Who in here can tell me exactly what the libertarian party is about?

[mrcheerful]

From my researching I learned they were started in 1971 when Nixon put a price freeze on american goods. I also learned that they were started by so called moderate and liberal republicans. I am dealing with a libertarian who is busy trying to court disgruntled republicans and a few democratic voters by telling them the glories of the libertarian party.

So far from what I read and from what this guy says, they are trying to make the party sound like a cross between pubs and dems. To be honest, I don't blindly trust any political party to do everything they say they will do. Thats impossible, after all they are only human and things happen beyound their control. Why is it so many are willing to take a political party at their word they are going to do the right thing. Hitler, Mao, and Stalin come to mind when I here this guy sprout off about the libertarian party. I know I will remain stead fast a democratic voter. I'm just wondering why so many that got burned over shrub are now willing to put all their faith in another political party thats made up of mostly disgruntled republicans, their views haven't changed they seem to be looking for a new leader to follow.

[Buzz Clik]

1. You can visit their websites to get their basic values, but...

The bottom line is that Libertarians love to stand on the sidelines throwing stuff at the party (parties) in charge, hide behind selected parts of the Constitution, and assume no responsibility for anything. Essentially, they are too lazy and too cowardly to invoke any change. There are exceptions to this, but they are very rare.

[Cosmocat]

Yep ...

That is pretty much my impression ... I call them republican's in jackals clothing ... They were full out behind this crew until the last year or so, and when it became all too clear they are an undeniable and ummitigated disaster, NOW are doing the stradling the middle thing ... They want to knock democrats left and right, but don't want to own the crap that goes along with being a republican today ...

[blondeatlast]

18. Sums up my Libertarian friends in a nutshell. nt

[Iris]

29. you forgot that there theories

have never been tested and would probably not work even if they were.

[Love Bug]

2. Republicans who like to smoke dope

[Tesha]

28. You beat me to it. (NT)

[FormerDittoHead]

32. Late to the game. Says it all. n/t

[notadmblnd]

3. I've heard libertarians refered to , simply as Republicans who smoke pot.

nt

[schmuls]

4. Can someone here give a real answer instead of a smart assed

one? I would like to know myself.

[Buzz Clik]

15. Google is your friend.

If you want an unfiltered answer, go to the source. http://www.lp.org/

Educate yourself.

[FormerDittoHead]

35. "Libertarian" is a catch-all used to describe many different things...

Here at DU, I got into a knife fight with a "Libertarian", as I asked her, if I remember, if she could explain how under a libertarian government, businesses wouldn't become monopolies, how unorganized workers could ever gain parity in a relationship with their employer, etc, etc, etc.

The reply listed OVER TWELVE "TYPES" OF LIBERTARIANS, depending upon the level of government in personal life (drugs) economy and commerce, national defense, enviornmental policy, foreign affairs and policy, etc....

The bottom line is that ANY TIME, FOR ANY SUBJECT, ANY LIBERTARIAN will be able to say, "Oh, I'm not THAT kind of Libertarian!"...

So you can wikipedia libertarian, but get this: there is no such "thing" (as in one) as a libertarian...

[Telly Savalas]

44. The common thread is this:

a Libertarian is somebody who believes government is evil except when it's doing something they agree with. Libertarianism more a form of moral posturing than it is a coherent political philosophy.

[DuaneBidoux]

58. Libertarians

They believe essentially in NO government. Unlike the right who wants to have influence over your bedroom life and other things you do in the privacy of your own room or the Democrats who believe in things like Universal Healthcare and Public Schools, they are for nothing that either the left or right is for. They do not believe we should EVER fight abroad for any reason (they would have been against saving the Jews in WWII), they would eliminate public schools, any government program that helps anyone (just name it). They barely even believe the government should defend the country).

[SmokingJacket]

5. My take on the libertarians is that they are against any kind of

group responsibility -- against taxes, against "anti-stupidity" laws like helmet laws, against welfare and social security, against gun control and drug laws, etc. They like to say they're all about personal freedom and responsibility.

I agree with them when it comes to some things, like drug laws. I too am in favor of individual freedom. BUT... a country that I want to live in will require certain things of its citizens, like contributing to infrastructure and a social safety net.

For me, it's about a balance between individual freedom and social responsibility, and the Democratic Party emodies that balance most closely, at the moment.

I'd hate to live in a country where idiots could shoot off AK47s in the city limits, you have to pay to drive on privately owned city streets, the elderly have to live off their savings or they're shit outta luck, etc.

[leftofthedial]

6. basically, it means that my property

is more important than your life.

[IdaBriggs]

7. They are the ultimate "small government" party. They believe in

"private enterprise" to the exclusion of common sense. For example, one local candidate running for a position as Trustee for a public University stated that his goal was to DISMANTLE the University, and SELL IT TO PRIVATE CONCERNS. (Insert me banging my head on a brick wall here -- what an idiot!) They think "every man for himself" (as in, No Police) is a good way to go. They don't like "crazy" government institutions like your local Water Department (because they believe people should independently get their own clean water, or pay private business for it).

The ones I know *personally* are definitely in the whack job category. I used to be friendly with a guy who ran for Senate in Michigan. He thought Waco was a government conspiracy, and Ruby Ridge was the ultimate invasion. I told him the folks who died at Waco deserved it because they were assisting a pedophile in molesting children (when they were "marrying" their ten year olds to their cult leader), and that folks with tons of guns who didn't obey the law didn't get a lot of sympathy when bad things happened to them. We haven't really been "friendly" since, especially since he backstabbed me when I recommended him for a job.

Basically, if you think of yourself as a "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" type of person who doesn't like public schools, public roads, guaranteed clean drinking water, or a social safety net for you or yours, its a great party. If however, you are one of the "sane" people who believes that we're all better off if we work together for the common good, then you probably aren't a Libertarian (as near as I understand the philosophy based on the stuff I've learned from the "Libertarians" around me.) They really seem to yearn for the days of the "Old West," while skipping out on the things like women and children being unable to protect themselves from vermin, because they are Big Brawny Men Folk who believe in Private Enterprise as the Answer to Everything -- and if you can't protect yourself from a Big Company, well, then, you deserve to suffer.

:shrug:

[mrcheerful]

11. Ok I was right

What you just said fits this guy to a T. He is a big brawny guy who insists that his avater is a pic of himself holding an AK-47 with an american flag behing him and you can make out the words don't thread on me written on the flag. Thanks, that was what my impression was about the libertarians, they are just as bad as their neo con counter parts. Which would explain why a conserative conserative republican who thinks shrub betrayed him is so ready to join them.

[skipos]

8. Do Libertarians like the way Hoover handled the great depression?

I always wondered that.

[135th]

17. Yes and No.

The agree with trickle down economics, and don't believe FDR did anything to help the depression. On the other hand, many see Hoover as a spineless liberal trying to pass FDR style social net policies but to weak to do so. That later part is actually true (minus the spineless liberal slander) but the school ciriculum is so dumbed down most people don't know it.

Probably the single funniest Libertarian thing I have ever seen was an anti-FDR rap. I'll try to dig it up and post it, it is hysterical in its own sick way.

[endarkenment]

9. Propertarian anarchists (right anarchism).

One of the seminal works in their ideology is ROBERT NOZICK, ANARCHY STATE & UTOPIA http://www.humanities.mq.edu.au/Ockham/y64l16.html. Murray Rothbard is the other big brain of propertarian anarchism.

The general idea is that the state should be reduced to protecting property rights (hence my use of the term 'propertarian'.) They have all sorts of rationalizations for why property rights are the only 'natural rights' that exist. The ideology, whatever its theoretical merits, ends up enabling corporate feudalism, i.e. corporations replace the state as the state is reduced in power. The fact that corporations are completely undemocratic while the state (in a constitutional republic) is at least on paper a democratic institution does not bother the propertarians and they have all sorts of reasonable sounding explanations for why corporate feudalism (which of course they deny would be the logical result of their theory of government) would not be corporate feudalism.

The Republican Party co-opts Libertarian rhetoric spewing out its maxims (taxes are theft, government can do no good, etc) deliberately in order to appeal to what some here have referred to as 'Republicans who smoke pot'. While that answer is indeed 'smart ass', it does make a good point.

[blm]

10. Built in excuse for their basic selfishness.

.

[lonehalf]

12. They are just like ...

...any other political party.

They want to get their candidates elected.

But they aren't very successful.

And those Libertarians I know are the most intolerant people I have ever seen.

In my North Georgia county we have a Democrat running for office on what she calls "Libertarian principles".

When asked to explain she stutters a lot, but "smaller government" seems to be her talking point.

[mcscajun]

13. Bottom line: Fiscally conservative (practically in the Grover Norquist

camp on this one) and Socially Liberal (leave what goes on in peoples' bedrooms alone, let tobacco smokers alone, leave me to make my own choices and let me grow/smoke pot).

They believe that government's only function is defense of life and property; everything else is intrusive into personal liberties. Of course, defense of life and property means that your personal liberties end when they intrude on another's.

Bill Maher is an avowed Libertarian, when he bothers to acknowledge any political position.

[Lasher]

14. Libertarians have different beliefs, just like Democrats do

I have also struggled to understand what libertarians are all about, with some success. Adding to the confusion, libertarians have sometimes been referred to as classical liberals. This is not consistent with common understanding of the term today. Some beliefs are commonly held by some libertarians and some liberals (little or no prosecution for victimless crimes, for example), but the differences far outweigh similarities.

They believe that individuals should be free to do whatever they wish with their person or property, as long as they do not infringe on the same liberty of others. There are extremes. Anarchists favor no governmental constraints at all, based on the assumption that rulers and laws are unnecessary because in the absence of government individuals will naturally form self-governing social bonds and rules. In contrast, Big-L-Libertarians consider government necessary for the sole purpose of protecting the rights of the people. This includes protecting people and their property from the criminal acts of others, as well as providing for national defense.

If you ever wanted to find a bunch of people who think their ideologies are self-justifying, look no further. Perhaps the most foolish aspect of this ideology is that they seem to think that removing governmental controls would mean corresponding power would not be assumed by others. If police protection were eliminated, for example, groups of individuals would certainly band together to provide the same thing for themselves. And without government regulation by agencies such as the FDA, corporations and other hucksters would quickly assume powers over us all that are frightful to imagine.

Good reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism

[TheDonkey]

16. I agree, It does vary widely what (L)'s are about.

I've come across many Republican who are embarassed by that title who call themselves Libertarian.
For the most part I found the ideology reckless and incomplete.


For example, what would an (L) have to say about the USDA?

[Lasher]

19. Most would want to shut the USDA down.

No thought to the consequences, everything will be fine as long as they don't have to pay any taxes. Just like you say, reckless and incomplete.

[Iris]

39. and spinach would be the least of our problems. . . n/t

[izzybeans]

20. Acquiescing to corporate power. You know because liberty

is found in a "market" alongside magical fairies.

[BoneDaddy]

21. To quote Bill Maher

"Libertarians are republicans who like to smoke pot"

[Stinky The Clown]

22. Reduce the national debt and legalize dope

That's about it.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

23. Broadly speaking, they're socially liberal and economically conservative.

Although that's not a hard and fast guide.

Their philosophy is basically "The law of the Jungle": Government is there to ensure a level playing field (although not to ensure equal starting positions), and beyond that if you fail it's your own fault.

On some issues - drugs, for example - they're more liberal than most Democrats or even than most DUers; on others - taxation and the economy, economic subsidies - they're further right than the Republicans.

It's a consistent and clear philosophy, I think - more so than either liberalism or conservatism - but not a terribly attractive one.

[Iris]

30. "It's a consistent and clear philosophy"

consistent and clear describes the moral compass of a 12 year old - black and white thinking.

Extremely immature and when an adult continues to think this way, it's just plain lazy and selfish.

[GoneOffShore]

33. Usually the "libertarian" Threads

are quickly "mobbed" by the DU'ers that are of that bent. Are they all off cleaning their AK-47's tonight?


I love your definition by the way.

[Iris]

36. yes

I've noticed a distinct silence from that realm!

Glad you like the definition!

[GoneOffShore]

38. Why do you suppose they're silent?

Usually they're in with both feet, like Manchester United supporters after a Birmingham City win.

Have they all gone to ground?

[Iris]

40. no clue.

It's really weird. Wasn't there some big stink a while back about libertarians not really fitting in here? Or that they at least shouldn't shout over more mainstream Democrats? (Heck, I'm not even a mainstream Democrat, but they still shouted over me!)

[135th]

45. This is probably the best description posted yet.

I'm suprised that so many people are talking about Libertarians coming out of the woodworks here, as they disagree with virtually all progressive issues. I'm also suprised by the level of Libertarian hate here; yes they are conservatives, but most hate Republicans and kind of get off on voting for their unelectable candidates. Their beliefs might be the polar opposite of what is held here, but they are mostly harmless as far as political challengers go.

Libertarians can be pretty hilariously uncompromising on their issues. A few years ago they almost managed to get a marijuana legalization referendum passed (can't recall the state), but refused to compromise on taxing the drug and the referendum collapsed.

[Iris]

48. Neal Boortz, radio talk show host in Atlanta, is a Libertarian.

If you think they are harmless, try living in my state for a while.

[Don1]

51. I used to believe the same thing.

You said that libertarianism is consistent. I considered this once as a possibility and have come to the conclusion that it actually is not consistent at all. The core of libertarian philosophy is that no person should be abused of their rights. Now, one of their big focuses is that holding on to personal wealth is a right. However, they ignore that this "right" affects other people. When someone has an extreme amount of wealth, buying a gold-plated air-conditioned doghouse for example, that is sort of a passive abuse against poor people who could be using that money for survival and a better quality life. Now, even worse, many of those with extreme wealth tend to hoard it and block others from succeeding and that is direct abuse. The Libertarian philosophy is inconsistent because it defends the right of those with money but it does not defend the poor from abuse by those people.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

52. While the philosophy you outline there may not be consistent,

I don't think it's the one that libertarians hold.

The core of libertarian belief, I think, is that any form of active interference in somebody else's life without their consent is wrong.

Not merely should government not be pushing people into rivers, libertarians question even whether it should be pulling them out.

Libertarianism isn't inconsistent in the way whay you outline is, because libertarians specifically don't support "negative freedoms" like freedom from poverty.

[Don1]

57. Poverty is not always a "negative freedom"

That was half the point of what I wrote. The other half of what I wrote is that Libertarians focus on "positive freedoms." Why the double standard? It is because they want to believe that money is a good thing. That is all.

[Luminous Animal]

24. The best definition I've found so far.

That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves. ~ Kim Stanley Robinson.

[AtomicKitten]

25. Libertarians are Republicans that smoke pot.

eom

[sendero]

26. Libertarians..

... folks whose thought processes are less than deep, but who are confident that in a dog-eat-dog world they would come out on top.

Most of them better hope it never happens (Libertarian rule) because they'd be the first to be subsumed.

[treestar]

54. Well in all fairness that may be true but they also think the

rising tide lifts all boats and that whoever is poor today would be better off and have more under their ideal of the state.

[sendero]

59. They think that.

.... because as I said, their thoughts don't run very deep.

[AX10]

27. A Libertarian is a dishonest Republican....

and a Republican is a dishonest Libertarian.

[lwcon]

31. It's in the eye of the beholder

Methinks that "libertarian" is the most inconsistently defined word this side of "emo," which renders it well-nigh useless.

It can mean:

* I'm an independent thinker who cherry-picks the best parts of right- and left-wing politics
* I hate any sort of government or governance
* I'm a Republican in sheep's clothing (see also: "Independent")
* I'm a disgruntled Democrat
* I'm attracted to fringe candidates

So, when one dons the term "Libertarian," one selects the meaning that suits him or her, but conveys no clear identity to the beholder.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

34. This is the best summary I've seen yet. I still feel the label is used

much more often by RWers and Repub leaners, usually young, who don't want the uncool Cheneyesque geezer connotation of calling themselves Republicans.

[lwcon]

37. I also tend to see it leaning rightward, but...

... I was in a discussion on a popular blog a few months back and all the Dems seemed to think the Libertarians were their brethren, which I think goes to show how slippery the term really is.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

41. I think it's less of a useful political label than a way for the person

assuming this label to say "hey lookit me, I'm a MAVERICK, a FREE THINKER, I defy being labelled!"

[lwcon]

42. Bingo! n/t

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[Lydia Leftcoast]

43. They're basically selfish people who believe in three principles:

1) Nothing is more important than me and my money--not the common good, not the environment, not anyone else's needs

2) I wanna do what I wanna do when I wanna do it

3) No government except the army and the police, because we're going to need them to protect me from all the people who are pissed off by 1) and 2)

[135th]

46. Anyone catch The Fountainhead on TV last night?

It's probably the most unapologetically Libertarian movie ever made, kind of a funny coincidence it played so close to this thread. It's ok, though the book is much, much better. Seeing the film is like reading 2/3 of the book on speed.

[silverweb]

47. I have a family member who is a rabid Libertarian.

I can sum up their "philosophy" in three words: ME, ME, ME!

This website provides a wealth of information about the whole range of Libertarian politics, beliefs, and fallacies: http://world.std.com/~mhuben/libindex.html

[Ian David]

49. Libertarians are just Republicans who smoke pot. n/t

[Don1]

50. Some Libertarians are okay actually.

The national party is for a withdrawal from Iraq and a complete repeal of the Patriot Act. Sounds good, doesn't it? The problem comes though from Libertarians' views on economic policy. The believe in the destruction of social programs and its replacement by private charities. Note that they are also against corporate welfare, i.e. corporate subsidies from the government. Many of these guys do not believe in taxes at all. This is because they think that any one person can do pretty much whatever he wants, including abusing people through economic hoarding. They generally think of money as good-natured and they focus way too much on one's personal wealth as a right and pay no attention to how that type of hoarding and entrenchment of power by a financial elite can abuse other people of their rights.

Now, I have a friend who is a Libertarian, too. He is for withdrawal from Iraq and a repeal of the Patriot Act. He is also for economic safety net type programs, like welfare. Though he views them as abuse against those with money, he thinks they are a necessary evil. He is also for a flat tax so that the "big government" of the IRS and overly bureaucratic tax code would be diminished in size. He cannot wait until Bush is out of office. He really is a good guy, though I disagree with him on some economic points.

[NeedleCast]

53. Libertarians

Like just about any party, there are a wide range of libertarians. Most of them (like myself) fall into the fiscally conservative but socially liberal group. As a person who usually votes libertarian (or for any third party if available), I can only speak for me but:

Taxes: I have no problem with taxes and understand the need for them. However, I support an end to "hidden" taxes. I'd like to see a simple, tierd income tax (rich carry a higher tax burden than the poor). By hidden tax, I'm refering to things like gas taxes, toll roads, sales taxes (this one is not so hidden), etc.) My chief problem with hidden taxes is that they do not hold politicians accountable. We shriek when our taxes get raised (or when they get cut for the rich) but when the local toll highway increases rates by a quarter, we don't hear much about it. How many people do you think know what they pay in tax on a gallon of gas (beyond the sales tax)? Inheritance tax...same thing. It's the Double Jeapordy of taxes. You get taxed on the income, you (probably) get a sales tax on the things you buy with your income. If those things are property, you get taxed on it (probably anually) and when you die, you taxed on it all again.

Welfare/Social Security: I am not at all against these things, I just beleive they could be run better (and in some cases, much better). As a contractor to the federal government (DoJ) I know just how badly the government can run things. Do I have a solution? No, not really. I think there needs to be a lot more oversight of the welfare system and that abuses of it should be pursued. When I see someone drive up to a grocery store in a convertible mustang GT and pay for 300 dollars of groceries in food stamps, it clues me in that there is an issue. I also have issues with "continual mistakes," for example, people who continue to have children despite the fact that they're on welfare. I understand that sometimes people fall on hard times and need help but there are also some people who are stupid or just don't care, and I don't like paying their way.

Control (stupidity) Laws: Generally agains these, because the more power we give government to legislate our lives, the happier they are. I think this applies to both major parties (but definatly more to authoritarian leaning republicans like the ones in office now). I take a lot of these on an individual basis though. I'm all for child saftey seats, but it's getting a little silly. I believe in some states you have to be eight years old before they let you out of the child seat. As a specific example, I am against motorcycle helmet laws, but if you break your melon open, don't expect me to pay to keep you on life support for 30 years. I look at an organization like MADD (Mothers against Drunk Driving) and see an organization that had a great idea and accomplished it's goal(s) (stricter DUI laws/punishments) but, because it didn't have anywhere to go after accomplishing it's mission, has now, basically, become the voice of prohibition.

Big biz/corporations: I support big businesses for the most part, however I would support much stricter penalties for corporations and their boards that violate laws, especially if those violations that cause harm to their employees. There are some large corporations out there (Virgin-Atlantic, for example) that show that they can be both a good business and a source of philanthropy. Corporations provide lots of jobs and they can be a powerful force of "good," but when corporate (or individual) greed are allowed to run rampant, they do just the opposite.

Just a sample of things I saw mentioned here. I'm happy to entertain questions on other issues.

[bluedogyellowdog]

55. In a nutshell...

They will talk about their party as a cross between Dems and Repubs, or as economically conservative and socially liberal, or as "Republicans who are gay and smoke pot".

What they really are in practice is economically ultra-right and socially ultra-left. So much so that they qualify as True Believers. Many who are initially attracted thinking they might be a common sense alternative to the major parties find out otherwise the hard way. They tend to believe the salvation of the world depends on everyone adopting every point in their platform (which amounts to No Government is Good Government on all issues all the time), and they like to shove the writings of Ludwig von Mises and Ayn Rand down your throat. In that sense they are really no different from Lenin-thumping Communists or Bible-thumping fundamentalist Christians.

They have a survey they like to use: "World's Smallest Political Quiz". The quiz is worded in such a way that most people who take it find that they lean libertarian. But leaning libertarian and being a Libertarian True Believer are two very different things.

[DuaneBidoux]

56. Anarchy and everyone for themselves

[Sapere aude]

60. A libertarian knows that the libertarian party will never come to power so

they can say what ever the hell comes to mind and know that they will never have to back it up.


It's like this. Let's invent a new party. The XYZ party. Now let's list everything that is wrong with the world or with this country then say, vote for the XYZ party and all that's wrong will disappear. That is so easy to say because there will never be enough voters willing to vote for the XYZ party to put it in power so they will never have to fix all that's wrong. It's also like the guy that never has to put his money were his mouth is. Big talkers but nothing to show for it.