5 ms·

What libertarians would probably want first in Iraq is to let ethnic and religious groups to have the control of their own territory and abolish or weaken the c

by afsina 9y ago

What libertarians would probably want first in Iraq is to let ethnic and religious groups to have the control of their own territory and abolish or weaken the central government as much as possible. Honestly this approach would at least alleviate the current turmoil there. Consider Syria, Iraq and Yemen for this.

afpx 9y ago
I don't know enough about libertarianism, to be honest. (I'm not sure many people do.) But, is libertarianism something that only works when all tenets are followed? Or, does it work in piecemeal and incrementally? Like, for example, is there a priority list of things that should be implemented first and the set of measurable, expected results? This is probably not the best place to ask these types of questions, but 'libertarianism' seems to come up on here so often, I had to ask.
- afsina 9y ago
  Perhaps it is better to read some introductory literature on this. Rothbard - Hoppe, Rand or Nozick (All are different schools in libertarian thought AFAIK)
dragonwriter 9y ago
> What libertarians would probably want first in Iraq is to let ethnic and religious groups to have the control of their own territory and abolish or weaken the central government as much as possible. Except for the Kurds, that doesn't seem to be want the groups in Iraq want. I wasn't aware that libertarians were generally in favor of imposed religious- and/or ethnicity-based balkanization against the will of the people. I suspect that would actually work against libertarianism, also, because greater ideological uniformity in the constituency would support more authoritarian government (light touch is a way of accommodating divergent interests which would be eliminated).
- Pica_soO 9y ago
  Eh all other groups want the whole country and the other groups pressed to geno-cidere? Thats not a ideology thing, that is more a "Real-Politics" that worked with pakistan and india - kind of approach.
- afsina 9y ago
  AFAIK, Libertarians are not Utopians. If there is a choice, they prefer decentralization and secession. Underlying reason is not important (Ethnic and religious, or ideological). Besides, from what I know, in large sovereign states and large democracies minority or ruled ethnic and religious groups always suffer. Because they will be imposed the ruling groups culture, language and curriculum. If they want, they should have at least a degree of self control and identity.
pjc50 9y ago
> let ethnic and religious groups to have the control of their own territory This is literally what ethnic cleansing means, and is of course the opposite of any kind of liberty - it creates a place where you can't walk down the street without being of the right ethnicity/religion.
- afsina 9y ago
  Oh that is such a stretch. Ethnic cleansing occurred in large, well established states already. "as small as possible" can go much smaller than what you have in mind.
- afsina 9y ago
  Are implying that, for example, if Catalonia, Bask or Scotland become a country situation will be ripe for killing Spanish or English man living there?
  - pjc50 9y ago
    "ethnic and religious groups" are the key words there. This is essentially what had to be dismantled in Northern Ireland - it was under the control of one "group" usually defined as Protestant. Transferring it to a situation under human rights law where all religions could live with equal protection under the law (including protection from the state and police by means of human rights law) was critical to ending the conflict. None of the Catalan, Basque (this is the usual English spelling, are you perhaps thinking of the Russian Басков?) or Scottish independence movements have ethnic cleansing ambitions, although these are usually attributed to them by their enemies. Construction and definition of a nation state is a complex issue not reducible to glib remarks about "liberty".
    - afsina 9y ago
      If you ask me, situation with norther Ireland is not really solved. Same for Quebec or heck Belgium or Italy. If one group have ethnic cleansing ambitions they will do it anyway. This whole "equal protection and human rights" rhetoric is laughable where on group seriously oppresses other. It is better off that all groups live in more autonomy and if one is not happy, moving to another place is better than living under threat. Of course, this is not the "liberty" people are longing for, but it is the preferable choice.
driverdan 9y ago
Libertarians are anti-interventionist. They wouldn't have invaded Iraq and wouldn't have manipulated their government.
- afsina 9y ago
  Yes, that is why I used the word "want" not "do".

by afsina 9y ago

afpx 9y ago

I don't know enough about libertarianism, to be honest. (I'm not sure many people do.) But, is libertarianism something that only works when all tenets are followed? Or, does it work in piecemeal and incrementally? Like, for example, is there a priority list of things that should be implemented first and the set of measurable, expected results? This is probably not the best place to ask these types of questions, but 'libertarianism' seems to come up on here so often, I had to ask.

afsina 9y ago
Perhaps it is better to read some introductory literature on this. Rothbard - Hoppe, Rand or Nozick (All are different schools in libertarian thought AFAIK)

dragonwriter 9y ago

> What libertarians would probably want first in Iraq is to let ethnic and religious groups to have the control of their own territory and abolish or weaken the central government as much as possible. Except for the Kurds, that doesn't seem to be want the groups in Iraq want. I wasn't aware that libertarians were generally in favor of imposed religious- and/or ethnicity-based balkanization against the will of the people. I suspect that would actually work against libertarianism, also, because greater ideological uniformity in the constituency would support more authoritarian government (light touch is a way of accommodating divergent interests which would be eliminated).

Pica_soO 9y ago
Eh all other groups want the whole country and the other groups pressed to geno-cidere? Thats not a ideology thing, that is more a "Real-Politics" that worked with pakistan and india - kind of approach.
afsina 9y ago
AFAIK, Libertarians are not Utopians. If there is a choice, they prefer decentralization and secession. Underlying reason is not important (Ethnic and religious, or ideological). Besides, from what I know, in large sovereign states and large democracies minority or ruled ethnic and religious groups always suffer. Because they will be imposed the ruling groups culture, language and curriculum. If they want, they should have at least a degree of self control and identity.

pjc50 9y ago

> let ethnic and religious groups to have the control of their own territory This is literally what ethnic cleansing means, and is of course the opposite of any kind of liberty - it creates a place where you can't walk down the street without being of the right ethnicity/religion.

afsina 9y ago
Oh that is such a stretch. Ethnic cleansing occurred in large, well established states already. "as small as possible" can go much smaller than what you have in mind.
afsina 9y ago
Are implying that, for example, if Catalonia, Bask or Scotland become a country situation will be ripe for killing Spanish or English man living there?
- pjc50 9y ago
  "ethnic and religious groups" are the key words there. This is essentially what had to be dismantled in Northern Ireland - it was under the control of one "group" usually defined as Protestant. Transferring it to a situation under human rights law where all religions could live with equal protection under the law (including protection from the state and police by means of human rights law) was critical to ending the conflict. None of the Catalan, Basque (this is the usual English spelling, are you perhaps thinking of the Russian Басков?) or Scottish independence movements have ethnic cleansing ambitions, although these are usually attributed to them by their enemies. Construction and definition of a nation state is a complex issue not reducible to glib remarks about "liberty".
  - afsina 9y ago
    If you ask me, situation with norther Ireland is not really solved. Same for Quebec or heck Belgium or Italy. If one group have ethnic cleansing ambitions they will do it anyway. This whole "equal protection and human rights" rhetoric is laughable where on group seriously oppresses other. It is better off that all groups live in more autonomy and if one is not happy, moving to another place is better than living under threat. Of course, this is not the "liberty" people are longing for, but it is the preferable choice.

driverdan 9y ago

Libertarians are anti-interventionist. They wouldn't have invaded Iraq and wouldn't have manipulated their government.

afsina 9y ago
Yes, that is why I used the word "want" not "do".