Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31
Like Tree17Likes

Thread: Endorsement from a Libertarian writer

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Woodbridge, Virginia
    Posts
    1,033

    Endorsement from a Libertarian writer

    Libertarianism and the Venus Project: https://beinglibertarian.com/liberta...venus-project/

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northwest Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,749
    Thanks Neil, that was an interesting article and opinion. My concern is that even after living so long and freely/actively engaging with many people from all walks of life, I've never once met a poor Libertarian.

    Every self proclaimed Libertarian I've encountered seems to be doing pretty well overall. I once followed some of its teachings and leaned that direction, which I still find interesting/intriguing .....but unfortunately, much of its philosophy remains exclusionary and off limits for much of the world's people IMHO

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Woodbridge, Virginia
    Posts
    1,033
    Quote Originally Posted by droneBEE View Post
    Thanks Neil, that was an interesting article and opinion. My concern is that even after living so long and freely/actively engaging with many people from all walks of life, I've never once met a poor Libertarian.
    Is it somehow a bad thing that you've never met one? What's the significance or relevance of that & why would it matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by droneBEE View Post
    Every self proclaimed Libertarian I've encountered seems to be doing pretty well overall.
    I myself can't say I know of many libertarians who would qualify as poor, but it seems to make sense that it wouldn't be easy to find many poor libertarians given that they're not fans of being recipients of free (I use that word here loosely) government handouts, and as such & along with that, tend to have an ethic of personal responsibility to try to avoid the need for handouts. That, to me, kinda leans towards being a rather good thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by droneBEE View Post
    I once followed some of its teachings and leaned that direction, which I still find interesting/intriguing .....but unfortunately, much of its philosophy remains exclusionary and off limits for much of the world's people IMHO
    I don't understand how that's possible, given that libertarians advocate less government, more liberty, and non-interventionism - what I would say are the opposites of being exclusionary and for making things off limits.

    Perhaps you could be more specific or elaborate & btw, I don't necessarily agree with everything in the article or the positions that some who identify as libertarians. For example, it seems ancaps consider themselves libertarians or hold the position that they're one in the same, but I think they're actually virtually mutually exclusive; the libertarian is ok with some small or limited government (opposite of anarchism) and not necessarily a hard-nosed capitalist per se (but they do have a huge preference for free-market capitalism over socialism).

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northwest Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,749
    Never said it was a 'bad thing' not to have ever met a poor Libertarian???...only that after working with the least fortunate members of society for forty years (not all of whom are poor simply because they want FREE stuff ) I've never met one libertarian standing in line waiting for a meal.....and I find that fact very telling, as it clearly examples an exclusionary ideology IMO.

    The circles I run in are quite expansive, from Skid Row to Mansions, from Reservations to the Halls of Congress......so I've also run into quite a few Libertarians over the years.....all were/are minimally living comfortable lives, ....some were self entitled complainers, complaining about those in need always wanting....some were simply ruthless capitalists....but all were extremely self obsessed, selfish and with little compassion for their fellow humans, selecting to making 'generalized' statements based on assumptions best left in ones head....IMHO....until one has had the opportunity to meet some more people....people outside our own circles....jus saying...

    I still say this or similar things to Libertarians (or anyone really) all the time.....most of them have no logical response, so as always, your's is refreshing to say the least....

    Libertarians (who come in all different shapes and are often loaded with contradictions) fight, wish and work for what 'they' want, not what you or I...or our neighbors living in squalor may deserve.... an equal SHARE.....

    Libertarians wouldn't do as well (on their own) as their ideology indicates.....someone (s) would have to work crappy jobs....something (some Government institution) would still be required to 'protect' them, the well off...

    These are just a few things that Libertarians choose not to think or talk about....at least in my limited experience
    Last edited by droneBEE; 1 Week Ago at 05:44 AM.
    Ernest likes this.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    350
    Some people in The Alt-Right might claim that they can relate to poor people or that they aren’t as wealthy as The Global Elite but it’s pretty obvious that they might actually be higher than what can be defined as middle class. I mean, how else are they able to travel all over the world, live in various places on the global map, eat well, dress up in fancy suits, et cetera?

    One could argue that it’s because they “work hard” but I think my deeper point is to emphasize the “historical set of variables” that “determines” an individual and thus, is why I’m skeptical of freewill. It appears that a lot of people in The Alt-Right aren’t “defective” psychologically and I suspect some of them might have had a more priviledged upbringing (as well as opportunities) compared to folks that can be defined as poor (of course, a very precise definition of what actually constitutes poverty needs to be defined).

    Don’t degenerates breed degenerates and non-degenerates breed non-degenerates? Of course, there will always be exceptions to every rule and that’s why we call them outliers but that is precisely why Albert Einstein’s quote regarding the mysterious fascinates me. What makes this whole thing even more interesting and absolutely fascinating is when a so-called degenerate is defective for many years in his/her early life and all of a sudden can sometimes sound incredibly brilliant even more so than folks deemed to be a non-degenerate.

    This further raises great and amazing questions regarding the issue of eugenics in that in the process of attempting to achieve eugenics, is it realistically possible? Analogously, is a utopia even possible regardless as to whether it is Right-Wing or Left-Wing oriented? It just seems that in the process of the already so-called achieved utopian state, that is precisely where the initiation of degradation and degeneracy occurs.

    Perhaps another way to look at this would be to try to imagine a world where eugenics or perfectionism has already been achieved. Even in that kind of imagined world, there will still be those that are deemed superior and those that are deemed inferior. It’s like if you were to put ten people with very high IQs in one room, can’t one still try to figure out which one of the ten people in that room is superior to the other nine (with or without respect to IQ scores depending on the degree to which you value IQ)? The shocking and perhaps mysterious thing about all of this is that there might actually be a person outside that “privileged room” that might come up with an ingenious idea, concept, theory, or invention that nobody in the privileged room thought of. It’s like reading that one article where a bunch of violent New York prisoners were able to defeat a bunch of Harvard undergraduates. How do you explain a phenomenon like that?

    One could argue that the aggregate of degenerates or inferor beings is more troublesome (in comparison to the outliers and/or mysterious/unusual cases/circumstances) but surely there must be a way to fix it? Is this the part where those on the Left are more right?

    New York prison debate team defeats Harvard College team - NY Daily News
    "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science." - Albert Einstein

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    350
    Quote Originally Posted by serenesam View Post
    One could argue that the aggregate of degenerates or inferor beings is more troublesome (in comparison to the outliers and/or mysterious/unusual cases/circumstances) but surely there must be a way to fix it? Is this the part where those on the Left are more right?

    New York prison debate team defeats Harvard College team - NY Daily News
    If you are going to say that there's no way to fix that then basically, the doubters of freewill as well as the proponents/supporters of determinism have essentially won.
    Last edited by serenesam; 1 Week Ago at 12:21 PM.
    "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science." - Albert Einstein

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Woodbridge, Virginia
    Posts
    1,033
    Quote Originally Posted by droneBEE View Post
    Never said it was a 'bad thing' not to have ever met a poor Libertarian???...only that after working with the least fortunate members of society for forty years (not all of whom are poor simply because they want FREE stuff ) I've never met one libertarian standing in line waiting for a meal.....and I find that fact very telling, as it clearly examples an exclusionary ideology IMO.
    Why do you seem to be hesitant to call an exclusionary ideology a bad thing? I think I wouldn't be hesitant to call an exclusionary ideology a bad thing. I don't think, though, that what you describe presents an example of an exclusionary ideology.

    I'd say that there's an exclusionary trait - as opposed to an ideology - to it, but there's an exclusionary trait in everything, such as people who don't like pizza not ordering a pizza for themselves. Are people who won't order a pizza for themselves part of an exclusionary ideology? I'd say something like that is also very telling, but it's telling something that's obvious, simply that people who don't like pizza aren't going to order pizzas for themselves. In either situation, it's the type of thing that can go without needing to be pointed out.

    To the Libertarian, the less fortunate get helped by (the state, big government) staying out of the way of the more fortunate, so they can grow their businesses, prosper, and in turn give the less fortunate jobs, contribute to charity, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by droneBEE View Post
    The circles I run in are quite expansive, from Skid Row to Mansions, from Reservations to the Halls of Congress......so I've also run into quite a few Libertarians over the years.....all were/are minimally living comfortable lives, ....some were self entitled complainers, complaining about those in need always wanting....some were simply ruthless capitalists....but all were extremely self obsessed, selfish and with little compassion for their fellow humans, selecting to making 'generalized' statements based on assumptions best left in ones head....IMHO....until one has had the opportunity to meet some more people....people outside our own circles....jus saying...
    Couple things:

    1. An ideology, and people who subscribe to an ideology, are 2 different things.

    2. Just because some of the individuals who subscribe to an ideology are ruthless or don't seem to be compassionate, doesn't mean that all who subscribe to that ideology are ruthless or that they aren't compassionate. To the Libertarian, being compassionate can essentially mean leaving people alone so they can be free to prosper.

    I probably could argue that those who are on the other end of the spectrum, opposite of libertarian (socialists, Democrats, etc.), tend more to be pretty far from being sincerely compassionate; what they call for could be interpreted as advocating for putting guns to the heads of the haves & forcing them to surrender part of what they worked for to earn for themselves to the have-nots; I probably could even go so far as to say that they'll even congratulate themselves & have themselves believing that by putting guns to the heads of the haves to give to the have-nots they're being compassionate, when in actuality all they really did was create an excuse not to be charitable with their own wealth as they take advantage of the tax deductions they buried in the tax code for themselves & their cronies. Anyways, I actually refrain from making that argument because I have some issues with certain things (i.e., I think there may be some latent flaws with the premises or arguments). I don't mean that all on the opposite end of the spectrum of libertarians are like that, only that I think far more often they tend to be that way; you, droneBEE, might be an exception to that rule of thumb.

    Quote Originally Posted by droneBEE View Post
    I still say this or similar things to Libertarians (or anyone really) all the time.....most of them have no logical response, so as always, your's is refreshing to say the least....
    LOL Well I guess I'm glad to hear that.

    Quote Originally Posted by droneBEE View Post
    Libertarians (who come in all different shapes and are often loaded with contradictions) fight, wish and work for what 'they' want, not what you or I...
    Damn skippy, bro! That's one of the main reasons that I, myself, can relate with the Libertarian ideology. That's how things ought to be; no one ought to be deciding "for" someone else what they want or don't want; only I - I alone - should be the one determining, for myself, what I want or don't want; only you - you alone - should determine what you want or don't want, for yourself. How would you like it if I was somehow given power over you to dictate where you get to live, what you eat & drink (and how much), when you wake up & go to sleep, what job you get to do, what clothes you get to wear, who you're allowed to associate with, etc. I don't think you'd want me to do that to you, and I wouldn't want to do that to you, either. I don't want anyone doing that to me, forcing me to do things I don't want to do or not permitting me to do what I want. BTW, I'm not referring to being able to get away with things like crimes or forcing someone to convert to a religion; I'm referring to people being free to do what they want, or not have to do something, as long as there essentially isn't a victim from their actions or behavior.

    Quote Originally Posted by droneBEE View Post
    or our neighbors living in squalor may deserve.... an equal SHARE.....
    Unless it's an equal share of 0, giving everyone equal shares of something is probably the most wasteful thing to do, and it's not what people need anyways. Libertarianism & TZM/TVP are both about access to resources, not equal shares. Some people want or need more of something than others; some people don't want any amount of some things; there are things you might want that I might not want & vice versa; or, there are some things where you might want a large amount and I might only want a very small amount.

    By giving everyone an equal share of something, no one (except for the person who happens to want exactly the amount provided by an equal share) will get the amount they want or need; some might get too much and others not enough (and this would most likely be everyone). If what people want or need is a quota of at least a certain amount of shares, only the ones who get more than that quota will be satisfied (and the rest will probably just be wasted). Those who don't get enough of what they need probably won't be able to use any of it because they need a certain minimum, meaning all of what they receive of an equal share is wasted.

    Quote Originally Posted by droneBEE View Post
    Libertarians wouldn't do as well (on their own) as their ideology indicates.....someone (s) would have to work crappy jobs....something (some Government institution) would still be required to 'protect' them, the well off...
    Be that as it may, I don't know that it would matter anyways, because on their own I don't think they'll encounter impedance in making progress (I think libertarianism is the real progressive ideology, as in progressing towards a society that improves the standard of living and quality of life for everyone), towards improving crappy jobs, eliminating the need for crappy jobs, or automating crappy jobs so no one has to do them, anymore.

    Quote Originally Posted by droneBEE View Post
    These are just a few things that Libertarians choose not to think or talk about....at least in my limited experience
    I'm happy to discuss something as a libertarian & advocate of transitioning to a post-scarcity society; but one thing I'm wondering is how did you determine that someone you've spoken to in the past was a Libertarian? Did you ask them or did they volunteer this information to you? Also, do you keep track of traits of members of other ideologies, as well?
    Last edited by Neil; 1 Week Ago at 07:37 PM.

  8. #8
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    24
    > TZM/TVP are both about access to resources, not equal shares.

    First you don't decide what TZM/TVP is about, we the people do, and we the people say equal shares !

    Otherwise it is no different to the current system where some have more, and some have less.


    > By giving everyone an equal share of something,
    > no one (except for the person who happens to want
    > exactly the amount provided by an equal share)
    > will get the amount they want or need;

    Give them a resource that is interchangeable with every other resources, like say a currency..

    Then you will reach efficiency, with those having too much for their needs can donate it to to those who want more.

    Assuming those who want more can provide a good reason / argument why they should have it over anyone else who wants it..

    This may well encourage folk to give money to worthy causes and not just to someone who wants their own jet..

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    631
    Why every time I hear a Libertarian speak, I get this?

    My property, my stuff! Keep your bloody hands off my Money! Dangnabbit !!

    It seems to me that an ideology that focuses on the MEEE to much.... might run in to a few problems.

    Also the question of are there Poor Libertarians out there is quite revealing, No? I mean it's obvious why someone of upper-class might be a Libertarian but how about someone in the Lower-Class being a Libertarian?

    Shouldn't as a society we be taking cues from the Lower rungs of the Economic spectrum? Wouldn't what they have to say be more telling on how our Socioeconomic landscape is impacting the whole Class sphere? I mean the Upper-Class focus on what they have so we know that. But the Lower-Class are actually dancing with the game of actual survival so it seems to me they would have the most telling input on our Economic Failures and how to address them...

    But paradoxically I think there could be poor people who believe in Libertarianism. They might just have some basic understanding of how it affects them like centering on the Freedom or the Limited Gov part. In that case who wouldn't be one right.
    droneBEE and YouTuber like this.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northwest Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,749
    @ Neil...sorry, Bro, you cannot convince me that there's anything of value within Libertarianism...'Been There, Done That'.....

    They don't believe in SHARING....and that's my personal 'line in the sand' for any ideology....

    Seems there's Lots of misunderstanding around Semantics AGAIN! ...a common occurrence between us sometimes, no?

    I've not 'hesitated' on calling out anything, anyone or any ideologies that I'm aware of...(Thought you knew me better).....and I still refuse to accept any infringement on my 'freedom to live the life I choose'.....

    That feeling isn't one just held by Libertarians, ya know?


    ....and YES.....I have a strong desire to know 'where' people get their ideas from...so, during most any conversation I don't/won't hesitate to ask someone (s) where, what, and who they are listening to....and will often present another perspective, one not known before...or Not ....I've heard it's called conversation


    TBH; its the "Labels" themselves that I find obtuse, intrusive and way too often divisive in scope and purpose.... but its also something all humans seem to do.....labeling everything....regardless of the fit
    Ernest and YouTuber like this.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
web statistics
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1