4 ms·

First, "deeply conservative" and "libertarian" aren't freely interchangeable. Second, it's a quite small branch of libertarianism that doesn't recognise any ro

First, "deeply conservative" and "libertarian" aren't freely interchangeable. Second, it's a quite small branch of libertarianism that doesn't recognise any role for the state (and thus, taxation) at all - and the one they do recognise is mostly concerned with security.

bane 13y ago
Something I've learned over the years is that there are a tremendous number of highly different personal philosophies that call themselves "conservative" or "libertarian" that share only the loosest similarities, but the people who self-identify these ways also seem to comfortably self-group and display similar behavior and thought patterns. This is regardless of the textbook definitions of what these philosophies should, in the normative sense, be. For example, if you ask somebody of any of these various personal philosophies, regardless of what the textbook definition is, to self identify, they'll say "conservative" or "libertarian" and often they'll self-identify as both...and their Facebook feeds will be clogged with endless anti-Obama anti-Government pro-gun patriotic religious posts sprinkled with quotes from the Constitution and reposts from Libertarian Girl, Fox, the NRA their favorite ultra-conservative or libertarian congressperson and then their occupation will be listed as "Department of..." or "<insert Fed Contractor>". So folks definitely self-group and self-select and self-identify with these labels even if by some strict definition it doesn't make any sense. And I guess that's what my point is, I run into people like this who've fundamentally constructed an anti-government world view that simply doesn't make any sense internally or externally...and here, in this area, it's shockingly common among civil servants and federal contractors and I find this pattern curious.
- arethuza 13y ago
  Reminds me of the time, years ago, when I was berated by some chap sitting across from me at a wedding reception for "living off the taxpayer" as I hold him I was a researcher doing a PhD. It was much later I realized that he had said he was a criminal laywer and therefore here in the UK his main source of income would have been Legal Aid - paid for by the tax payer. [NB He was really quite staggeringly rude - probably one of the few times I have considered punching someone. Fortunately, even here in Scotland, thumping someone during a wedding lunch is frowned on, you do that at the dance later, where it is practically a tradition].
- javert 13y ago
  Not Objectivists. Others call us "libertarians," but we generally reject that. Because we don't agree with the people you're talking about on anything except politics, and where we agree, it's for different reasons. tl;dr stupid arguments make good causes look stupid.
- jeremyt 13y ago
  I'm going to take you at your word that you're actually curious. I think you're seeing hypocrisy here when there is really a lot less in reality. People who are in favor of a certain outcome have no obligation to act as if that outcome has already come to pass. This is why I don't give liberals a hard time because they are in favor of higher taxes but don't voluntarily pay higher taxes themselves. First of all, most conservatives/libertarians are in favor of a smaller government, but smaller doesn't mean nonexistent. There are often large swaths of the government that they are in fact in favor of, and defense is one of them. I would be more surprised if these type of people that you're observing worked in places like the EPA, the Department of Education, and other things that the worldview opposes. But even if… One can't just concede the playing field to the other side. If there is to be an EPA or Department of Education, been all things being equal it's better to have some conservative/libertarian people working there to keep things from getting out of control.
  - bane 13y ago
    > I'm going to take you at your word that you're actually curious. I actually do find it curious, but frustrating. I have a great many friends, who I quite like in normal face-to-face interaction, who I've FB friended, and found I had to unfollow their feeds because in private they turn into rabid ideologues...from every part of the political spectrum. In this case I'm isolating conservative/libertarian folks, but I see similar kinds of things from people in various liberal parts of the spectrum as well...endless huffington post, MSNBC and planned parenthood links or whatever. > People who are in favor of a certain outcome have no obligation to act as if that outcome has already come to pass. Yeah that's true in theory. But it can get out of control. It's like attending a rally about having too many strip clubs in your neighborhood, then chilling out after the rally in your local neighborhood strip club. It's not like there isn't a large, thriving, private, non-government sector in the U.S. that they could be employing their skills at. > all things being equal it's better to have some conservative/libertarian people working there to keep things from getting out of control What would concern me is people who fundamentally don't believe their job should exist because it's a waste of resources, simply not doing a good job.
    - 13y ago
- ctdonath 13y ago
  Your interpretation of "anti-government" is misapplied & misguided. Conservatives and libertarians will, when duly prompted and given time to elaborate, give you a detailed description of how government should exist and function - not the absence of government, but a positive review of how it should be (including a robust military). They're not anarchists by any means. The government they're "anti" is one which confiscates enormous fractions of productive citizen's incomes, spends far beyond that revenue stream incurring impossible-to-repay debt, twists & breaks the guiding verbiage of the constitution granting it powers, and generally is so far from the aforementioned ideal that the temptation is to scrap it all and start over. One can also learn the necessity of functioning within a disliked system, sometimes living off & taking advantage of it, because the dominant system makes preferable alternatives unworkable. Working within that system may also make one painfully aware of what's wrong with it, with circumstantial realities making it impractical to do much other than take the money and bitch about it on Facebook. Hey, there's plenty of people who hate their jobs, employers, industry, etc. - regardless of sociopolitical persuasion of both employee and employer.
droopybuns 13y ago
These kinds of discussions highlight an annoying defect in the human condition. We adore taxonomies. From Music to Painting to Architecture to Biology to Software Engineering to Mathematics. Every single discipline depends taxonomies. It's even part of our social foundation. Conversationally, it is critical for many people to map their peers, friends & families to these taxonomies. They seem to need to be able to define you as a conservative, liberal or whatever. Along the way, any sense of true, genuine compassion goes out the window until they interact with you more and find where their modeling isn't correct. Then they redefine their cubbyhole for you, unless you entertain or arouse them. Then you're Truly Unique. So for what it's worth, I appreciate that you're trying to defend a more independent view point, but I argue that doing so on a message board (and in this thread in particular) is utterly futile.
- JonnieCache 13y ago
  As a side point, that fundamental urge to taxonomize is a large part of what zen seeks to overcome. Satori (enlightenment) can be seen as the ultimate discarding of categories: where all distinctions are removed, between the self and others, between the self and the universe, etc. Thus, the self is in fact annihilated altogether. This is one interpretation of the oft-used phrase "one with the universe." Doubtless I've mangled some of the concepts as bit, for which I apologise, but it's unavoidable when discussing zen.
  - droopybuns 13y ago
    Interesting! Thank you for sharing!

bane 13y ago

Something I've learned over the years is that there are a tremendous number of highly different personal philosophies that call themselves "conservative" or "libertarian" that share only the loosest similarities, but the people who self-identify these ways also seem to comfortably self-group and display similar behavior and thought patterns. This is regardless of the textbook definitions of what these philosophies should, in the normative sense, be. For example, if you ask somebody of any of these various personal philosophies, regardless of what the textbook definition is, to self identify, they'll say "conservative" or "libertarian" and often they'll self-identify as both...and their Facebook feeds will be clogged with endless anti-Obama anti-Government pro-gun patriotic religious posts sprinkled with quotes from the Constitution and reposts from Libertarian Girl, Fox, the NRA their favorite ultra-conservative or libertarian congressperson and then their occupation will be listed as "Department of..." or "<insert Fed Contractor>". So folks definitely self-group and self-select and self-identify with these labels even if by some strict definition it doesn't make any sense. And I guess that's what my point is, I run into people like this who've fundamentally constructed an anti-government world view that simply doesn't make any sense internally or externally...and here, in this area, it's shockingly common among civil servants and federal contractors and I find this pattern curious.

arethuza 13y ago
Reminds me of the time, years ago, when I was berated by some chap sitting across from me at a wedding reception for "living off the taxpayer" as I hold him I was a researcher doing a PhD. It was much later I realized that he had said he was a criminal laywer and therefore here in the UK his main source of income would have been Legal Aid - paid for by the tax payer. [NB He was really quite staggeringly rude - probably one of the few times I have considered punching someone. Fortunately, even here in Scotland, thumping someone during a wedding lunch is frowned on, you do that at the dance later, where it is practically a tradition].
javert 13y ago
Not Objectivists. Others call us "libertarians," but we generally reject that. Because we don't agree with the people you're talking about on anything except politics, and where we agree, it's for different reasons. tl;dr stupid arguments make good causes look stupid.
jeremyt 13y ago
I'm going to take you at your word that you're actually curious. I think you're seeing hypocrisy here when there is really a lot less in reality. People who are in favor of a certain outcome have no obligation to act as if that outcome has already come to pass. This is why I don't give liberals a hard time because they are in favor of higher taxes but don't voluntarily pay higher taxes themselves. First of all, most conservatives/libertarians are in favor of a smaller government, but smaller doesn't mean nonexistent. There are often large swaths of the government that they are in fact in favor of, and defense is one of them. I would be more surprised if these type of people that you're observing worked in places like the EPA, the Department of Education, and other things that the worldview opposes. But even if… One can't just concede the playing field to the other side. If there is to be an EPA or Department of Education, been all things being equal it's better to have some conservative/libertarian people working there to keep things from getting out of control.
- bane 13y ago
  > I'm going to take you at your word that you're actually curious. I actually do find it curious, but frustrating. I have a great many friends, who I quite like in normal face-to-face interaction, who I've FB friended, and found I had to unfollow their feeds because in private they turn into rabid ideologues...from every part of the political spectrum. In this case I'm isolating conservative/libertarian folks, but I see similar kinds of things from people in various liberal parts of the spectrum as well...endless huffington post, MSNBC and planned parenthood links or whatever. > People who are in favor of a certain outcome have no obligation to act as if that outcome has already come to pass. Yeah that's true in theory. But it can get out of control. It's like attending a rally about having too many strip clubs in your neighborhood, then chilling out after the rally in your local neighborhood strip club. It's not like there isn't a large, thriving, private, non-government sector in the U.S. that they could be employing their skills at. > all things being equal it's better to have some conservative/libertarian people working there to keep things from getting out of control What would concern me is people who fundamentally don't believe their job should exist because it's a waste of resources, simply not doing a good job.
  - 13y ago
ctdonath 13y ago
Your interpretation of "anti-government" is misapplied & misguided. Conservatives and libertarians will, when duly prompted and given time to elaborate, give you a detailed description of how government should exist and function - not the absence of government, but a positive review of how it should be (including a robust military). They're not anarchists by any means. The government they're "anti" is one which confiscates enormous fractions of productive citizen's incomes, spends far beyond that revenue stream incurring impossible-to-repay debt, twists & breaks the guiding verbiage of the constitution granting it powers, and generally is so far from the aforementioned ideal that the temptation is to scrap it all and start over. One can also learn the necessity of functioning within a disliked system, sometimes living off & taking advantage of it, because the dominant system makes preferable alternatives unworkable. Working within that system may also make one painfully aware of what's wrong with it, with circumstantial realities making it impractical to do much other than take the money and bitch about it on Facebook. Hey, there's plenty of people who hate their jobs, employers, industry, etc. - regardless of sociopolitical persuasion of both employee and employer.

droopybuns 13y ago

These kinds of discussions highlight an annoying defect in the human condition. We adore taxonomies. From Music to Painting to Architecture to Biology to Software Engineering to Mathematics. Every single discipline depends taxonomies. It's even part of our social foundation. Conversationally, it is critical for many people to map their peers, friends & families to these taxonomies. They seem to need to be able to define you as a conservative, liberal or whatever. Along the way, any sense of true, genuine compassion goes out the window until they interact with you more and find where their modeling isn't correct. Then they redefine their cubbyhole for you, unless you entertain or arouse them. Then you're Truly Unique. So for what it's worth, I appreciate that you're trying to defend a more independent view point, but I argue that doing so on a message board (and in this thread in particular) is utterly futile.

JonnieCache 13y ago
As a side point, that fundamental urge to taxonomize is a large part of what zen seeks to overcome. Satori (enlightenment) can be seen as the ultimate discarding of categories: where all distinctions are removed, between the self and others, between the self and the universe, etc. Thus, the self is in fact annihilated altogether. This is one interpretation of the oft-used phrase "one with the universe." Doubtless I've mangled some of the concepts as bit, for which I apologise, but it's unavoidable when discussing zen.
- droopybuns 13y ago
  Interesting! Thank you for sharing!