Libertarian Purity Test

[Sirotnikov]

2.966666666666667 on the fascist test

[Maniac]

Way to go, Drogue!

16 on the purity test btw...

[Frankychan]

25? WTH is that? I wanted lower than 10!

Bah!

[Tuberski]

26 soft-core.

ACK!

[David Floyd]

Well, it was on the Libertarian quiz that was quoted in the first post, and as such I presumed was a hard line Libertarian belief.

More of an anarchist belief, actually.

I see that, and I agree it is what a 'pure' Libertarian would think. However I always find the notion of the absolute, of being one thing or another at the extreme, absurd. I have never met anyone who is completely Libertarian (ie. wants no law, no state, nothing that prohibits anyone from doing anything) nore completely authoritarian (ie. someone who wants complete state control, with no personal freedom).

The major Libertarians on 'Poly (myself, Wraith, Berzerker, Rex Little, etc.) are "completely" Libertarian. Further, Libertarians do NOT take the position of wanting no law and no state - the state and the law are good things, if they are used for the sole purpose of preventing the violation of individual rights and coercion of the individual. Libertarians are NOT anarchists, if you want to discuss anarchy, talk to Ramo. If you want to talk about Libertarianism, talk to me.

I don't believe a completely Free Market promotes freedom. I think you end up with corporations ruling, and as such a government of unelected, ultra powerful companies that have their own agenda (of making more money).

First of all, that's not at all true, unless you can point out an example of a completely free market system, without government interference on behalf of either workers or corporations, in which ultrapowerful corporations ended up running things.

Second of all, what's wrong with making more money?

In your opinion. WHile you are entitled to it, it is not one I share. In my eyes, I am no less a lIbertarian because I believe you can get more liberal freedoms (freedom of action) by having slightly less economic freedom.

Well, you would be wrong. You are certainly entitled to your beliefs, and I am not belittling them in any way, but those beliefs do not make you a Libertarian.

How am I an authoritarian. I do not believe in the power of one person to tell another what to do.

Perhaps not, but you clearly believe in the power of the majority to tell the minority what to do. That's no less authoritarian than rule by one man.

Non-American sources. Since your position seems to be from American sources, hence your strong belief in economic freedom as "One of the biggest" and mine that it is not. My normal definition, given above, is from www.libertarian.org, which is more of the world-wide think tank than a party.

Well let's see. Selected quotes from www.libertarian.org:

"Because of their emphasis on free markets, many libertarians are called conservative. But libertarians also think people should be free to pursue "sex, drugs, and rock & roll," if that's what they want to do."

That implies that Libertarians believe in the free market system.

"So it's probably not much of a surprise to discover that libertarians believe that state-run welfare and health care are inappropriate in principle and hugely inefficient in practice."

This shows that Libertarians oppose welfare and nationalized health care programs.

"Many libertarians favor complete separation of school and state, while others favor school vouchers and charter schools, at least as intermediate steps. Both groups argue that education is better and more flexible when it is taken out of the hands of the state."

Opposition to state run education.

"In fact, many maintain that any and all taxation is stealing, and that if it were done by anyone besides the organized group of people calling themselves the government it would be recognized as theft. "

Opposition to taxation.

So, in light of those positions quoted from YOUR source, how are you a Libertarian, again?

I have my own beliefs, that according to all the European (where I live, and therefore what is relevant to me) sources I have read I agree with most Libertarian views, and almost no authoritarian.

Irrelevant. The definition of freedom does not change depending on where you live. If you do not support freedom for some aspect of life, then you are not a Libertarian.

You may believe in a form of Libertarianism whereby everything is privatly owned, others may believe in a system whereby nobody owns anything, everything is communal but everybody is free.

That's silly. One of those systems is basically Libertarian. The other is basically communist. The two are mutually exclusive.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

32

31-50 points: Your libertarian credentials are obvious. Doubtlessly you will become more extreme as time goes on

[Drogue]

Originally posted by David Floyd
First of all, that's not at all true, unless you can point out an example of a completely free market system, without government interference on behalf of either workers or corporations, in which ultrapowerful corporations ended up running things.

Not completely, but the USA comes close. IMO the corporations in the US are more of a threat to liberty and freedom than the federal government. Besides, it follows basic economic principle. Companies will try to become monopolies, as it is in their best interest (highest profit margins), and thus legislation must be used to stop market failure. Perfect competition is a great idea, but sadly, will not happen with human nature as it is. The closest we can get involves legislating against monopolies.

Originally posted by David Floyd
Second of all, what's wrong with making more money?

Nothing, but if the leaders of the country's primary objective is to make money, not to promote the welfare of citizens, then that is not a good thing.

Originally posted by David Floyd
Well, you would be wrong. You are certainly entitled to your beliefs, and I am not belittling them in any way, but those beliefs do not make you a Libertarian.

Well, that is again in your opinion. I still disagree. I may not be completely Libertarian, but I am more that than authoritarian.

Originally posted by David Floyd
Perhaps not, but you clearly believe in the power of the majority to tell the minority what to do. That's no less authoritarian than rule by one man.

No I don't. I believe in majority rule when it comes to electing a government, but I don't believe in the rights of society over the rights of the individual.

Originally posted by David Floyd
Well let's see. Selected quotes from www.libertarian.org:

So, in light of those positions quoted from YOUR source, how are you a Libertarian, again?

Selected quotes yes. I agree, I am not a hard line Libertarian, and I do not agree with most of those quotes. I am not against Free Market, I just don't think it should be completely free. For instance, the Friedman quote:

A Corporations only duty is to provide a profit for it's shareholders

is an opinion I do not share. I still believe in a predominantly free market though. Just like I do not agree with hard core Liberatarian beliefs, and I am not a pure Libertarian, but I am still a moderate Libertarian. Indeed, you are the first person who has ever thought of me as an authoritarian that I'm aware of.

Originally posted by David Floyd
Irrelevant. The definition of freedom does not change depending on where you live. If you do not support freedom for some aspect of life, then you are not a Libertarian.

I disagree, if you support freedom in most aspects of life (like I do) then you are a Libertarian, with the stength of your desire for freedom dictating the strength of your Libertarianism.

What is the definition of freedom then? I think it probably does differ from country to country actually. Certainly in the way it is used, if not its actual dictionary definition.

Originally posted by David Floyd
That's silly. One of those systems is basically Libertarian. The other is basically communist. The two are mutually exclusive.

I disagree, as have many thinkers. Utopia being the first I can think of, but there have been many written about since. I think capitalism is as mutually exclusive with Libertarianism as Communism (or at least Marxism).

I suggest we stop this debate, as I'm sure we are boring people by now, and it's begining to look like a threadjack. I thinkwe are now both aware of each others views. I don't think you will ever convince me that I am an authoritarian (I'm way to much of a radical for that ), or anything less (or more) than a moderate Libertarian, and I don't think I will ever convince you that you can be Libertarian and economically Left. I do have to say though, if you want to gain politically, it does not seem sensible to mock your more moderate supporters. It would be much easier to get through some of your policies if you didn't. But hey, that's just my opinion.

[Sava]

Floyd, your idea of Libertarianism sound very anti-Democratic.

[MichaeltheGreat]

18 on the Lib Purity test, 2 (You're a liberal airhead) on the Fascist test, and Lib Socialist (as far right as they get) on the Godless Commie test.

[Tuberski]

Progressive and 3.26666.

ACK!

[David Floyd]

Not completely, but the USA comes close.

The US is in no way a free market system, nor is it run by corporations.

IMO the corporations in the US are more of a threat to liberty and freedom than the federal government.

Right, because the corporations are passing anti-gun laws, taxing our income, and telling us what we can do to ourselves in private. Come on.

Besides, it follows basic economic principle. Companies will try to become monopolies, as it is in their best interest (highest profit margins), and thus legislation must be used to stop market failure.

If one company provides the best service, and enough people think so, I see nothing wrong with it being a monopoly.

Nothing, but if the leaders of the country's primary objective is to make money, not to promote the welfare of citizens, then that is not a good thing.

A country should not be in the business of, as you put it, making money. That would involve some sort of tax.

I may not be completely Libertarian, but I am more that than authoritarian.

Yes, and Hitler was more Republican than communist, but I don't quite see the relevance. Hitler was no more a Republican than you are Libertarian.

I believe in majority rule when it comes to electing a government, but I don't believe in the rights of society over the rights of the individual.

Then why do you support forced taxation for public schools, public health care, welfare, etc.?

Selected quotes yes. I agree, I am not a hard line Libertarian, and I do not agree with most of those quotes.

*shrug* It's your source. I'm only responding to it. If you don't agree with some aspect of your source, you shouldn't cite it.

Similar to the concept that if you aren't a Libertarian, you shouldn't call yourself one

I disagree, if you support freedom in most aspects of life (like I do) then you are a Libertarian,

The keyword is "most". The proper way to say that is "If you support freedom in all aspects of life (like I do) then you are a Libertarian."

I think capitalism is as mutually exclusive with Libertarianism as Communism

How is a system promoting economic freedom mutually exclusive with a set of beliefs promoting freedom in general?

I suggest we stop this debate, as I'm sure we are boring people by now

We probably are, but it's so fun

I do have to say though, if you want to gain politically, it does not seem sensible to mock your more moderate supporters. It would be much easier to get through some of your policies if you didn't.

*shrug* I'm unelectable anyway in the current political environment. The bottom line is, though, if one supports freedom in a consistent way, they likely vote Libertarian, and if they are inconsistent in their support of freedom, they likely do not vote Libertarian.

Sava,

Floyd, your idea of Libertarianism sound very anti-Democratic.

That's the point. Democracy is only a good idea if you agree with the majority.

[TCO]

3.4666666

An appropriate male American.

[Jaguar]

30

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Azazel
erm, no. Most of your policies oppose the policies of the Libertarians, Lawrence. You support taxes. which infringe of the individuals right of ownership. and taxes are on the general scheme, not different than theft. A bunch of people takes something from someone that doesn't nessesseraly wants to give it. What's the difference between govt. taxes, and burglary, in the freedoms infringed realm? zip. Both will physically harm you if you refuse (prison, injury) so it's all the same, supposedly.

Personally, Libertarianism is silly, particularly hard core ones such as DF's set. Without a government, there's nobody around to protect a person's "rights," and a group of people living together must give up the "rights" to do certain things.

[David Floyd]

Ack! Lookit, Libertarianism is NOT anarchism!