- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Things Libertarians need to realize...
Posted on 2/12/14 at 4:47 pm to LSUnKaty
Posted on 2/12/14 at 4:47 pm to LSUnKaty
quote:
One must interact with the system to effect the system.
This is the major point.
And, I believe that there are a ton of Republicans that would immediately attach themselves to a well organized Libertarian movement within the party. In fact, I think people are basically begging for it.
This post was edited on 2/12/14 at 4:49 pm
1
Posted on 2/12/14 at 4:48 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:What is also ironic is the way "We are for the poor people/middle class" Democrats in the Senate posture mightily (and self-righteously) along those lines, but in 2012, the top three richest Senators were democrats, and that would be 4 of the top 5 richest also democrats. In fact, only 3 of the top 10 richest Senators were republicans. Hmmm.
What is ironic is when "Less Government" Republicans go to the polls to restrict who can get married.
This post was edited on 2/12/14 at 4:49 pm
Posted on 2/12/14 at 4:50 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:It's naive to think that you can vote your conscious (I am assuming you are talking about politicians because I can't force anyone to do anything)and totally separate your vote from what you believe whether you are Christian, Jew, Hindu, Muslim or Pagan. Do you think the Palestinian/Israel deal is strictly over politics?
There's a difference in choosing to live a certain way based on your own moral beliefs and religious ideals compared to forcing those beliefs onto others.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 4:53 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:Do you mean like forcing a state to adhere to certain views on marriage? Even if that state's residents hold different views?
compared to forcing those beliefs onto others.
Just asking. Is that forcing beliefs and ideals on people?
Posted on 2/12/14 at 4:54 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
If I had a real life you think I'd be posting here?
Posted on 2/12/14 at 4:57 pm to LSUnKaty
quote:
Do you mean like forcing a state to adhere to certain views on marriage? Even if that state's residents hold different views?
Just asking. Is that forcing beliefs and ideals on people?
Really? You aren't forcing or prohibiting private individuals from doing anything by having gay marriage imposed on a state government.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 4:57 pm to bamafan1001
quote:
1) Fiscal issues matter way more than minute social issues(gay marriage
quote:
4) The Christian right is fighting the same battles on the same side as Libertarians on 1
LOL
Posted on 2/12/14 at 5:02 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
9) Electing a libertarian to public office is like electing an atheist for Pope.
10) If you don't elect a libertarian you're just going to get more of the same. What choice do you have?
Posted on 2/12/14 at 5:04 pm to moneyg
quote:What, in the history of politics, would lead you to this conclusion?
One must interact with the system to effect the system.
This is the major point.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 5:06 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
What, in the history of politics, would lead you to this conclusion?
The ineffectiveness of 3rd party movements.
This post was edited on 2/12/14 at 5:07 pm
Posted on 2/12/14 at 5:41 pm to moneyg
quote:
One must interact with the system to effect the system.
This is the major point.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What, in the history of politics, would lead you to this conclusion?
quote:So, you're basing the future of this country on hopes that the system has never heard the story of the Trojan Horse. Interesting.
The ineffectiveness of 3rd party movements.
Almost as interesting as your belief that third parties haven't succeeded for a lack of interaction with the system.
Sort of negates the entire concept of a third party, doesn't it.
Can you give me an example, in the history of politics, where interaction with the system fundamentally changed the system?
Posted on 2/12/14 at 5:42 pm to moneyg
quote:
The ineffectiveness of 3rd party movements.
I don't consider winning the election as the only sign of effectiveness. Third party politics influences the two dominant parties in a big way.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 5:50 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Aside from tasking the speechwriters to pander to a wider audience, how does a third party influence the two dominant parties?
Third party politics influences the two dominant parties in a big way.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 7:45 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:Really?
You aren't forcing or prohibiting private individuals from doing anything by having gay marriage imposed on a state government
Well, I have it on the highest authority that we have the right to vote in this country. So tell me, where does your right to vote stand when shite that is voted in isn't?
Notwithstanding that, let's try it this way. Do you mean like telling people what kind of health insurance they can buy or what size soda they can drink. Even if they hold different views?
Just asking. Is that forcing beliefs and ideals on people?
Posted on 2/12/14 at 7:51 pm to TX Tiger
quote:The point, I believe, was that if libertarians eschew government and the state how can they be a part of the state apparatus. Insinuating that libertarian political organizations are fundamentally hypocritical.
Can you give me an example, in the history of politics, where interaction with the system fundamentally changed the system?
My only point was in a representative system one needs to engage on some level to have your voice heard.
I can't believe you would disagree with that.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 8:18 pm to LSUnKaty
quote:I wasn't disagreeing with that. I was disagreeing with the assumption that if one's voice is heard, change would follow.
My only point was in a representative system one needs to engage on some level to have your voice heard.
I can't believe you would disagree with that.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 9:34 pm to bamafan1001
quote:
Those two first responses are why Libertarians will never have a legitimate seat at the table and that makes me sad.
I don't want to be anywhere near that table.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 9:42 pm to bamafan1001
quote:
1) Fiscal issues matter way more than minute social issues(gay marriage etc)
That cuts both ways. If they are more important, then why do conservatives and republicans run so hard on social issues? You're alienating the youth, who might otherwise be receptive to what you have to say.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 9:45 pm to Patrick O Rly
It's also dividing issues that shouldn't be divided.
Property rights are property rights. There aren't "economic property rights" and "social property rights".
Property rights are property rights. There aren't "economic property rights" and "social property rights".
Posted on 2/12/14 at 10:05 pm to joshnorris14
I realize I'm jumping in late and I apologize if this has been brought up already I skimmed most of the replies.
But in regard to the OP saying Libertarians don't focus on fiscal issues is a bit of a surprise to me. Perhaps it's all the anarcho caps I hang with online facebook etc that has skewed my perspective. Libertarians are not going to win major elections without big donors. Who has the big donors? It seems to me that big corporations do not donate to libertarians precisely because of their stance on fiscal issues. (ie) no GM bail outs, no Wall Street bail outs, no housing mortgage bail outs etc. So in short it's precisely BECAUSE Libertarians are firm on fiscal issues and that's why they don't get the big corporate sponsors and thus the ammo to win elections. In part anyways but I think that's a huge part.
And yes there's overlap with the tea party on issues but that's mainly fiscal. There's no over lap on immigration, womens rights to chose, gay marriage,and the death penalty. One can easily point out all the issues that Libertarians share with liberals yet no one makes the claim that these two positions are the same. And if they did I'd take that as an insult.
But in regard to the OP saying Libertarians don't focus on fiscal issues is a bit of a surprise to me. Perhaps it's all the anarcho caps I hang with online facebook etc that has skewed my perspective. Libertarians are not going to win major elections without big donors. Who has the big donors? It seems to me that big corporations do not donate to libertarians precisely because of their stance on fiscal issues. (ie) no GM bail outs, no Wall Street bail outs, no housing mortgage bail outs etc. So in short it's precisely BECAUSE Libertarians are firm on fiscal issues and that's why they don't get the big corporate sponsors and thus the ammo to win elections. In part anyways but I think that's a huge part.
And yes there's overlap with the tea party on issues but that's mainly fiscal. There's no over lap on immigration, womens rights to chose, gay marriage,and the death penalty. One can easily point out all the issues that Libertarians share with liberals yet no one makes the claim that these two positions are the same. And if they did I'd take that as an insult.
This post was edited on 2/12/14 at 10:08 pm
Page 7 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News