Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Libertarians, Talk to Me
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1246
Location: 아이다호, 美國

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 5:41 am    Post subject: Libertarians, Talk to Me Reply with quote

I'm finding myself looking at Jeff Sessions thinking, "WTF?!" But in reality, he's doing exactly what any proper Republican would expect him to do.

I am currently a registered Republican, but it doesn't really seem right. Fundamentally:

1. I couldn't care less about Israel vs. Palestine; they are two whiny children.
2. The 2nd Amendment is non-negotiable, and the only functioning purpose of a registration system is to know what to confiscate later.
3. I think that a fetus is a separate living entity, so I cannot in good faith accept abortion.
4. Democrats pervasively aborting their own offspring is quite convenient, however.
5. Japan and South Korea should be allowed to have their own nuclear weapons programs, thereby being able to take better care of themselves.
6. I absolutely do not care about any "crimes" anyone commits that do not put other people in danger.
7. If the United States is ever attacked, it should utterly destroy the attacker and leave them in shambles.
8. What consenting adults do in the bedroom is strictly between themselves and God.

How good of a fit am I for the Libertarian party?
_________________
Gun: Glock 19 Gen 4
Sights: XS DXT Big Dot
Holster: Alien Gear ShapeShift IWB
Ammunition: Federal Premium HST 124gr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 686
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 6:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You are a Libertarian from my perspective.
_________________
People Of Love

Kindness Evokes Kindness

Peace Emits Positive Energy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
o'bogamol
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 90
Location: Detroit, Michigan - The Home of Rock and Roll

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sounds pretty libertarian (note uncapitalized) to me, except number 7.
_________________
"History began on July 4,1776. Everything before that was a mistake." -Ron Swanson
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1605
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think #7 is not too much of a divergence, given the "if attacked" part. I would lean more toward 'proportional response' and targeting actual bad actors and lean a bit more away from genocide.

#3 would be contrary to libertarianism to the extent that, by "cannot accept", he means "cannot allow others to engage in".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
superjaded
l33t
l33t


Joined: 05 Jul 2002
Posts: 759

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bones McCracker wrote:
#3 would be contrary to libertarianism to the extent that, by "cannot accept", he means "cannot allow others to engage in".

How is it? Abortion is only not murder (which is certainly a violation of the non-aggression principle) if you believe babies aren't human until they are outside of the mother's womb.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Old School
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 240
Location: West Bank of the Coast Fork

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 3:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bones McCracker wrote:
#3 would be contrary to libertarianism to the extent that, by "cannot accept", he means "cannot allow others to engage in".
Nah, I think W means he cannot accept the idea of abortion. It does not sound as if he intends to force that principle on others.
_________________
The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.
George Orwell

It just keeps getting better
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 17295

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 5:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

o'bogamol wrote:
Sounds pretty libertarian (note uncapitalized) to me, except number 7.
How is defending yourself not libertarian?

Bones McCracker wrote:
I think #7 is not too much of a divergence, given the "if attacked" part. I would lean more toward 'proportional response' and targeting actual bad actors and lean a bit more away from genocide.
He didn't mention genocide. What he mentioned sounds a lot like the Powell doctrine. "utterly destroy the attacker and leave them in shambles." The attacker seems to exactly reference your "bad actors."

Bones McCracker wrote:
#3 would be contrary to libertarianism to the extent that, by "cannot accept", he means "cannot allow others to engage in".
++

superjaded wrote:
Bones McCracker wrote:
#3 would be contrary to libertarianism to the extent that, by "cannot accept", he means "cannot allow others to engage in".

How is it? Abortion is only not murder (which is certainly a violation of the non-aggression principle) if you believe babies aren't human until they are outside of the mother's womb.
++

The libertarian view would be that you can do what you want as long as it doesn't harm another. So the issue of abortion cannot be one single answer as it depends on each individuals belief on when cells become a human being. Which by the way isn't limited solely to post-birth.

The issue of parenting, parents rights and their physical well being also come into play. Who gets to make those decisions other than the legal adult? This likely leads to a volatile discussion, because at some point, the rights of one (possible) human being are going to be violated.

Old School wrote:
Nah, I think W means he cannot accept the idea of abortion. It does not sound as if he intends to force that principle on others.
But he framed his points as their relevance to being libertarian. Also note that there is no "problem" with diverging from a possible ideal definition of libertarianism. One person may choose an aspect of their religion as more important than someone's definition of an ideal libertarian. Others might prefer a balance toward "least harm," which could be counter to a religious belief.


On #1. Does being libertarian mean never standing by your friends? If so, I'm out. Standing by them does not mean condoning possible bad behavior.

On #5. I see no problem in trying to eliminate or delay proliferation of nuclear weapons. Particularly as it relates to "bad actors."
_________________
The whole system has to go. The modern criminal justice system is incompatible with Neuroscience. --Sapolsky
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1246
Location: 아이다호, 美國

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 6:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The best thing I can come up with is that each state should decide when an embryo becomes truly separate.

And murdering civilians serves no functional purpose that I can think of.
_________________
Gun: Glock 19 Gen 4
Sights: XS DXT Big Dot
Holster: Alien Gear ShapeShift IWB
Ammunition: Federal Premium HST 124gr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 17295

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wswartzendruber wrote:
The best thing I can come up with is that each state should decide when an embryo becomes truly separate.

And murdering civilians serves no functional purpose that I can think of.
You may not be aware, but pregnancy is not simple and often has complications. So deciding without medical relevance that the mother's life is less valuable than a non-viable baby is, IMO, without merit. Deciding on "when an embryo becomes truly separate" would seem to be a medical definition, independent of religion. I'd be OK with that. I'm also OK with "viable outside the womb" limitations (incest & rape), to include a "buffer" for medical advancement.

As a rhetorical aside, who will pay for those born with disabilities so severe they will never be able to care for themselves? As a libertarian, you can't tax me for it. I also support a person's right to euthanasia (and a parent's right to make that choice when medically relevant).
_________________
The whole system has to go. The modern criminal justice system is incompatible with Neuroscience. --Sapolsky
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1375
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think your stance on abortion is something that you do not have in common with most libertarians I know and associate with.

Other than that, I think you'd be MUCH happier in libertarian company than any other party (at the moment).

Republican used to mean something SOOOOOO very different from what we see today. Hence my parenthetical qualifying clause.
_________________
mcgruff wrote:
I can't promise to be civil.


pjp wrote:
The greater evil is voting for the "lesser evil."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here are some more questions to help you asses if you are a libertarian:


Should the US maintain overseas military bases?
Should the US have a permanent military force?
Should US cities's police forces have military style weapons?
Should US police officers carry weapons?
If a police officer shoots an unarmed person, should the officer be prosecuted for murder?
Was the US government right to impose anti-trust sanctions on Microsoft?
Should the US government investigate Google or Amazon for anti-trust?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1246
Location: 아이다호, 美國

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 10:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
Here are some more questions to help you asses if you are a libertarian:


Should the US maintain overseas military bases?

No, they are too costly. I think joint training exercises with allied nations is a good idea, though.

richk449 wrote:
Should the US have a permanent military force?

Oh hell yes. I'm with Washington on this one.

richk449 wrote:
Should US cities's police forces have military style weapons?

Military style? That's a rather loaded term, I think. Technically, an off-the-shelf Beretta 92FS is a military weapon. So is a Ka-Bar.

richk449 wrote:
Should US police officers carry weapons?

Most certainly.

richk449 wrote:
If a police officer shoots an unarmed person, should the officer be prosecuted for murder?

That's another loaded question. I think these are best decided by juries as they are today.

richk449 wrote:
Was the US government right to impose anti-trust sanctions on Microsoft?

I couldn't have ever cared less about them bundling their incompetent browser.

richk449 wrote:
Should the US government investigate Google or Amazon for anti-trust?

Not that I know of. What is the issue?
_________________
Gun: Glock 19 Gen 4
Sights: XS DXT Big Dot
Holster: Alien Gear ShapeShift IWB
Ammunition: Federal Premium HST 124gr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1605
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Old School wrote:
Bones McCracker wrote:
#3 would be contrary to libertarianism to the extent that, by "cannot accept", he means "cannot allow others to engage in".
Nah, I think W means he cannot accept the idea of abortion. It does not sound as if he intends to force that principle on others.

You never know. I mean, look at the guy. Doesn't he look like somebody you'd see in the news where his neighbors would be like, "No, I'm not surprised. We always said he was kinda strange. He drinks light beer!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1605
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 11:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
Here are some more questions to help you asses if you are a libertarian:


Should the US maintain overseas military bases?
Should the US have a permanent military force?
Should US cities's police forces have military style weapons?
Should US police officers carry weapons?
If a police officer shoots an unarmed person, should the officer be prosecuted for murder?
Was the US government right to impose anti-trust sanctions on Microsoft?
Should the US government investigate Google or Amazon for anti-trust?

It's all a load of horse poo. Global collectivist-authoritarianism is the only answer. Anything else will result in extinction of the species.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 12:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wswartzendruber wrote:
richk449 wrote:
Should US cities's police forces have military style weapons?

Military style? That's a rather loaded term, I think. Technically, an off-the-shelf Beretta 92FS is a military weapon. So is a Ka-Bar.

Forgive my unclear language. Should US cities's police forces have weapons beyond hand-guns? SWAT teams with high power rifles, sniper rifles, armored personnel carriers, etc.

Quote:
richk449 wrote:
If a police officer shoots an unarmed person, should the officer be prosecuted for murder?

That's another loaded question. I think these are best decided by juries as they are today.

If you think a jury should decide, then it seems that you think they should be prosecuted.

Quote:
richk449 wrote:
Was the US government right to impose anti-trust sanctions on Microsoft?

I couldn't have ever cared less about them bundling their incompetent browser.

That is a strange answer. Does it mean that you don't think they should have been charged?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Old School
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 240
Location: West Bank of the Coast Fork

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 12:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bones McCracker wrote:
Old School wrote:
Bones McCracker wrote:
#3 would be contrary to libertarianism to the extent that, by "cannot accept", he means "cannot allow others to engage in".
Nah, I think W means he cannot accept the idea of abortion. It does not sound as if he intends to force that principle on others.

You never know. I mean, look at the guy. Doesn't he look like somebody you'd see in the news where his neighbors would be like, "No, I'm not surprised. We always said he was kinda strange. He drinks light beer!"
:lol:
_________________
The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.
George Orwell

It just keeps getting better
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 17295

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 2:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
Here are some more questions to help you asses if you are a libertarian:


Should the US maintain overseas military bases?
Should the US have a permanent military force?
I don't' agree with the premise that the presence is not libertarian (maybe it is not Libertarian).

Quote:
Should US cities's police forces have military style weapons?
Should US police officers carry weapons?
Should the US have police? Again, I don't agree with the premise that these questions address whether or not something is libertarian.

Quote:
If a police officer shoots an unarmed person, should the officer be prosecuted for murder?
Without more details, it is impossible to determine if the shooting was justified. Again, not a deciding factor of libertarianism.

Quote:
Was the US government right to impose anti-trust sanctions on Microsoft?
Should the US government investigate Google or Amazon for anti-trust?
Given the government we have, yes, and probably yes. If we were in a different government, probably not. We are in a heavily regulated market, which has its own problems, particularly as it relates to consolidation and barriers to entry.
_________________
The whole system has to go. The modern criminal justice system is incompatible with Neuroscience. --Sapolsky
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 4:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
I don't' agree with the premise that ... is not libertarian (maybe it is not Libertarian).

What premise are you referring to?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1246
Location: 아이다호, 美國

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm drinking Miller Lite right now. Is that unLibertarian?
_________________
Gun: Glock 19 Gen 4
Sights: XS DXT Big Dot
Holster: Alien Gear ShapeShift IWB
Ammunition: Federal Premium HST 124gr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
notageek
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 131
Location: India

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's distinctly liberal. In-fact, it's the most popular beer in Massachusetts.
_________________
"Defeat is a state of mind. No one is ever defeated, until defeat has been accepted as a reality." -- Bruce Lee
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 686
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wswartzendruber wrote:
I'm drinking Miller Lite right now. Is that unLibertarian?


Not at all. It's just un-gourmet. 8)

notageek wrote:
It's distinctly liberal. In-fact, it's the most popular beer in Massachusetts.


It's also a traditional favorite with naval aviators in the USMC.

And I never met a single USMC naval aviator who was a cuck democrat.
_________________
People Of Love

Kindness Evokes Kindness

Peace Emits Positive Energy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
notageek
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 131
Location: India

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 6:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The number of USMC naval aviators living in Massachusetts must be staggering.
_________________
"Defeat is a state of mind. No one is ever defeated, until defeat has been accepted as a reality." -- Bruce Lee
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 17295

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 6:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
pjp wrote:
I don't' agree with the premise that ... is not libertarian (maybe it is not Libertarian).

What premise are you referring to?
The premise that the questions you posed are related to assessing if someone is a libertarian.
_________________
The whole system has to go. The modern criminal justice system is incompatible with Neuroscience. --Sapolsky
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 17295

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 6:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

notageek wrote:
The number of USMC naval aviators living in Massachusetts must be staggering.
That would take a lot of Miller Lite. Any lite beer for that matter.
_________________
The whole system has to go. The modern criminal justice system is incompatible with Neuroscience. --Sapolsky
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
o'bogamol
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 90
Location: Detroit, Michigan - The Home of Rock and Roll

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
o'bogamol wrote:
Sounds pretty libertarian (note uncapitalized) to me, except number 7.
How is defending yourself not libertarian?

Bones McCracker wrote:
I think #7 is not too much of a divergence, given the "if attacked" part. I would lean more toward 'proportional response' and targeting actual bad actors and lean a bit more away from genocide.
He didn't mention genocide. What he mentioned sounds a lot like the Powell doctrine. "utterly destroy the attacker and leave them in shambles." The attacker seems to exactly reference your "bad actors."


Art of war thinking is not libertarian. What constitutes an attack? Is engaging in trade war tactics 'an attack'? Should we airstrike China for devaluing the Renminbi? Should we annihilate the OPEC states for allowing the energy cartel to continue (actually, that's not a half bad idea...)? Proportional response, rather than 'utterly destroy' is a much closer to a non-aggression principle level response. In his view would a libertarian response to China trade warfare be to tariff Chinese goods? Economic warfare is more effective than military warfare will ever be. When's the last time you've heard a libertarian arguing in favor of trade restrictions?

Does he only mean military attack? What about US territories? Will they benefit from the same 'utterly destroy' their attackers doctrine that the states will? What about US investors in foreign powers? Should we defend American companies operating within foreign borders? What if the foreign power tries to seize ownership of the American company's holdings? What level of response is appropriate? Should we send in CIA operatives to try and overthrow the aggressive government? Does that sound like libertarians?

I'm not saying a libertarian would not seek to defend himself. I think that completely destroying someone else for 'having the audacity to think something that is mine is his' is not a libertarian mindset, unless what he meant is what we did to Japan. That was a proportional response to their aggressive actions towards us and our Chinese allies. Afterwards, we invested heavily into their economy to rebuild it, creating what is now 70 years of mutual prosperity. And we didn't execute the Emperor... If that's what he meant, then I misunderstood.
_________________
"History began on July 4,1776. Everything before that was a mistake." -Ron Swanson
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum