Libertarianism?

[steven787]

rocketpig said:

steven787 said:

"Moderate" Libertarians understand this, but how does this differ from a Socially-liberal Republican or a Fiscally conservative Democrat? It's just another name, because young people, and some older people with grudges, want to belong to somehthing that sounds different, new and exciting.

I deleted the rest of your post because, while it accurately illustrates the Libertarian party's beliefs, isn't held by any of the Libertarians I know personally nor does it seem to be held by most of the members of the party itself.

I think you're missing the point; the reason so many people like myself are registered as Libertarians is because of the split in the party-thought. We want a party that represents social freedom and fiscal responsibility. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans offer that and the closest thing we have is the Libertarian party. Not all of us agree with every tenant of the party, just as many Republicans I know are pro-choice; we stick to the party because it has more of the core values we believe in than any other party in America.

And just so you know, I've been a member of the Libertarian party for roughly a decade now. The "new wave" of Libertarianism, spurred mostly by the internet, had nothing to do with my choice. I believe in many of the principles of the party - though not all - and neither of the major parties in America come close to my core beliefs as a person. It's that simple.

You are right, but most of the principles that make up the party will actually work or are already done. We live in a democratic constitutional republic, which is a big part of libertarianism. They don't like the structure of the US government or the EU but this is governing for, of, and by the people. We elect the ones who form it, and we can change it at anytime. The problem with republics and democracies is that "51% of the people tell the other 49% how to live". This is the best system we've got, but until everyone agrees people are always going to feel like their rights are being taken away.

Don't get me wrong, I like freedom and fiscal responsability but the system we have works and works really well. Populations in industrialized countries live longer, healthier, and more free lives than any other period in history. More people (total or proportionally) have access to better health care, education, services (both public and private) and entertainment. There's more variety, better working conditions, freedom to worship, freedom and ability to travel than any other time since the dawn of civilization. Industrialized nations have also begun to lift the thumb of oppression, colonialization, and empire. Many of today's international problems don't stem from "neo-colonialism"; quite the opposite, the problems are just a result of adjustment as oppressed people begin to govern and guide themselves and become more informed.

All I am trying to promote is that people take a look around and ask themselves if the systems we have are really so bad.

Have the "high taxes" of democracy been better or worse than indentured servitude, slavery, feudalism, or the aristocracy?

Are we not already living in a system where anyone can work hard/smart and get rewarded appropriately depending on the demand of the services they are supplying?

If libertarianism is such a great way to reduce taxes and promote people being able to run businesses the way they want, then why aren't more of the wealthy and entrupenural libertarian? (Not all of them abuse the corrupt system...)

If we did adopt libertarianism, do we ban abortion? The official party line is no, but many people believe that it ends a life and prevents that person from having free will.

Edit: To respond more directly to your post, this is why I vote for the individual that I think is best suited for the job and not by party lines... I think enough people in the U.S. already do this, but unfortunately parlimentary systems don't allow for this as much but atleast provide a place for more than two parties and force compromise.