Libertarianism is not conservative

xTYBALTx · 03-06-2008, 05:47 PM

First of all, how many conservatives want to legalize prostitution and heroin? How many conservatives are in favor of gay marriage? How many conservatives are in favor of massively increased immigration from places like Mexico? How many conservatives want more pornography to remain legal and available? If you're not convinced just yet, have a gander at the rest of the post.

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

"Syncretic politics involves taking political positions that attempt to reconcile seemingly opposed ideological systems, usually by combining some elements associated with the left with some associated with the right. The term is derived from the older idea of syncretic religion."

"Noted syncretic movements include Fascism, Libertarianism and Producerism. Many lesser-known political syncretisms also exist; examples include the People's Mujahedin of Iran, which combines Marxism and Islamism, Common Course, a Danish political party which blended official communism with anti-immigration sentiments, the National Bolshevik Party of Russia, formed from the union of Leninist and Fascist aesthetics, as well as the Minaret of Freedom Institute, a seemingly unlikely union between Islamism and libertarianism."

"The assassinated Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn and his LPF party are often mentioned as being syncretic, especially by commentators outside the Netherlands, since the LPF combined acceptance of soft drug use and equal rights for homosexuals, seen as rather radical left-liberal positions in most of the world, with a strong stance against immigration, which is usually a right-wing sentiment. Others have categorized the LPF as reactionary liberal and deny its platform constitutes syncretic politics."

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

"Libertarianism is often portrayed as right-wing by non-libertarians in the United States. Under the concept of fusionism, it was proposed that American libertarians ally themselves with traditional conservatives, with whom they have historically had more in common than they do with American liberals, particularly with regard to economic and gun control policies. Such an alliance can be seen in uniting of libertarian and conservative lawyers in the Federalist Society. Others however, call for an alliance between libertarians and civil libertarians in the Democratic party. Many describe libertarians as being "conservative" on economic issues and "liberal" on social issues, so they can find allies in both of the two main parties while remaining distinct from both, especially on the use of state power to solve perceived problems, and constitutional compliance."

**El_Gringo_Grande** · 03-06-2008, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xTYBALTx

First of all, how many conservatives want to legalize prostitution and heroin? How many conservatives are in favor of gay marriage? How many conservatives are in favor of massively increased immigration from places like Mexico? How many conservatives want more pornography to remain legal and available? If you're not convinced just yet, have a gander at the rest of the post.

You can be morally against most of that and still be a libertarian. You just have to be against the government doing something about it.

Right?

xTYBALTx · 03-06-2008, 07:36 PM

You're right, Gringo. My language wasn't as precise as it should have been.

Satertek · 03-06-2008, 07:52 PM

There are different types of conservatism. Just going by the Wikipedia page, we have Socal Conservatism and Fiscal Conservatism.

The things you mention are all deal with social issues, and on that topic you're right. Libertarians generally have a "liberal" view of these. However, on the economic and foreign issues, they're, more often than not, together on them.

2 out of 3 ain't bad.

War.mongeR1 · 03-07-2008, 10:18 AM

It seems to me that Libertarianism is a Laissez-Faire approach to the extreme, am I right? It basically means that government should be much much smaller and leave both social issues and fiscal issues alone. Which means that it would allow for pretty much anything except the strictest interpretation of the constitution. That's how I've always figured it was. I like a lot of the principles of it, but think society would go hay-wire in America, if Libertarianism was the chief principle. That's why I really like Ron Paul. He's a good blend of common sense and Libertarianist principles. I just disagreed on him on the war and a few other things. That's ok tho.

Arf · 03-07-2008, 11:29 AM

Extreme Laissez-Faire would be Anarchism. Libertarians believe in decentralizing power, IE give it to the states. You'll notice that Ron Paul tends to qualify his statements on such issues as something the Federal Government shouldn't do.

xTYBALTx · 03-07-2008, 11:48 AM

Arf, I believe what you're describing is Federalism. Ron Paul is a bit of a complicated case because he clearly has many libertarian preferences, but is a Federalist first. A libertarian typically likes Federalism because Federalism tends to lead to less regulation. But the two theories need not be mutually reinforcing. There could be, for example, a Federalist system with extremely overbearing and suppressive regulation. Or a libertarian state with a central government and very little local government.

Basically, the whole world has been moving to a more libertarian status for much of recent history, with notable exceptions in drug prohibition and stricter immigration controls. But even still, I think everyone agrees that the worlds' population - and even that of the USA - is much freer today than it was, say, 100 years ago. The extreme political meddling and corruption which was commonplace in the recent past has been toned down, people are free to work and live as they please. Womens' rights, gay rights, civil rights have all expanded dramatically. WarMonger, your concern is a common one - that society would go haywire if more freedom were permitted. Certainly no one wants a haywire society, but I think that the entire developed world is largely already libertarian anyways. The only issues left are things like drug prohibition, prostitution, free speech, and of course maintaining the freedoms which we already do have. These issues aren't trivial - especially if you're one of the unfortunate many being kept locked in a cage for selling plants! - but constitute only marginal threats compared to, say, the collectivism of the 20th century.

Another critical issue for libertarians is the environment. The default libertarian solution to problems is to introduce property ownership: If I own a piece of land, then I have every incentive to ensure that it stays clean and healthy. If runoff from my land pollutes my neighbors land, then my neighbor can sue me in a court of law for damages and penalties. So I have incentives to keep my land clean and to avoid polluting the land of others. But what happens in the case of "commons"? Commons are shared resources which no one owns - the oceans, rivers, fisheries, the air we breathe. If no one owns the ocean, then no one is going to sue me when I dump toxic waste into it. So the default libertarian position breaks down - people can pollute all they want without punishment. There is no incentive to protect the commons. Because of the problem of the commons, most all libertarians favor the existence of regulations protecting the environment. It seems to be the only solution, as the traditional fix, private ownership, probably wouldn't work very well for the ocean :]

AMosely · 03-07-2008, 02:26 PM

I completely agree - libertarianism is not conservative, but in terms of lining up with America's two party system it has more in common with the right (less government regulation) than it does with the left (more government regulation). I don't think anyone would argue that its a perfect fit, but that's the landscape we are in - there may be more than two political parties in America, but there are two general classifications of political party.

Steeler · 03-07-2008, 03:02 PM

In my experience Libertarianism is whatever the person describing it wants it to be.

xTYBALTx · 03-07-2008, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AMosely

I completely agree - libertarianism is not conservative, but in terms of lining up with America's two party system it has more in common with the right (less government regulation) than it does with the left (more government regulation). I don't think anyone would argue that its a perfect fit, but that's the landscape we are in - there may be more than two political parties in America, but there are two general classifications of political party.

I agree with you as well :]

Also, some libertarians are now just sitting out the national elections.

xTYBALTx · 03-07-2008, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steeler

In my experience Libertarianism is whatever the person describing it wants it to be.

Well I sourced Wikipedia in the original post. So what does Wikipedia want it to be?

**GlobalWarmin** · 03-07-2008, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xTYBALTx

First of all, how many conservatives want to legalize prostitution and heroin? How many conservatives are in favor of gay marriage? How many conservatives are in favor of massively increased immigration from places like Mexico? How many conservatives want more pornography to remain legal and available? If you're not convinced just yet, have a gander at the rest of the post.

These are all social issues. This is why I jokingly referred to libertarians as conservatives who smoke pot.

Now, lets talk about economics and what role the government should have in the economy, and libertarianism and conservatism are clearly very similar. Libertarians and conservatives would, for example, both be opposed to government restrictions on industry that would reduce C02 emissions by more than those interests would want. Take this current example: http://www.livescience.com/environme...stry-smog.html
Conservatives, libertarians, and big business would in general be in agreement that the government should not impose restrictions that affect business.

xTYBALTx · 03-07-2008, 07:41 PM

Look, I'll be the first to admit that libertarianism shares some values with conservatism. But that doesn't make it conservative. Or the same as conservatism. Libertarianism also shares values with liberalism, and I don't see anyone claiming that libertarians are the same as liberals.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlobalWarmin

Now, lets talk about economics and what role the government should have in the economy, and libertarianism and conservatism are clearly very similar. Libertarians and conservatives would, for example, both be opposed to government restrictions on industry that would reduce C02 emissions by more than those interests would want.

Uno!
Dos!

**GlobalWarmin** · 03-08-2008, 08:34 PM

“I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.”
Ronald Reagan

http://www.fff.org/comment/com0604c.asp

**CingularDuality** · 03-08-2008, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlobalWarmin

“I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.”
Ronald Reagan

http://www.fff.org/comment/com0604c.asp

I believe the very heart and soul of almost everyone is libertarianism. Who doesn't dig freedom?

I'm glad to see that you're a bit more educated on libertarianism, GlobalWarmin.

03-06-2008, 05:47 PM	#1 (permalink)
xTYBALTx Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 3,676	Libertarianism is not conservative First of all, how many conservatives want to legalize prostitution and heroin? How many conservatives are in favor of gay marriage? How many conservatives are in favor of massively increased immigration from places like Mexico? How many conservatives want more pornography to remain legal and available? If you're not convinced just yet, have a gander at the rest of the post. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syncretic_politics "Syncretic politics involves taking political positions that attempt to reconcile seemingly opposed ideological systems, usually by combining some elements associated with the left with some associated with the right. The term is derived from the older idea of syncretic religion." "Noted syncretic movements include Fascism, Libertarianism and Producerism. Many lesser-known political syncretisms also exist; examples include the People's Mujahedin of Iran, which combines Marxism and Islamism, Common Course, a Danish political party which blended official communism with anti-immigration sentiments, the National Bolshevik Party of Russia, formed from the union of Leninist and Fascist aesthetics, as well as the Minaret of Freedom Institute, a seemingly unlikely union between Islamism and libertarianism." "The assassinated Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn and his LPF party are often mentioned as being syncretic, especially by commentators outside the Netherlands, since the LPF combined acceptance of soft drug use and equal rights for homosexuals, seen as rather radical left-liberal positions in most of the world, with a strong stance against immigration, which is usually a right-wing sentiment. Others have categorized the LPF as reactionary liberal and deny its platform constitutes syncretic politics." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism "Libertarianism is often portrayed as right-wing by non-libertarians in the United States. Under the concept of fusionism, it was proposed that American libertarians ally themselves with traditional conservatives, with whom they have historically had more in common than they do with American liberals, particularly with regard to economic and gun control policies. Such an alliance can be seen in uniting of libertarian and conservative lawyers in the Federalist Society. Others however, call for an alliance between libertarians and civil libertarians in the Democratic party. Many describe libertarians as being "conservative" on economic issues and "liberal" on social issues, so they can find allies in both of the two main parties while remaining distinct from both, especially on the use of state power to solve perceived problems, and constitutional compliance." __________________ Current Tybalt theme song: Mason v. Princess - Perfect "$250,000 a year won't get me to Central Park West."

03-06-2008, 07:36 PM	#3 (permalink)
xTYBALTx Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 3,676	Re: Libertarianism is not conservative You're right, Gringo. My language wasn't as precise as it should have been. __________________ Current Tybalt theme song: Mason v. Princess - Perfect "$250,000 a year won't get me to Central Park West."

03-06-2008, 07:52 PM	#4 (permalink)
Satertek Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Auburn, Alabama, USA Age: 21 Posts: 257	Re: Libertarianism is not conservative There are different types of conservatism. Just going by the Wikipedia page, we have Socal Conservatism and Fiscal Conservatism. The things you mention are all deal with social issues, and on that topic you're right. Libertarians generally have a "liberal" view of these. However, on the economic and foreign issues, they're, more often than not, together on them. 2 out of 3 ain't bad. __________________

03-07-2008, 10:18 AM	#5 (permalink)
War.mongeR1 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 1,113	Re: Libertarianism is not conservative It seems to me that Libertarianism is a Laissez-Faire approach to the extreme, am I right? It basically means that government should be much much smaller and leave both social issues and fiscal issues alone. Which means that it would allow for pretty much anything except the strictest interpretation of the constitution. That's how I've always figured it was. I like a lot of the principles of it, but think society would go hay-wire in America, if Libertarianism was the chief principle. That's why I really like Ron Paul. He's a good blend of common sense and Libertarianist principles. I just disagreed on him on the war and a few other things. That's ok tho. __________________ "Common sense is not so common." -Voltaire

03-07-2008, 11:29 AM	#6 (permalink)
Arf Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 972	Re: Libertarianism is not conservative Extreme Laissez-Faire would be Anarchism. Libertarians believe in decentralizing power, IE give it to the states. You'll notice that Ron Paul tends to qualify his statements on such issues as something the Federal Government shouldn't do. __________________

03-07-2008, 11:48 AM	#7 (permalink)
xTYBALTx Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 3,676	Re: Libertarianism is not conservative Arf, I believe what you're describing is Federalism. Ron Paul is a bit of a complicated case because he clearly has many libertarian preferences, but is a Federalist first. A libertarian typically likes Federalism because Federalism tends to lead to less regulation. But the two theories need not be mutually reinforcing. There could be, for example, a Federalist system with extremely overbearing and suppressive regulation. Or a libertarian state with a central government and very little local government. Basically, the whole world has been moving to a more libertarian status for much of recent history, with notable exceptions in drug prohibition and stricter immigration controls. But even still, I think everyone agrees that the worlds' population - and even that of the USA - is much freer today than it was, say, 100 years ago. The extreme political meddling and corruption which was commonplace in the recent past has been toned down, people are free to work and live as they please. Womens' rights, gay rights, civil rights have all expanded dramatically. WarMonger, your concern is a common one - that society would go haywire if more freedom were permitted. Certainly no one wants a haywire society, but I think that the entire developed world is largely already libertarian anyways. The only issues left are things like drug prohibition, prostitution, free speech, and of course maintaining the freedoms which we already do have. These issues aren't trivial - especially if you're one of the unfortunate many being kept locked in a cage for selling plants! - but constitute only marginal threats compared to, say, the collectivism of the 20th century. Another critical issue for libertarians is the environment. The default libertarian solution to problems is to introduce property ownership: If I own a piece of land, then I have every incentive to ensure that it stays clean and healthy. If runoff from my land pollutes my neighbors land, then my neighbor can sue me in a court of law for damages and penalties. So I have incentives to keep my land clean and to avoid polluting the land of others. But what happens in the case of "commons"? Commons are shared resources which no one owns - the oceans, rivers, fisheries, the air we breathe. If no one owns the ocean, then no one is going to sue me when I dump toxic waste into it. So the default libertarian position breaks down - people can pollute all they want without punishment. There is no incentive to protect the commons. Because of the problem of the commons, most all libertarians favor the existence of regulations protecting the environment. It seems to be the only solution, as the traditional fix, private ownership, probably wouldn't work very well for the ocean :] __________________ Current Tybalt theme song: Mason v. Princess - Perfect "$250,000 a year won't get me to Central Park West." Last edited by xTYBALTx; 03-07-2008 at 12:27 PM.

03-07-2008, 02:26 PM	#8 (permalink)
AMosely Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Maine Age: 33 Posts: 2,422	Re: Libertarianism is not conservative I completely agree - libertarianism is not conservative, but in terms of lining up with America's two party system it has more in common with the right (less government regulation) than it does with the left (more government regulation). I don't think anyone would argue that its a perfect fit, but that's the landscape we are in - there may be more than two political parties in America, but there are two general classifications of political party.

03-07-2008, 03:02 PM	#9 (permalink)
Steeler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Taxachusetts Age: 30 Posts: 2,860	Re: Libertarianism is not conservative In my experience Libertarianism is whatever the person describing it wants it to be. __________________

03-08-2008, 08:34 PM	#14 (permalink)
GlobalWarmin Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Springfield, OH Age: 26 Posts: 661	Re: Libertarianism is not conservative “I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.” Ronald Reagan http://www.fff.org/comment/com0604c.asp

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links