| Jumpin said: That's because many people incorrectly identify libertarianism as being synonymous with neo-liberal/laissez-faire economics, but it isn't. It is doctrine which advocates policies which enhance freedoms for the most people in a given society. That is why many libertarians advocate social aspects within economies, rather than laissez-faire economics, which ultimately lead to corporate ownership, advantages over small scale operations, and advantages toward inheriting parties leading to an economically oppressed working class. Historically, Libertarianism began as a socialist platform to combat unfairness among the Noble class. William Godwin, one of the fathers of libertarianism, was also one of history's strongest advocates for the estate tax. The purpose of the estate tax was to hamstring the economic advantage of the Noble upper class by taxing their estate when they transfered wealth to heirs - usually by death inheretence. The money would be transfered to the state in order to strengthen the infrastructure for the lower classes. He argued that this would create a happier and more productive society, as those who had the aptitude to rise would rise, and those who didn't would still have an easier time on their end. Meanwhile, the incompetent heirs of wealthy families would have far less of an opportunity to be a cancer on society. |
However that is not libertarian though thats socialist?
Pretty much in the end supposed socialst libertarianism requires a strong powerful government.
Pretty much I see a lot of theory and no real world applications
Firstly to invoke socialist libertarianism would require a strong powerful government to break the current status quo.
