Finally a place for INGO libertarians

[jamil]

I am so thankful that you have corrected my error by presenting facts, backed up of course by references.

I have learned a lot!

Regards,

Doug

Well, he's right. You're definitely not an anarchist.

 

[Libertarian01]

Well, he's right. You're definitely not an anarchist.

Thank you, no I am definitely NOT an anarchist.

The Libertarian ideal I hold is maximum rights with minimal government intrustion - NOT infinite rights with no government intrusion.

What is property? What does ownership mean? How do we deal with conflict? Who decides when two (2) people disagree and a decision MUST be reached?

We have always and will always need government. Its form, power, and intrusiveness are up for reasonable debate.

Regards,

Doug

 

[ATM]

Perhaps you were representing the Libertarian Party ideals and its strategies. If so, maybe that was accurate, I wouldn't know.

Please, do remember to capitalize 'libertarianism' in the future if this is the case and you wish to avoid confusion.

 

[jamil]

Perhaps you were representing the Libertarian Party ideals and its strategies. If so, maybe that was accurate, I wouldn't know.

Please, do remember to capitalize 'libertarianism' in the future if this is the case and you wish to avoid confusion.

Wait. You mean the Libertarian Party is made up of Libertarians and not libertarians? So now I have to pay attention to whether letters are capitalized to know which flavor? What if the sentence begins with the word "Libertarian"? Wouldn't it be easier to attach an adjective to "libertarian" so we all know what kind we're dealing with? Like bitter or sweet.

I don't wanna have to mess around with the ambiguity of whether one intends a proper noun or not. So if you classify libertarians by differences in ideals, then you may further divide your already small bit of world influence into even smaller, purer bits of influence.

So I looked up the different flavors and there are several. So which kind are you? Which kind is Doug? What about steve or rambone. You have yer Anarcho-Capitalist Libertarians, Civil Libertarians, Socialist Libertarians, Minarchist Libertarians, Neolibertarians, and Paleolibertarians. Probably missing a few but you get the idea. Wait. Paleolibertarians? WTF? Really?

 

[ATM]

Wait. You mean the Libertarian Party is made up of Libertarians and not libertarians? So now I have to pay attention to whether letters are capitalized to know which flavor? What if the sentence begins with the word "Libertarian"? Wouldn't it be easier to attach an adjective to "libertarian" so we all know what kind we're dealing with? Like bitter or sweet.

I don't wanna have to mess around with the ambiguity of whether one intends a proper noun or not. So if you classify libertarians by differences in ideals, then you may further divide your already small bit of world influence into even smaller, purer bits of influence.

So I looked up the different flavors and there are several. So which kind are you? Which kind is Doug? What about steve or rambone. You have yer Anarcho-Capitalist Libertarians, Civil Libertarians, Socialist Libertarians, Minarchist Libertarians, Neolibertarians, and Paleolibertarians. Probably missing a few but you get the idea. Wait. Paleolibertarians? WTF? Really?

I would be most closely categorized in the anarcho-capitalist area, but I'd never heard of such a self-defeating plan from anyone who claimed general association with libertarianism.

I must admit, if there is a subgroup that proposes such incrementalism as it's goal (all while claiming that libertarianism is impossible), I'm quite curious why they self identify as libertarian at all?

 

[jamil]

I would be most closely categorized in the anarcho-capitalist area, but I'd never heard of such a self-defeating plan from anyone who claimed general association with libertarianism.

I must admit, if there is a subgroup that proposes such incrementalism as it's goal (all while claiming that libertarianism is impossible), I'm quite curious why they self identify as libertarian at all?

Yeah. Probably way too practical and rooted in reality to be a real libertarian.

 

[D-Ric902]

Yeah. Probably way too practical and rooted in reality to be a real libertarian.

that would be the Psyco-Libertarian

 

[ATM]

Yeah. Probably way too practical and rooted in reality to be a real libertarian.

Incrementalism as a means to a goal might make practical sense in certain cases, I suppose, but the actual claims made don't appear to reconcile with the label.

I would need further explanation.

 

[SirRealism]

Yes, we most definitely should distinguish between a political party and an ideology. This has nothing to do with "flavor" or purity; they're just different animals altogether.

 

[jamil]

Incrementalism as a means to a goal might make practical sense in certain cases, I suppose, but the actual claims made don't appear to reconcile with the label.

I would need further explanation.

I'm not going to speak for Doug, but as I see it, in a world with diverse opinions, it is not a bad goal to seek out the best you can get. There are more than just one type of goals. I think I most identify with minarchists. So for me that would be the ideal goal. So what is the realistic goal? well, I'll take whatever I can get.

 

[jamil]

Yes, we most definitely should distinguish between a political party and an ideology. This has nothing to do with "flavor" or purity; they're just different animals altogether.

But this discussion *is* about ideology and not about parties.