6 ms·

Libertarian who wants to eliminate public schools and privatize fire departments (though I'm not necessarily as enthusiastic about the latter) reporting for dut

Libertarian who wants to eliminate public schools and privatize fire departments (though I'm not necessarily as enthusiastic about the latter) reporting for duty, sir. I'm afraid it's you who has the limited Beltway understanding of libertarianism. Rand Paul isn't a libertarian and he'd probably gawk at most actual libertarian political theory. He's a states' rights conservative aligned with Old Right ideals (nowadays associated with paleoconservatism). These used to be common, but have been eclipsed by the more warhawking neoconservatives over the past few decades or so. fiscally conservative, in favor of limited government, limited intervention in individual's lives, pro small business None of these things are necessary to libertarianism. Hell, even being socially liberal isn't necessary for some of the more propertarian, extreme Rothbardian interpretations of anarcho-capitalism and the so-called paleolibertarians, like Lew Rockwell.

seanflyon 11y ago
> fiscally conservative, in favor of limited government, limited intervention in individual's lives, pro small business > None of these things are necessary to libertarianism. Could you state what you mean by "libertarianism" because the definition I am used to has "limited intervention in individual's lives" at its heart.
- vezzy-fnord 11y ago
  Various libertarian socialist and left-libertarian movements either reject private property entirely and advocate a common means of production owned by decentralized worker cooperatives, for gradual revolution through democratic worker-controlled labor unions, mutual credit banks that reject traditional conceptions of markets and are instead based on labor theory of value with shared credit pooling, so on and so forth. These would constitute aggression under some right-libertarian interpretations. In certain right-libertarian anarcho-capitalist theories where private property becomes the ultimate foundation of individual sovereignty that trumps all other rights, one may end up in a situation where you have little social mobility from decisions made by adjacent property owners, despite being master of your own dominion.
  - bcheung 11y ago
    I've never heard Libertarianism described that way. This is straight from their web site lp.org. "We, the members of the Libertarian Party, challenge the cult of the omnipotent state and defend the rights of the individual. We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose. Governments throughout history have regularly operated on the opposite principle, that the State has the right to dispose of the lives of individuals and the fruits of their labor. Even within the United States, all political parties other than our own grant to government the right to regulate the lives of individuals and seize the fruits of their labor without their consent. We, on the contrary, deny the right of any government to do these things, and hold that where governments exist, they must not violate the rights of any individual: namely, (1) the right to life -- accordingly we support the prohibition of the initiation of physical force against others; (2) the right to liberty of speech and action -- accordingly we oppose all attempts by government to abridge the freedom of speech and press, as well as government censorship in any form; and (3) the right to property -- accordingly we oppose all government interference with private property, such as confiscation, nationalization, and eminent domain, and support the prohibition of robbery, trespass, fraud, and misrepresentation. Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market." "Libertarians support free markets. We defend the right of individuals to form corporations, cooperatives and other types of entities based on voluntary association. We oppose all forms of government subsidies and bailouts to business, labor, or any other special interest. Government should not compete with private enterprise." "Employment and compensation agreements between private employers and employees are outside the scope of government, and these contracts should not be encumbered by government-mandated benefits or social engineering. We support the right of private employers and employees to choose whether or not to bargain with each other through a labor union. Bargaining should be free of government interference, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain."
closetnerd 11y ago
Not sure I agree with labelling him a paleoconservative since part of the ideology is a growing concern of secularism.

seanflyon 11y ago

> fiscally conservative, in favor of limited government, limited intervention in individual's lives, pro small business > None of these things are necessary to libertarianism. Could you state what you mean by "libertarianism" because the definition I am used to has "limited intervention in individual's lives" at its heart.

vezzy-fnord 11y ago
Various libertarian socialist and left-libertarian movements either reject private property entirely and advocate a common means of production owned by decentralized worker cooperatives, for gradual revolution through democratic worker-controlled labor unions, mutual credit banks that reject traditional conceptions of markets and are instead based on labor theory of value with shared credit pooling, so on and so forth. These would constitute aggression under some right-libertarian interpretations. In certain right-libertarian anarcho-capitalist theories where private property becomes the ultimate foundation of individual sovereignty that trumps all other rights, one may end up in a situation where you have little social mobility from decisions made by adjacent property owners, despite being master of your own dominion.
- bcheung 11y ago
  I've never heard Libertarianism described that way. This is straight from their web site lp.org. "We, the members of the Libertarian Party, challenge the cult of the omnipotent state and defend the rights of the individual. We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose. Governments throughout history have regularly operated on the opposite principle, that the State has the right to dispose of the lives of individuals and the fruits of their labor. Even within the United States, all political parties other than our own grant to government the right to regulate the lives of individuals and seize the fruits of their labor without their consent. We, on the contrary, deny the right of any government to do these things, and hold that where governments exist, they must not violate the rights of any individual: namely, (1) the right to life -- accordingly we support the prohibition of the initiation of physical force against others; (2) the right to liberty of speech and action -- accordingly we oppose all attempts by government to abridge the freedom of speech and press, as well as government censorship in any form; and (3) the right to property -- accordingly we oppose all government interference with private property, such as confiscation, nationalization, and eminent domain, and support the prohibition of robbery, trespass, fraud, and misrepresentation. Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market." "Libertarians support free markets. We defend the right of individuals to form corporations, cooperatives and other types of entities based on voluntary association. We oppose all forms of government subsidies and bailouts to business, labor, or any other special interest. Government should not compete with private enterprise." "Employment and compensation agreements between private employers and employees are outside the scope of government, and these contracts should not be encumbered by government-mandated benefits or social engineering. We support the right of private employers and employees to choose whether or not to bargain with each other through a labor union. Bargaining should be free of government interference, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain."

closetnerd 11y ago

Not sure I agree with labelling him a paleoconservative since part of the ideology is a growing concern of secularism.