Why do libertarians support Republicans?

Fogdog said:

I you'll probably say its not true but its true.

Libertarians would end regulations at the workplace including those against linking sexual favors to employment.

Click to expand...

While libertarians generally advocate for minimal government intervention, this does not mean they support inappropriate workplace behavior. Many libertarians support laws and regulations that protect individuals from harassment and discrimination. Linking sexual favors to employment is illegal and unethical. It's inaccurate to say that libertarians would end all workplace regulations, including those against such behavior. Libertarians may advocate for a balanced approach that protects individual freedoms while ensuring fair and respectful treatment in the workplace.

Ya, probably not quite true. Maybe more bias seeping through?

Dryxi said:

While libertarians generally advocate for minimal government intervention, this does not mean they support inappropriate workplace behavior. Many libertarians support laws and regulations that protect individuals from harassment and discrimination. Linking sexual favors to employment is illegal and unethical. It's inaccurate to say that libertarians would end all workplace regulations, including those against such behavior. Libertarians may advocate for a balanced approach that protects individual freedoms while ensuring fair and respectful treatment in the workplace.

Ya, probably not quite true. Maybe more bias seeping through?

Click to expand...

lulz at how you want to shape that sucky philosophy into whatever you want. And another person shapes it into whatever they like. And another. And another.

I had a conversation with one of your kind who owned his own business and he said if an employee were given that ultimatum -- give me head or no paycheck -- free market rules, they would be free to quit. That is the at rotten core of the libertarian philosophy. It's just about money and the power money gives people who have it over those who don't, backed up by authoritarian government.

1.7% of the electorate supporting that sucky philosophy seems about right.

Fogdog said:

lulz at how you want to shape that sucky philosophy into whatever you want. And another person shapes it into whatever they like. And another. And another.

I had a conversation with one of your kind who owned his own business and he said if an employee were given that ultimatum -- give me head or no paycheck -- free market rules, they would be free to quit. That is the at rotten core of the libertarian philosophy. It's just about money and the power money gives people who have it over those who don't, backed up by authoritarian government.

Click to expand...

Fogdog said:

"You need to cite a source on that.

Click to expand...

Regarding that conversation I had with a hard core libertarian?

I almost always post my sources. In this case, I don't need to because I'm the source. That was a real conversation. As you say, every "libertarian" makes up his own ideology and calls it the real one. In his case, he was hard core "free market" and subscribed to the idea that everybody was their own agent. If a person demanded sexual favors as a requirement for employment, they could do so and their employees were free to find work elsewhere if they didn't like it. Free market will decide who is right and who is wrong. He wasn't wrong either. That IS the core of libertarianism.

Dryxi said:

While libertarians generally advocate for minimal government intervention, this does not mean they support inappropriate workplace behavior. Many libertarians support laws and regulations that protect individuals from harassment and discrimination. Linking sexual favors to employment is illegal and unethical. It's inaccurate to say that libertarians would end all workplace regulations, including those against such behavior. Libertarians may advocate for a balanced approach that protects individual freedoms while ensuring fair and respectful treatment in the workplace.

Ya, probably not quite true. Maybe more bias seeping through?

Click to expand...

What if I want my freedom to show people my dick?

What happens under the libertarian government to people that would violate sexual harassment laws? Would the body you put in charge have the teeth/strength to deal with it? That's a major broad criticism of the ideology, a government as weak as what gets proposed doesn't have the ability to govern.

Again, it's kinda frustrating to discuss because it isn't a solid belief system. Each person seems to mold the ideology to their own specific interpretation rather than a bunch of individuals coming together to adopt one. That certainly happens in other political philosophies, but nowhere near the extent it does with libertarians.

Fogdog said:

Regarding that conversation I had with a hard core libertarian?

I almost always post my sources. In this case, I don't need to because I'm the source. That was a real conversation. As you say, every "libertarian" makes up his own ideology and calls it the real one. In his case, he was hard core "free market" and subscribed to the idea that everybody was their own agent. If a person demanded sexual favors as a requirement for employment, they could do so and their employees were free to find work elsewhere if they didn't like it. Free market will decide who is right and who is wrong. He wasn't wrong either. That IS the core of libertarianism.

Click to expand...

And yet most libertarians would probably agree that rules and protections are still important. The source is needed to establish creditability to the individuals views that you speak of. Is he the only one with those views? If I say, "I met a Democrat once, they told me the privilege of owning property is one of white privilege and it must be taken away", the creditability of that individual means it should be assumed they speak for the majority of democrats?

You need a source on that. The lack of one shows we are simply speaking from a biased perspective with the goal of throwing mud. Typical.

Fogdog said:

Regarding that conversation I had with a hard core libertarian?

I almost always post my sources. In this case, I don't need to because I'm the source. That was a real conversation. As you say, every "libertarian" makes up his own ideology and calls it the real one. In his case, he was hard core "free market" and subscribed to the idea that everybody was their own agent. If a person demanded sexual favors as a requirement for employment, they could do so and their employees were free to find work elsewhere if they didn't like it. Free market will decide who is right and who is wrong. He wasn't wrong either. That IS the core of libertarianism.

Click to expand...

The tell is the invocation of natural law, which is at its root an article of faith.

Dryxi said:

While libertarians generally advocate for minimal government intervention, this does not mean they support inappropriate workplace behavior. Many libertarians support laws and regulations that protect individuals from harassment and discrimination. Linking sexual favors to employment is illegal and unethical. It's inaccurate to say that libertarians would end all workplace regulations, including those against such behavior. Libertarians may advocate for a balanced approach that protects individual freedoms while ensuring fair and respectful treatment in the workplace.

Ya, probably not quite true. Maybe more bias seeping through?

Click to expand...

So, here we have another libertarian who makes up his own ideology. You support workplace regulations but say that's libertarian. OK. You just proved my point. Libertarian isn't a real thing. It's propaganda.

Fogdog said:

So, here we have another libertarian who makes up his own ideology. You support workplace regulations but say that's libertarian. OK. You just proved my point. Libertarian isn't a real thing. It's propaganda.

Click to expand...

The other guy who espouses voluntaryist doctrine? I’ll say this to his credit: he goes a layer deeper. This has the unintended effect of laying bare the cognitive dissonances that result when one seeks to define the squishy words like coercion or intrinsic rights.

Fogdog said:

So, here we have another libertarian who makes up his own ideology. You support workplace regulations but say that's libertarian. OK. You just proved my point. Libertarian isn't a real thing. It's propaganda.

Click to expand...

Is there an official line drawn in the sand regarding how far individual freedoms and free market ideas have to be prioritized before one is not called a libertarian? Is this line situated along the very hard line views, or is there maybe some room for more moderate views? What about more liberal views?

Please provide a citation so I might learn some more, I would be surprised to learn there is only space for different ideological interpretations within the main two parties.

HGCC said:

What if I want my freedom to show people my dick?

What happens under the libertarian government to people that would violate sexual harassment laws? Would the body you put in charge have the teeth/strength to deal with it? That's a major broad criticism of the ideology, a government as weak as what gets proposed doesn't have the ability to govern.

Again, it's kinda frustrating to discuss because it isn't a solid belief system. Each person seems to mold the ideology to their own specific interpretation rather than a bunch of individuals coming together to adopt one. That certainly happens in other political philosophies, but nowhere near the extent it does with libertarians.

Click to expand...

That is because it is not a real thought-out ideology, rather a grab bag of rationalizations for the greedy and bigoted, who refuse to form a caring sharing community with the "other", or if they are antisocial enough, anybody. They don't want to pay taxes because the brown people might get some, same real reason they don't want government healthcare and are trying to destroy education in America. The libertarian ideology and cult of the individual is just the same mealy-mouthed bullshit you hear about every issue they care about.

The US government is already weak enough and cannot even control domestic terrorism, make gun laws or deal with socially destructive and deadly lies and disinformation spread by public broadcasters FFS. It doesn't even have the tools most other liberal democracies have to deal with fascism and domestic terrorism.

Dryxi said:

And yet most libertarians would probably agree that rules and protections are still important. The source is needed to establish creditability to the individuals views that you speak of. Is he the only one with those views? If I say, "I met a Democrat once, they told me the privilege of owning property is one of white privilege and it must be taken away", the creditability of that individual means it should be assumed they speak for the majority of democrats?

You need a source on that. The lack of one shows we are simply speaking from a biased perspective with the goal of throwing mud. Typical.

Click to expand...

Reagarding my conversation? I'm the source. Call me a liar if you will but you'd be wrong.

If you want to read about what libertarians say about unregulated markets, how about going to what the Libertarian Party says about it?


Libertarians believe that the only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. Unfortunately, the vast majority of regulations on the books do not do that. These regulations are heavy burdens on businesses and people who are just trying to make a living, and often prevent new businesses from starting, prevent existing businesses from hiring new employees, and even force businesses to close. This violates the rights of people to engage in peaceful and honest trade. Additionally, it actively hurts people by stifling human energy, innovation, and well-being.

Where in their manifesto are human rights? It's all about property rights, protecting trade and providing a court to adjudicate disputes. Within that statement, the asshole who said demanding head as part of the requirement for a paycheck might be able to justify that belief.

This is so naïve, I can't believe a person can espouse such a belief and still learn to type.

The free market, when it is allowed to do so, provides tremendous opportunity for people of all backgrounds, interests, and abilities.

The context of that statement was what they called crony capitalism. "Free the Market and free yourself".

I don't think you've even read what the Mises Institute says about it all.

They reject science and mathematics because it just "confuses". They adhere to axioms otherwise put by them as praexeology. It's nothing more than religious belief dressed up in modern terms.

Dryxi said:

Is there an official line drawn in the sand regarding how far individual freedoms and free market ideas have to be prioritized before one is not called a libertarian? Is this line situated along the very hard line views, or is there maybe some room for more moderate views? What about more liberal views?

Please provide a citation so I might learn some more, I would be surprised to learn there is only space for different ideological interpretations within the main two parties.

Click to expand...

Dude, I already said it. That ideology you call libertarian is not what other people call it. Your description is like jello nailed to a wall. I'm not interested in teaching you about the propaganda that is called libertarian.

We have civil rights laws and I stand by them. Libertarians don't. They stand for property rights above human rights. I reject that concept.

Dryxi said:

And yet most libertarians would probably agree that rules and protections are still important. The source is needed to establish creditability to the individuals views that you speak of. Is he the only one with those views? If I say, "I met a Democrat once, they told me the privilege of owning property is one of white privilege and it must be taken away", the creditability of that individual means it should be assumed they speak for the majority of democrats?

You need a source on that. The lack of one shows we are simply speaking from a biased perspective with the goal of throwing mud. Typical.

Click to expand...

"And yet most libertarians would probably agree that rules and protections are still important."
You need a source on that. The lack of one shows we are simply speaking from a biased perspective with the goal of throwing mud. Typical.

Fogdog said:

Reagarding my conversation? I'm the source. Call me a liar if you will but you'd be wrong.

If you want to read about what libertarians say about unregulated markets, how about going to what the Libertarian Party says about it?

The Economy | Libertarian Party

Libertarians believe that all people have the right to freely offer goods and services on the market and that free-market approaches are the most effective at improving people’s lives. Our current economy is more crony capitalist than it is free, and that is responsible for the majority of...

www.lp.org

Libertarians believe that the only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. Unfortunately, the vast majority of regulations on the books do not do that. These regulations are heavy burdens on businesses and people who are just trying to make a living, and often prevent new businesses from starting, prevent existing businesses from hiring new employees, and even force businesses to close. This violates the rights of people to engage in peaceful and honest trade. Additionally, it actively hurts people by stifling human energy, innovation, and well-being.

Where in their manifesto are human rights? It's all about property rights, protecting trade and providing a court to adjudicate disputes. Within that statement, the asshole who said demanding head as part of the requirement for a paycheck might be able to justify that belief.

This is so naïve, I can't believe a person can espouse such a belief and still learn to type.

The free market, when it is allowed to do so, provides tremendous opportunity for people of all backgrounds, interests, and abilities.

The context of that statement was what they called crony capitalism. "Free the Market and free yourself".

I don't think you've even read what the Mises Institute says about it all.

They reject science and mathematics because it just "confuses". They adhere to axioms otherwise put by them as praexeology. It's nothing more than religious belief dressed up in modern terms.

Click to expand...

This meme is spot-on in its evaluation of supply-side economics, a darling of libertarians.



aside: the word praxeology reminds me of zetetic, a word held similarly hostage by flat-earthers.

cannabineer said:

This meme is spot-on in its evaluation of supply-side economics, a darling of libertarians.

View attachment 5260637

aside: the word praxeology reminds me of zetetic, a word held similarly hostage by flat-earthers.

Click to expand...

the origin of the word:
In philosophy, praxeology or praxiology (/ˌpræksiˈɒlədʒi/; from Ancient Greek πρᾶξις (praxis) 'deed, action', and -λογία (-logia) 'study of') is the theory of human action, based on the notion that humans engage in purposeful behavior, contrary to reflexive behavior and other unintentional behavior.


It reminds me of the theory of efficient markets where the market always acts rationally and prices are set with all available information. Another chimera.

Fogdog said:

the origin of the word:
In philosophy, praxeology or praxiology (/ˌpræksiˈɒlədʒi/; from Ancient Greek πρᾶξις (praxis) 'deed, action', and -λογία (-logia) 'study of') is the theory of human action, based on the notion that humans engage in purposeful behavior, contrary to reflexive behavior and other unintentional behavior.


It reminds me of the theory of efficient markets where the market always acts rationally and prices are set with all available information. Another chimera.

Click to expand...

Some humans do engage in purposeful behavior, those who create the propaganda and disinformation the weak-minded lap up online. Their first exposure to abstract ideas, are usually bad ones, long since discarded by the mainstream of science and society. Libertarianism is mostly based on a rationality of feelings, not on rational thinking based on facts!

Fogdog said:

Reagarding my conversation? I'm the source. Call me a liar if you will but you'd be wrong.

If you want to read about what libertarians say about unregulated markets, how about going to what the Libertarian Party says about it?

The Economy | Libertarian Party

Libertarians believe that all people have the right to freely offer goods and services on the market and that free-market approaches are the most effective at improving people’s lives. Our current economy is more crony capitalist than it is free, and that is responsible for the majority of...

www.lp.org

Libertarians believe that the only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. Unfortunately, the vast majority of regulations on the books do not do that. These regulations are heavy burdens on businesses and people who are just trying to make a living, and often prevent new businesses from starting, prevent existing businesses from hiring new employees, and even force businesses to close. This violates the rights of people to engage in peaceful and honest trade. Additionally, it actively hurts people by stifling human energy, innovation, and well-being.

Where in their manifesto are human rights? It's all about property rights, protecting trade and providing a court to adjudicate disputes. Within that statement, the asshole who said demanding head as part of the requirement for a paycheck might be able to justify that belief.

This is so naïve, I can't believe a person can espouse such a belief and still learn to type.

The free market, when it is allowed to do so, provides tremendous opportunity for people of all backgrounds, interests, and abilities.

The context of that statement was what they called crony capitalism. "Free the Market and free yourself".

I don't think you've even read what the Mises Institute says about it all.

They reject science and mathematics because it just "confuses". They adhere to axioms otherwise put by them as praexeology. It's nothing more than religious belief dressed up in modern terms.

Click to expand...

The Libertarian Party's focus on property rights is rooted in the belief that it is the foundation for preserving individual freedom and autonomy. However, this does not mean that human rights are neglected or overlooked. Libertarians believe that individual rights, including the right to be free from coercion and to seek legal recourse if such behavior occurs, must be protected. In the context of employment, an employer demanding sexual favors as a condition for employment is a clear violation of voluntary trade and individual freedom.

But, you caught me. My expertise may not be thoroughly enough Libertarian to fully engage in defending them with you as an authority on the subject. I haven't read the mises institute publications at all. Does it state some where that sexual coercion is allowable in the workplace? Guess I'm not Libertarian enough... but it's not required for me to point out obvious places where your bias is showing or your attempt to misrepresent an entire political party. No need to call you a liar, just possibly an exaggerator of the truth?

Dryxi said:

… but it's not required for me to point out obvious places where your bias is showing or your attempt to misrepresent an entire political party. No need to call you a liar, just possibly an exaggerator of the truth?

Click to expand...

actually it is required.

Unless you can point to text in the libertarian handbook expressly addressing the issue, a worst-case analysis is quite appropriate.

Libertarians have wedded themselves to an ineffective philosophy. You yourself invoked natural laws, a concept that is at best controversial. I think it is fraudulent.

Fogdog mentioned praxeology, another key concept stated as axiom but not robust under examination.

It is a faith-based enterprise, and that is something I don’t want to see in our government.

DIY-HP-LED said:

Some humans do engage in purposeful behavior, those who create the propaganda and disinformation the weak-minded lap up online. Their first exposure to abstract ideas, are usually bad ones, long since discarded by the mainstream of science and society. Libertarianism is mostly based on a rationality of feelings, not on rational thinking based on facts!

Click to expand...

Psychologist's definition of purposeful behavior: Behavior that has a particular and recognized goal in mind. The behavior that will aid in achieving that goal.

PURPOSEFUL BEHAVIOR: "His losing enough weight to compete is a purposeful behavior"

By that definition, everybody sometimes acts with a purpose in mind. But is that always a good thing? The people on Jan 6 acted with a purpose in mind. Their problem was they were influenced by a liar.

Again from the Mises institute: Praxeology rests on the fundamental axiom that individual human beings act, that is, on the primordial fact that individuals engage in conscious actions toward chosen goals.

The foundation that developed US libertarian ideology says this is an irrefutable fact. They base everything on this axiom.

Is it true?


92 percent of people who set New Year's goals never actually achieve them.

The article goes on to describe behaviors of the 8% of people who go on to achieve their goals. My point being that praxeology is a false start at developing an economic theory.

While it's nice to think that everybody acts according to their goals, the fact is, we don't. There is something else that motivates us. To base an economy on a false assumption is lethal to the society and people who were forced to live under it. And that's what it would take -- force. Just like Communism, Libertarianism is based upon false assumptions that require massive authoritarian control to warp a society into aping a false ideal.