[Valiant Champion]

then why do you think there will be violent revolution in response to obama taking your rights away?

and it is not unconstitutional, the constitution only speaks on a few things I dont think that is one of them.

I never said anything about starting a violent revolution. Libertarianism is a revolution in thought, ideas and eventually government.

Or more than likely it is simply a return to the basic principles this country was founded on.