"anorton" wrote in message
news

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"David R. Birch" wrote in message
...
On 6/2/2011 6:09 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message
...
On 6/1/2011 10:52 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
wrote in message
...
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is
aesthetics, are dominated by liberals.
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is
replicable
measurements, are dominated by conservatives.

I would assume that most dance choreographers are liberal.
I would assume that most machinists are conservative.

But here on rec.crafts.metalworking, I am reading some posts by
liberals who are interested in metalworking.
What gives here?
Are liberals just looking for forums to argue?

I think the real question is why people who supposedly can think
would
ever
be ideologically conservative or liberal? Or, especially,
libertarian?
d8-)

Do you believe that people who can think must therefore be
authoritarian?

Nope. Nor do they believe in the market tyrrany that ideological
libertarians would impose, in which poor people are at the whim and
mercy of
handouts for medical care, and in which banksters run the world by
controlling all of the money, with no restrictions on monopoly or
collusion
among them. Only those who could afford it would get an education
("principle" 2.8 of the platform). Those are among the mindless
reductionisms that the Libertarian Party platform provides for, if you
read
it with a critical eye.

That's where thinking comes in. Libertarianism can be a mindless
ideology
like all other ideologies. In the case of libertarianism, the
mindlessness
results in this, inevitably: It takes power away from democratically
elected
government and turns it over to money, in the form of monopolies,
cartels,
and oligopolies. Astute observers have recognized this since the time
of
Adam Smith.

Now, that's libertarianism as an ideology. Conservatism, liberalism,
and any
other ideology you can think of has equally disastrous failings.

You oversimplify. That's libertarian right. Just as there are
authoritarian left and right, so there are also two sides to
libertarianism.

Well, you may be just the guy to clear up something for the rest of us.
You're suggesting that there is a side to libertarianism other than
"libertarian right." I was basing the words above on the Libertarian
Party platform, which says, among other things:

"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. All efforts by government to
redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a
free society." (principle 2.0)

"We oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and
interest rates. We advocate the repeal of all laws banning or restricting
the advertising of prices, products, or services. We oppose all
violations of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and
freedom of trade." (principle 2.1)

That's an invitation to monopoly and collusion to control markets, to
predatory pricing to strangle new market entrants, etc. Someone at the
Party office got carried away with the music of their words and didn't
think about what they mean. They forgot about Standard Oil, the Steel
Trust, and other monopolies of the late 19th century, and how they came
about. They also forgot about quack doctors and snake oil drug salesmen.

Now, does your flavor of libertarianism (what do you call it, "liberal
libertarian"?) hold to those principles, too? And if not, what is it
about your position that can be called "libertarian"?


Most people who call themselves conservative, or liberal, or
libertarian do
not really buy into the ideologies. Their postures most often reflect
an
attitude and a leaning. On a scale, they lie somewhere between dead
center
and the ideological extreme, and the closer they are to the true center
of
political and economic thought they are, the more thoughtful and
insightful
they're likely to be.

There's nothing wrong with leanings and attitudes. That diversity of
persepective and opinion is essential to a democratic society if it is
to
avoid falling into a static and entropic state. Further, as I've said
many
times, most Americans, including myself, have a greater or lesser
streak of
libertarian attitude. But not ideology. That's for the people who can't
deal
with the anxiety and challenge of the real, and very messy, world,
including
contradictory facts and ideas that are equally true.


Authoritarian means, among other things, believing that you have the
right
to think for others. I don't happen to need or want that.

Hardly anyone does.

Yet the authoritarian left and right seem to need to do that for
everyone. And they do it so poorly!

One of the two basic strains of conservatism in America is highly
authoritarian ("law and order" conservatives -- the traditional type, who
have morphed into what we now call "social conservatives."). The other is
what's being called "libertarian" today. What they are, in their pure
form, is what Murray Rothbard called "anarcho-capitalists." That was a
term of approval by Rothbard, by the way, and it was in use for 12 or 15
years before the invention of modern "libertarianism" and the Libertarian
Party.

Now, how do you differ from that conservative type of libertarian? Do you
somehow restrict commerce or contracts to differentiate yourself from the
conservatives? Are there other differences between you and them?

--
Ed Huntress

Ed, he is probably one of these types of libertarian:
http://www.leftycartoons.com/the-24-...f-libertarian/

(How many of these folks frequent this group?)

HA-ha! Those are good. I think we have at least 20 of those types here. g

--
Ed Huntress

On Jun 1, 10:58*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 16:08:27 -0500, Jon Elson
wrote:





On 06/01/2011 10:33 AM, wrote:
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is
aesthetics, are dominated by liberals.
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is replicable
measurements, are dominated by conservatives.

I would assume that most dance choreographers are liberal.
I would assume that most machinists are conservative.

But here on rec.crafts.metalworking, I am reading some posts by
liberals who are interested in metalworking.
What gives here?
Are liberals just looking for forums to argue?

Although some of my friends might consider me a liberal, I have a mix of
opinions, some that sound more liberal, some that sound more
conservative. *I certainly don't come here for political fodder, or to
argue anything other than how best to make some kind of widget.

Jon

Im rather socially liberal. Really. Those of you who read my posts
should be quite aware of this.

However..Im politically conservative.

Gunner

*Whenever a Liberal utters the term "Common Sense approach"....grab your
*wallet, your ass, and your guns because the sombitch is about to do
*something damned nasty to all three of them.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yeah Gummer...

Socially liberal.

Politically conservative.

Financially parasite.

TMT

On Jun 2, 1:22*am, Rich Grise wrote:
Tom Gardner wrote:

wrote in message
....
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is
aesthetics, are dominated by liberals.
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is
replicable
measurements, are dominated by conservatives.

I would assume that most dance choreographers are liberal.
I would assume that most machinists are conservative.

But here on rec.crafts.metalworking, I am reading some posts by
liberals who are interested in metalworking.
What gives here?
Are liberals just looking for forums to argue?

A better question might be :What percentage of machinists are
Capitalists?" *The difference exists between those that believe in
wealth creation and those that believe in wealth redistribution.
Obviously, wealth redistributionists arrogantly view wealth
creationists with distain and have no idea where wealth comes
from...they just know that they want to take it away from those that
make it.

Even socialists are capitalists. Without capital, there wouldn't be anything
but flowers and trees and caves and raw meat.

It's just that under socialism, the rulers hold all the capital.

Hope This Helps!
Rich- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So you are saying that because Republicans want the rich folk to hold
all the capital they are socialists.

Thought so.

TMT

David R. Birch wrote:
On 6/2/2011 6:09 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Now, that's libertarianism as an ideology. Conservatism, liberalism, and
any other ideology you can think of has equally disastrous failings.

You oversimplify. That's libertarian right. Just as there are
authoritarian left and right, so there are also two sides to
libertarianism.

Maybe this can help clear things up on that matter:
http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz

Hope This Helps!
Richard the Dreaded Libertarian

On 6/2/2011 10:18 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message
...
On 6/2/2011 6:09 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message
...
On 6/1/2011 10:52 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
wrote in message
...
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is
aesthetics, are dominated by liberals.
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is replicable
measurements, are dominated by conservatives.

I would assume that most dance choreographers are liberal.
I would assume that most machinists are conservative.

But here on rec.crafts.metalworking, I am reading some posts by
liberals who are interested in metalworking.
What gives here?
Are liberals just looking for forums to argue?

I think the real question is why people who supposedly can think would
ever
be ideologically conservative or liberal? Or, especially, libertarian?
d8-)

Do you believe that people who can think must therefore be
authoritarian?

Nope. Nor do they believe in the market tyrrany that ideological
libertarians would impose, in which poor people are at the whim and mercy
of
handouts for medical care, and in which banksters run the world by
controlling all of the money, with no restrictions on monopoly or
collusion
among them. Only those who could afford it would get an education
("principle" 2.8 of the platform). Those are among the mindless
reductionisms that the Libertarian Party platform provides for, if you
read
it with a critical eye.

That's where thinking comes in. Libertarianism can be a mindless ideology
like all other ideologies. In the case of libertarianism, the
mindlessness
results in this, inevitably: It takes power away from democratically
elected
government and turns it over to money, in the form of monopolies,
cartels,
and oligopolies. Astute observers have recognized this since the time of
Adam Smith.

Now, that's libertarianism as an ideology. Conservatism, liberalism, and
any
other ideology you can think of has equally disastrous failings.

You oversimplify. That's libertarian right. Just as there are
authoritarian left and right, so there are also two sides to
libertarianism.

Well, you may be just the guy to clear up something for the rest of us.
You're suggesting that there is a side to libertarianism other than
"libertarian right." I was basing the words above on the Libertarian Party
platform, which says, among other things:

"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. All efforts by government to redistribute
wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society."
(principle 2.0)

"We oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and
interest rates. We advocate the repeal of all laws banning or restricting
the advertising of prices, products, or services. We oppose all violations
of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and freedom of
trade." (principle 2.1)

That's an invitation to monopoly and collusion to control markets, to
predatory pricing to strangle new market entrants, etc. Someone at the Party
office got carried away with the music of their words and didn't think about
what they mean. They forgot about Standard Oil, the Steel Trust, and other
monopolies of the late 19th century, and how they came about. They also
forgot about quack doctors and snake oil drug salesmen.

Now, does your flavor of libertarianism (what do you call it, "liberal
libertarian"?) hold to those principles, too? And if not, what is it about
your position that can be called "libertarian"?

The Libertarian Party is libertarian right. The libertarian left is less
concerned about economics and more focused on individual rights, but
also less inclined to politics.


Most people who call themselves conservative, or liberal, or libertarian
do
not really buy into the ideologies. Their postures most often reflect an
attitude and a leaning. On a scale, they lie somewhere between dead
center
and the ideological extreme, and the closer they are to the true center
of
political and economic thought they are, the more thoughtful and
insightful
they're likely to be.

There's nothing wrong with leanings and attitudes. That diversity of
persepective and opinion is essential to a democratic society if it is to
avoid falling into a static and entropic state. Further, as I've said
many
times, most Americans, including myself, have a greater or lesser streak
of
libertarian attitude. But not ideology. That's for the people who can't
deal
with the anxiety and challenge of the real, and very messy, world,
including
contradictory facts and ideas that are equally true.


Authoritarian means, among other things, believing that you have the
right
to think for others. I don't happen to need or want that.

Hardly anyone does.

Yet the authoritarian left and right seem to need to do that for everyone.
And they do it so poorly!

One of the two basic strains of conservatism in America is highly
authoritarian ("law and order" conservatives -- the traditional type, who
have morphed into what we now call "social conservatives."). The other is
what's being called "libertarian" today. What they are, in their pure form,
is what Murray Rothbard called "anarcho-capitalists." That was a term of
approval by Rothbard, by the way, and it was in use for 12 or 15 years
before the invention of modern "libertarianism" and the Libertarian Party.

Now, how do you differ from that conservative type of libertarian? Do you
somehow restrict commerce or contracts to differentiate yourself from the
conservatives? Are there other differences between you and them?

The libertarian left and right are more unalike than the authoritarian
left and right. As far as their effects, the Dems and Reps, as they
represent the authoritarian left and right, are becoming
indistinguishable. Lots of bluster and righteous indignation, but they
end up serving the same interests.

David

"David R. Birch" wrote in message
...
On 6/2/2011 10:18 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message
...
On 6/2/2011 6:09 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message
...
On 6/1/2011 10:52 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
wrote in message
...
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is
aesthetics, are dominated by liberals.
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is
replicable
measurements, are dominated by conservatives.

I would assume that most dance choreographers are liberal.
I would assume that most machinists are conservative.

But here on rec.crafts.metalworking, I am reading some posts by
liberals who are interested in metalworking.
What gives here?
Are liberals just looking for forums to argue?

I think the real question is why people who supposedly can think
would
ever
be ideologically conservative or liberal? Or, especially,
libertarian?
d8-)

Do you believe that people who can think must therefore be
authoritarian?

Nope. Nor do they believe in the market tyrrany that ideological
libertarians would impose, in which poor people are at the whim and
mercy
of
handouts for medical care, and in which banksters run the world by
controlling all of the money, with no restrictions on monopoly or
collusion
among them. Only those who could afford it would get an education
("principle" 2.8 of the platform). Those are among the mindless
reductionisms that the Libertarian Party platform provides for, if you
read
it with a critical eye.

That's where thinking comes in. Libertarianism can be a mindless
ideology
like all other ideologies. In the case of libertarianism, the
mindlessness
results in this, inevitably: It takes power away from democratically
elected
government and turns it over to money, in the form of monopolies,
cartels,
and oligopolies. Astute observers have recognized this since the time
of
Adam Smith.

Now, that's libertarianism as an ideology. Conservatism, liberalism,
and
any
other ideology you can think of has equally disastrous failings.

You oversimplify. That's libertarian right. Just as there are
authoritarian left and right, so there are also two sides to
libertarianism.

Well, you may be just the guy to clear up something for the rest of us.
You're suggesting that there is a side to libertarianism other than
"libertarian right." I was basing the words above on the Libertarian
Party
platform, which says, among other things:

"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. All efforts by government to redistribute
wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society."
(principle 2.0)

"We oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and
interest rates. We advocate the repeal of all laws banning or restricting
the advertising of prices, products, or services. We oppose all
violations
of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and freedom of
trade." (principle 2.1)

That's an invitation to monopoly and collusion to control markets, to
predatory pricing to strangle new market entrants, etc. Someone at the
Party
office got carried away with the music of their words and didn't think
about
what they mean. They forgot about Standard Oil, the Steel Trust, and
other
monopolies of the late 19th century, and how they came about. They also
forgot about quack doctors and snake oil drug salesmen.

Now, does your flavor of libertarianism (what do you call it, "liberal
libertarian"?) hold to those principles, too? And if not, what is it
about
your position that can be called "libertarian"?

The Libertarian Party is libertarian right. The libertarian left is less
concerned about economics and more focused on individual rights, but also
less inclined to politics.


Most people who call themselves conservative, or liberal, or
libertarian
do
not really buy into the ideologies. Their postures most often reflect
an
attitude and a leaning. On a scale, they lie somewhere between dead
center
and the ideological extreme, and the closer they are to the true center
of
political and economic thought they are, the more thoughtful and
insightful
they're likely to be.

There's nothing wrong with leanings and attitudes. That diversity of
persepective and opinion is essential to a democratic society if it is
to
avoid falling into a static and entropic state. Further, as I've said
many
times, most Americans, including myself, have a greater or lesser
streak
of
libertarian attitude. But not ideology. That's for the people who can't
deal
with the anxiety and challenge of the real, and very messy, world,
including
contradictory facts and ideas that are equally true.


Authoritarian means, among other things, believing that you have the
right
to think for others. I don't happen to need or want that.

Hardly anyone does.

Yet the authoritarian left and right seem to need to do that for
everyone.
And they do it so poorly!

One of the two basic strains of conservatism in America is highly
authoritarian ("law and order" conservatives -- the traditional type, who
have morphed into what we now call "social conservatives."). The other is
what's being called "libertarian" today. What they are, in their pure
form,
is what Murray Rothbard called "anarcho-capitalists." That was a term of
approval by Rothbard, by the way, and it was in use for 12 or 15 years
before the invention of modern "libertarianism" and the Libertarian
Party.

Now, how do you differ from that conservative type of libertarian? Do you
somehow restrict commerce or contracts to differentiate yourself from the
conservatives? Are there other differences between you and them?

The libertarian left and right are more unalike than the authoritarian
left and right. As far as their effects, the Dems and Reps, as they
represent the authoritarian left and right, are becoming
indistinguishable. Lots of bluster and righteous indignation, but they end
up serving the same interests.

David

"Emphasis" is all well and good, but I'm asking about which specific
policies a left libertarian would support or not. Maybe you can clear it up
with few examples. Does a left libertarian support the idea that we should
not have state-supported education, that every parent is responsible to pay
for the education of his kids, in a private-school market? And, second, does
a left libertarian support a completely free banking market, in which anyone
can set up a bank, issue credit at will and trade in derivatives under the
table, with no government oversight of securities markets? Third, does a
left libertarian support selling food and drugs with no Pure Food and Drug
Act in place, no inspection of meat, and no certification of
pharmaceuticals?

Those are key points of contention between the people who usually call
themselves libertarian and the rest of us. It sounds like you're saying that
those are "right" libertarian positions. Are they also left libertarian
positions?

--
Ed Huntress

"Rich Grise" wrote in message
...
David R. Birch wrote:
On 6/2/2011 6:09 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Now, that's libertarianism as an ideology. Conservatism, liberalism, and
any other ideology you can think of has equally disastrous failings.

You oversimplify. That's libertarian right. Just as there are
authoritarian left and right, so there are also two sides to
libertarianism.

Maybe this can help clear things up on that matter:
http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz

Hope This Helps!
Richard the Dreaded Libertarian

It's interesting, but the subject here is ideology and ideologues, not
leanings. Most of the people I associate with lean one way or the other, but
ideologues use an ersatz kind of deductive reasoning to reach absolute and
extreme positions.

An ideological libertarian, according to the Libertarian Party Platform,
opposes pharmaceutical certification, meat inspection, public education,
monopolies, and free-wheeling securities trading.

--
Ed Huntress

On 6/2/2011 8:18 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Authoritarian means, among other things, believing that you have the
right
to think for others. I don't happen to need or want that.

Hardly anyone does.

Yet the authoritarian left and right seem to need to do that for everyone.
And they do it so poorly!

One of the two basic strains of conservatism in America is highly
authoritarian ("law and order" conservatives -- the traditional type, who
have morphed into what we now call "social conservatives."). The other is
what's being called "libertarian" today. What they are, in their pure form,
is what Murray Rothbard called "anarcho-capitalists." That was a term of
approval by Rothbard, by the way, and it was in use for 12 or 15 years
before the invention of modern "libertarianism" and the Libertarian Party.

Now, how do you differ from that conservative type of libertarian? Do you
somehow restrict commerce or contracts to differentiate yourself from the
conservatives? Are there other differences between you and them?



What strikes me as funny about libertarianism is that we already had a
world that was like what the libertarians want. It was early America,
when the government did just about nothing except provide for defense
and the post office, and provide money and a legal system.

What we learned is that was wholly inadequate to satisfy the needs and
wants of the majority of the public. Hence the adoption of all the
things our modern state is involved in. The rest of the modern countries
have all followed a similar model. None of them, or us, want to go back
to a time when the government was virtually nonexistent. Because things
were clearly worse for everyone when we had the kind of government
libertarians want.

It's like libertarians are people who think history began in the 1950s.
Worse that that is they are in a fantasy about how bad things would be
if they actually got their way.

Hawke

"Ignoramus6203" wrote in message
...
On 2011-06-03, Ed Huntress wrote:
An ideological libertarian, according to the Libertarian Party Platform,
opposes pharmaceutical certification, meat inspection, public education,
monopolies, and free-wheeling securities trading.

I would think that an ideological libertarian would support
monopolies and free-wheeling securities trading.

i

Read on in the thread. I caught it. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

Ignoramus6203 wrote:
On 2011-06-03, Ed Huntress wrote:
An ideological libertarian, according to the Libertarian Party Platform,
opposes pharmaceutical certification, meat inspection, public education,
monopolies, and free-wheeling securities trading.

I would think that an ideological libertarian would support
monopolies and free-wheeling securities trading.

Without government collusion, monopolies get driven out of business
by leaner, quicker competitors.

Cheers!
Rich

"Rich Grise" wrote in message
...
Ignoramus6203 wrote:
On 2011-06-03, Ed Huntress wrote:
An ideological libertarian, according to the Libertarian Party Platform,
opposes pharmaceutical certification, meat inspection, public education,
monopolies, and free-wheeling securities trading.

I would think that an ideological libertarian would support
monopolies and free-wheeling securities trading.

Without government collusion, monopolies get driven out of business
by leaner, quicker competitors.

Then explain Standard Oil, International Harvester, and the sugar trust.

I think you're behind the curve on libertarian/anarcho-capitalist thinking
here, Rich. Their pitch now is that these monopolies were *good* for the
economy. In the case of Standard Oil, the pro-monopolist extreme capitalists
even say that competition was bad for the environment. g Fortunately for
libertarian theory and for the US economy, they never got a chance to see
their ideas put into action.

There are different kind of monopolies, and I'm not talking about natural
monopolies, like water or electrical utilities. The monopolies in question
break down into coercive and non-coercive. If a monopoly is non-coercive,
there is a strong possibility that new entrants in a market will break the
monopoly down with competition. This is the case with Microsoft, in the
opinion of those extreme capitalists, although we continue to wait for
results.

Those monopolies I listed at the top were coercive, and had to be broken up
with the Sherman Anti-Trust law. US Steel collapsed of its own weight, but
not until it had screwed up the steel market in the US. If they had been
smarter, and under libertarian policy, we could still be under their thumb.
When the cost of entry is high or the cost of building a distribution
network is prohibitive in a competitive market, forget it.

But today, the bigger issue is that large monopolies have coercive power
over *government*. We're already on the verge of an oligarchy.

Likewise, there would be a lot of dead people resulting from libertarian
policies on food and drugs. The finance industry has provided the model for
any business operating with little or no regulation: Once the executives and
original investors have set themselves up with good parachutes, they hardly
care whether the business goes belly-up. Nor do they care how much damage
they do.

--
Ed Huntress

On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 10:39:49 -0700, Hawke
wrote:

On 6/2/2011 8:18 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Authoritarian means, among other things, believing that you have the
right
to think for others. I don't happen to need or want that.

Hardly anyone does.

Yet the authoritarian left and right seem to need to do that for everyone.
And they do it so poorly!

One of the two basic strains of conservatism in America is highly
authoritarian ("law and order" conservatives -- the traditional type, who
have morphed into what we now call "social conservatives."). The other is
what's being called "libertarian" today. What they are, in their pure form,
is what Murray Rothbard called "anarcho-capitalists." That was a term of
approval by Rothbard, by the way, and it was in use for 12 or 15 years
before the invention of modern "libertarianism" and the Libertarian Party.

Now, how do you differ from that conservative type of libertarian? Do you
somehow restrict commerce or contracts to differentiate yourself from the
conservatives? Are there other differences between you and them?



What strikes me as funny about libertarianism is that we already had a
world that was like what the libertarians want. It was early America,
when the government did just about nothing except provide for defense
and the post office, and provide money and a legal system.

What we learned is that was wholly inadequate to satisfy the needs and
wants of the majority of the public. Hence the adoption of all the
things our modern state is involved in. The rest of the modern countries
have all followed a similar model. None of them, or us, want to go back
to a time when the government was virtually nonexistent. Because things
were clearly worse for everyone when we had the kind of government
libertarians want.

It's like libertarians are people who think history began in the 1950s.
Worse that that is they are in a fantasy about how bad things would be
if they actually got their way.

Hawke


With one exception. In early America, local governments probably were
far more receptive to their constituent's desires then at present.
When you had to stand up on a stump and address the 4th of July clam
bake you had better been doing what the voters like or you'd find out
really quickly. Now they just spend a few million on the T.V. and that
is it.

On 6/3/2011 8:20 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message

The Libertarian Party is libertarian right. The libertarian left is
less concerned about economics and more focused on individual
rights, but also less inclined to politics.

The libertarian left and right are more unalike than the
authoritarian left and right. As far as their effects, the Dems and
Reps, as they represent the authoritarian left and right, are
becoming indistinguishable. Lots of bluster and righteous
indignation, but they end up serving the same interests.

David

"Emphasis" is all well and good, but I'm asking about which specific
policies a left libertarian would support or not. Maybe you can clear
it up with few examples. Does a left libertarian support the idea
that we should not have state-supported education, that every parent
is responsible to pay for the education of his kids, in a
private-school market? And, second, does a left libertarian support a
completely free banking market, in which anyone can set up a bank,
issue credit at will and trade in derivatives under the table, with
no government oversight of securities markets? Third, does a left
libertarian support selling food and drugs with no Pure Food and
Drug Act in place, no inspection of meat, and no certification of
pharmaceuticals?

I've noticed you usually read what you reply to, why not this time?

Those are key points of contention between the people who usually
call themselves libertarian and the rest of us.

I don't speak for those who "call themselves libertarian", just myself.

It sounds like you're saying that those are "right" libertarian
positions. Are they also left libertarian positions?

I'd be surprised if you could find two left libertarians who would agree
enough on much to be able to say there really are any positions.
Authoritarians have it so much easier since they have leaders to tell
what their positions should be.

David

Liberals make machine parts to feel good about what they are
doing.

Me, repairman, doing useful work (unlike most liberals).
It's necessary to be precise, and make things that work.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


wrote in message
...
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is
aesthetics, are dominated by liberals.
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is
replicable
measurements, are dominated by conservatives.

I would assume that most dance choreographers are liberal.
I would assume that most machinists are conservative.

But here on rec.crafts.metalworking, I am reading some posts
by
liberals who are interested in metalworking.
What gives here?
Are liberals just looking for forums to argue?

On Jun 3, 7:48*pm, john B. wrote:
On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 10:39:49 -0700, Hawke





wrote:
On 6/2/2011 8:18 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Authoritarian means, among other things, believing that you have the
right
to think for others. I don't happen to need or want that.

Hardly anyone does.

Yet the authoritarian left and right seem to need to do that for everyone.
And they do it so poorly!

One of the two basic strains of conservatism in America is highly
authoritarian ("law and order" conservatives -- the traditional type, who
have morphed into what we now call "social conservatives."). The other is
what's being called "libertarian" today. What they are, in their pure form,
is what Murray Rothbard called "anarcho-capitalists." That was a term of
approval by Rothbard, by the way, and it was in use for 12 or 15 years
before the invention of modern "libertarianism" and the Libertarian Party.

Now, how do you differ from that conservative type of libertarian? Do you
somehow restrict commerce or contracts to differentiate yourself from the
conservatives? Are there other differences between you and them?

What strikes me as funny about libertarianism is that we already had a
world that was like what the libertarians want. It was early America,
when the government did just about nothing except provide for defense
and the post office, and provide money and a legal system.

What we learned is that was wholly inadequate to satisfy the needs and
wants of the majority of the public. Hence the adoption of all the
things our modern state is involved in. The rest of the modern countries
have all followed a similar model. None of them, or us, want to go back
to a time when the government was virtually nonexistent. Because things
were clearly worse for everyone when we had the kind of government
libertarians want.

It's like libertarians are people who think history began in the 1950s.
Worse that that is they are in a fantasy about how bad things would be
if they actually got their way.

Hawke

With one exception. In early America, local governments probably were
far more receptive to their constituent's desires then at present.
When you had to stand up on a stump and address the 4th of July clam
bake you had better been doing what the voters like or you'd find out
really quickly. Now they just spend a few million on the T.V. and that
is it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Does your televison remote have a mute button?

Mine does.

I wear the mute button out when politicians and commercials come on.

TMT

"David R. Birch" wrote in message
...
On 6/3/2011 8:20 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message

The Libertarian Party is libertarian right. The libertarian left is
less concerned about economics and more focused on individual
rights, but also less inclined to politics.

The libertarian left and right are more unalike than the
authoritarian left and right. As far as their effects, the Dems and
Reps, as they represent the authoritarian left and right, are
becoming indistinguishable. Lots of bluster and righteous
indignation, but they end up serving the same interests.

David

"Emphasis" is all well and good, but I'm asking about which specific
policies a left libertarian would support or not. Maybe you can clear
it up with few examples. Does a left libertarian support the idea
that we should not have state-supported education, that every parent
is responsible to pay for the education of his kids, in a
private-school market? And, second, does a left libertarian support a
completely free banking market, in which anyone can set up a bank,
issue credit at will and trade in derivatives under the table, with
no government oversight of securities markets? Third, does a left
libertarian support selling food and drugs with no Pure Food and
Drug Act in place, no inspection of meat, and no certification of
pharmaceuticals?

I've noticed you usually read what you reply to, why not this time?

Those are key points of contention between the people who usually
call themselves libertarian and the rest of us.

I don't speak for those who "call themselves libertarian", just myself.

Well, you're calling *yourself* libertarian, so the question is what you
mean by that.

It sounds like your views are like those that used to be called "civil
libertarians." Maybe you guys need a new description that distinguishes you
from Libertarians. d8-)


It sounds like you're saying that those are "right" libertarian
positions. Are they also left libertarian positions?

I'd be surprised if you could find two left libertarians who would agree
enough on much to be able to say there really are any positions.
Authoritarians have it so much easier since they have leaders to tell what
their positions should be.

David

You've left it unclear how "authoritarian" you would be about economic
issues. If you don't care, that's one thing. If you oppose all regulation,
then you're close to what you're calling a "right" libertarian, or a
Libertarian. If you favor some regulation, then you're closer to the center,
with a strong civil-liberties interest.

That makes it hard to identify what someone means when he says
"libertarian." Maybe the Libertarians will set up a sub-category for you
guys...

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
..

That makes it hard to identify what someone means when he says
"libertarian." Maybe the Libertarians will set up a sub-category for you
guys...


But what then if they also happen to be cross-dressers ?

--

David R. Birch wrote:

I'd be surprised if you could find two left libertarians who would agree
enough on much to be able to say there really are any positions.
Authoritarians have it so much easier since they have leaders to tell
what their positions should be.

I think Ron Paul is the standardbearer for what a "real" Libertarian is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul
And you could always ask the Libertarians themselves:
http://www.lp.org/introduction/what-...ertarian-party

Hope This Helps!
Rich

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
news:1oqdnTwzeNCFWnTQnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@scnresearch. com...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
.

That makes it hard to identify what someone means when he says
"libertarian." Maybe the Libertarians will set up a sub-category for you
guys...


But what then if they also happen to be cross-dressers ?

--

They'd be easier to identify on the street, unless they were really good at
it.

You have to have some sympathy for those liberals, like David, though. All
the good names have been co-opted, even "liberal," which is most accurate,
but the meaning of which has taken a real beating. But choosing
"libertarian" was not a good idea. They've lumped themselves in with the
housebroken anarchists, like Rich, who also call themselves "libertarian."

Have you ever looked up some of these ideological descriptions on Wikipedia?
Holy cow. Every variation and mutation has its own entry now. It's like a
rat's nest of entangled philosophies, and you can hardly pick them apart
with pliers and a crowbar.

If there was world enough and time, it would be interesting to write an
historical account of the philosophical origins of these
Libertarian/libertarians, tracing them to their real roots. They think
they're following the philosophies of the Founding Fathers. Not. Actually,
they're dead-nuts followers of the American intellectual anarchists, who
started the whole thing in the 1830s and 1840s.

--
Ed Huntress

"That government is best which governs least." -- Henry David Thoreau,
Transcendentalist and proto-anarchist, 1834.

"Rich Grise" wrote in message
...
David R. Birch wrote:

I'd be surprised if you could find two left libertarians who would agree
enough on much to be able to say there really are any positions.
Authoritarians have it so much easier since they have leaders to tell
what their positions should be.

I think Ron Paul is the standardbearer for what a "real" Libertarian is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul

Wait a minute. David has just made clear that there are left libertarians
and right libertarians. How can there be one type of libertarian in light of
what he's said?

And you could always ask the Libertarians themselves:
http://www.lp.org/introduction/what-...ertarian-party

Yes, I've quoted a couple of entries from their platform in this thread. It
sounds like a fast, greasy slide into social and economic collapse.

--
Ed Huntress


Hope This Helps!
Rich

On Fri, 3 Jun 2011 22:08:54 -0700 (PDT), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Jun 3, 7:48*pm, john B. wrote:
On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 10:39:49 -0700, Hawke





wrote:
On 6/2/2011 8:18 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Authoritarian means, among other things, believing that you have the
right
to think for others. I don't happen to need or want that.

Hardly anyone does.

Yet the authoritarian left and right seem to need to do that for everyone.
And they do it so poorly!

One of the two basic strains of conservatism in America is highly
authoritarian ("law and order" conservatives -- the traditional type, who
have morphed into what we now call "social conservatives."). The other is
what's being called "libertarian" today. What they are, in their pure form,
is what Murray Rothbard called "anarcho-capitalists." That was a term of
approval by Rothbard, by the way, and it was in use for 12 or 15 years
before the invention of modern "libertarianism" and the Libertarian Party.

Now, how do you differ from that conservative type of libertarian? Do you
somehow restrict commerce or contracts to differentiate yourself from the
conservatives? Are there other differences between you and them?

What strikes me as funny about libertarianism is that we already had a
world that was like what the libertarians want. It was early America,
when the government did just about nothing except provide for defense
and the post office, and provide money and a legal system.

What we learned is that was wholly inadequate to satisfy the needs and
wants of the majority of the public. Hence the adoption of all the
things our modern state is involved in. The rest of the modern countries
have all followed a similar model. None of them, or us, want to go back
to a time when the government was virtually nonexistent. Because things
were clearly worse for everyone when we had the kind of government
libertarians want.

It's like libertarians are people who think history began in the 1950s.
Worse that that is they are in a fantasy about how bad things would be
if they actually got their way.

Hawke

With one exception. In early America, local governments probably were
far more receptive to their constituent's desires then at present.
When you had to stand up on a stump and address the 4th of July clam
bake you had better been doing what the voters like or you'd find out
really quickly. Now they just spend a few million on the T.V. and that
is it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Does your televison remote have a mute button?

Mine does.

I wear the mute button out when politicians and commercials come on.

TMT

I don't watch TV. Too many good books I haven't read.

PrecisionmachinisT wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
.

That makes it hard to identify what someone means when he says
"libertarian." Maybe the Libertarians will set up a sub-category for you
guys...


But what then if they also happen to be cross-dressers ?


Still looking for someone to accept you?


--
It's easy to think outside the box, when you have a cutting torch.

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in message
...
Liberals make machine parts to feel good about what they are
doing.

Me, repairman, doing useful work (unlike most liberals).
It's necessary to be precise, and make things that work.

You, repairman. Me, writer. Cheeta, conservative candidate for President...

--
Ed Huntress


--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.


wrote in message
...
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is
aesthetics, are dominated by liberals.
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is
replicable
measurements, are dominated by conservatives.

I would assume that most dance choreographers are liberal.
I would assume that most machinists are conservative.

But here on rec.crafts.metalworking, I am reading some posts
by
liberals who are interested in metalworking.
What gives here?
Are liberals just looking for forums to argue?

Stormin Mormon wrote:

Liberals make machine parts to feel good about what they are
doing.

Me, repairman, doing useful work (unlike most liberals).


Sorry to hear you don't feel good about what you are doing

But what is really unfortunate is
you think you need to feel bad in order to be useful
Only in America

On 6/4/2011 12:22 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message
...
On 6/3/2011 8:20 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message

The Libertarian Party is libertarian right. The libertarian left is
less concerned about economics and more focused on individual
rights, but also less inclined to politics.

The libertarian left and right are more unalike than the
authoritarian left and right. As far as their effects, the Dems and
Reps, as they represent the authoritarian left and right, are
becoming indistinguishable. Lots of bluster and righteous
indignation, but they end up serving the same interests.

David

"Emphasis" is all well and good, but I'm asking about which specific
policies a left libertarian would support or not. Maybe you can clear
it up with few examples. Does a left libertarian support the idea
that we should not have state-supported education, that every parent
is responsible to pay for the education of his kids, in a
private-school market? And, second, does a left libertarian support a
completely free banking market, in which anyone can set up a bank,
issue credit at will and trade in derivatives under the table, with
no government oversight of securities markets? Third, does a left
libertarian support selling food and drugs with no Pure Food and
Drug Act in place, no inspection of meat, and no certification of
pharmaceuticals?

I've noticed you usually read what you reply to, why not this time?

Those are key points of contention between the people who usually
call themselves libertarian and the rest of us.

I don't speak for those who "call themselves libertarian", just myself.

Well, you're calling *yourself* libertarian, so the question is what you
mean by that.

It sounds like your views are like those that used to be called "civil
libertarians." Maybe you guys need a new description that distinguishes you
from Libertarians. d8-)

How about "libertarian"? Or those other guys could more accurately
identify themselves as "Right Libertarians".

This is one reason I usually avoid this type of issue, the descriptions
I come up with are best summarized with just my name.


It sounds like you're saying that those are "right" libertarian
positions. Are they also left libertarian positions?

I'd be surprised if you could find two left libertarians who would agree
enough on much to be able to say there really are any positions.
Authoritarians have it so much easier since they have leaders to tell what
their positions should be.

David

You've left it unclear how "authoritarian" you would be about economic
issues. If you don't care, that's one thing. If you oppose all regulation,
then you're close to what you're calling a "right" libertarian, or a
Libertarian. If you favor some regulation, then you're closer to the center,
with a strong civil-liberties interest.

How about anarcho-syndicalist, modeled on those in "Monty Python and the
Holy Grail"? Although I tend to take the whole thing less seriously than
they do.

That makes it hard to identify what someone means when he says
"libertarian." Maybe the Libertarians will set up a sub-category for you
guys...

I'm sure they'll get right on that! :^)

David

"David R. Birch" wrote in message
...
On 6/4/2011 12:22 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message
...
On 6/3/2011 8:20 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message

The Libertarian Party is libertarian right. The libertarian left is
less concerned about economics and more focused on individual
rights, but also less inclined to politics.

The libertarian left and right are more unalike than the
authoritarian left and right. As far as their effects, the Dems and
Reps, as they represent the authoritarian left and right, are
becoming indistinguishable. Lots of bluster and righteous
indignation, but they end up serving the same interests.

David

"Emphasis" is all well and good, but I'm asking about which specific
policies a left libertarian would support or not. Maybe you can clear
it up with few examples. Does a left libertarian support the idea
that we should not have state-supported education, that every parent
is responsible to pay for the education of his kids, in a
private-school market? And, second, does a left libertarian support a
completely free banking market, in which anyone can set up a bank,
issue credit at will and trade in derivatives under the table, with
no government oversight of securities markets? Third, does a left
libertarian support selling food and drugs with no Pure Food and
Drug Act in place, no inspection of meat, and no certification of
pharmaceuticals?

I've noticed you usually read what you reply to, why not this time?

Those are key points of contention between the people who usually
call themselves libertarian and the rest of us.

I don't speak for those who "call themselves libertarian", just myself.

Well, you're calling *yourself* libertarian, so the question is what you
mean by that.

It sounds like your views are like those that used to be called "civil
libertarians." Maybe you guys need a new description that distinguishes
you
from Libertarians. d8-)

How about "libertarian"? Or those other guys could more accurately
identify themselves as "Right Libertarians".

This is one reason I usually avoid this type of issue, the descriptions I
come up with are best summarized with just my name.


It sounds like you're saying that those are "right" libertarian
positions. Are they also left libertarian positions?

I'd be surprised if you could find two left libertarians who would agree
enough on much to be able to say there really are any positions.
Authoritarians have it so much easier since they have leaders to tell
what
their positions should be.

David

You've left it unclear how "authoritarian" you would be about economic
issues. If you don't care, that's one thing. If you oppose all
regulation,
then you're close to what you're calling a "right" libertarian, or a
Libertarian. If you favor some regulation, then you're closer to the
center,
with a strong civil-liberties interest.

How about anarcho-syndicalist, modeled on those in "Monty Python and the
Holy Grail"? Although I tend to take the whole thing less seriously than
they do.

Ooooh...you *are* far out there. I wouldn't have guessed. d8-)

Watch out for the Great Crullers...

--
Ed Huntress



That makes it hard to identify what someone means when he says
"libertarian." Maybe the Libertarians will set up a sub-category for you
guys...

I'm sure they'll get right on that! :^)

David

"john B." wrote:

I don't watch TV. Too many good books I haven't read.


My TBR List is over 100 books at the moment. I read about 25 last
month.


--
It's easy to think outside the box, when you have a cutting torch.

I have no clue how you made such a silly conclusion. And,
you are writing to (wrongly) tell me what I'm thinking. Do
you enjoy being badly mistaken?

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"jim" "sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net wrote in message
...


Stormin Mormon wrote:

Liberals make machine parts to feel good about what they
are
doing.

Me, repairman, doing useful work (unlike most liberals).


Sorry to hear you don't feel good about what you are doing

But what is really unfortunate is
you think you need to feel bad in order to be useful
Only in America

If I meet someone who owns and frequently uses a mill or metal lathe,
I can be almost certain that he is a conservative.

Yet on rec.crafts.metalworking, there are a number of liberal
metalworkers making flaming posts.

Why do the few liberal metalworkers come here?

Why causes that?

Stormin Mormon wrote:

I have no clue how you made such a silly conclusion. And,
you are writing to (wrongly) tell me what I'm thinking. Do
you enjoy being badly mistaken?

I did not tell you anything. But since you asked
I will now.

You (for some unknown reasons) announced
you were not like the people who make things
to feel good about what they are doing.

You made it crystal clear that you thought that
"feel good about what they are doing"
was incompatible with "doing useful work"

that is what is know as the "Puritan ethic"
The Puritan ethic is unique to the USA

Feel free to inquire, if you need additional assistance

-jim




--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"jim" "sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net wrote in message
...

Stormin Mormon wrote:

Liberals make machine parts to feel good about what they
are
doing.

Me, repairman, doing useful work (unlike most liberals).


Sorry to hear you don't feel good about what you are doing

But what is really unfortunate is
you think you need to feel bad in order to be useful
Only in America

On 6/3/2011 10:22 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message
...
On 6/3/2011 8:20 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message

The Libertarian Party is libertarian right. The libertarian left is
less concerned about economics and more focused on individual
rights, but also less inclined to politics.

The libertarian left and right are more unalike than the
authoritarian left and right. As far as their effects, the Dems and
Reps, as they represent the authoritarian left and right, are
becoming indistinguishable. Lots of bluster and righteous
indignation, but they end up serving the same interests.

David

"Emphasis" is all well and good, but I'm asking about which specific
policies a left libertarian would support or not. Maybe you can clear
it up with few examples. Does a left libertarian support the idea
that we should not have state-supported education, that every parent
is responsible to pay for the education of his kids, in a
private-school market? And, second, does a left libertarian support a
completely free banking market, in which anyone can set up a bank,
issue credit at will and trade in derivatives under the table, with
no government oversight of securities markets? Third, does a left
libertarian support selling food and drugs with no Pure Food and
Drug Act in place, no inspection of meat, and no certification of
pharmaceuticals?

I've noticed you usually read what you reply to, why not this time?

Those are key points of contention between the people who usually
call themselves libertarian and the rest of us.

I don't speak for those who "call themselves libertarian", just myself.

Well, you're calling *yourself* libertarian, so the question is what you
mean by that.

It sounds like your views are like those that used to be called "civil
libertarians." Maybe you guys need a new description that distinguishes you
from Libertarians. d8-)


It sounds like you're saying that those are "right" libertarian
positions. Are they also left libertarian positions?

I'd be surprised if you could find two left libertarians who would agree
enough on much to be able to say there really are any positions.
Authoritarians have it so much easier since they have leaders to tell what
their positions should be.

David

You've left it unclear how "authoritarian" you would be about economic
issues. If you don't care, that's one thing. If you oppose all regulation,
then you're close to what you're calling a "right" libertarian, or a
Libertarian. If you favor some regulation, then you're closer to the center,
with a strong civil-liberties interest.

That makes it hard to identify what someone means when he says
"libertarian." Maybe the Libertarians will set up a sub-category for you
guys...


I'm pretty sure that you know that most of the guys who are calling
themselves libertarians aren't really libertarians. People who are true
libertarians belong to the party and believe in the party platform. Take
a poll and you find hardly anyone belongs in that category.

What you have instead is a bunch of right wingers who are in essence
anti government, but pretty much only when Democrats are in power. When
republicans are in power you find these same anti government guys
supporting all kinds of intrusive big government policies like war,
deficit spending, and police state expansion.

They're really just conservatives who are anti government when Democrats
run the country. They're whiners who partake from the "socialist"
welfare state as much as anyone else and would not like that to end.
They're libertarians just like we all are libertarians when the
government does something we don't personally want done. You can tell
they're not really libertarians because when it comes to election day
virtually all of them vote straight republican tickets. In reality
they're just fair weather libertarians, meaning they're a libertarian
whenever it suits them. But most of the time they're just conservative
republicans.

Hawke

On 6/4/2011 10:49 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
I have no clue how you made such a silly conclusion. And,
you are writing to (wrongly) tell me what I'm thinking. Do
you enjoy being badly mistaken?



I'm just trying to understand how you figure. You do work that pays
less, requires less intellectual capacity, takes less time to learn, and
is considered to be on the lower end of the scale when it comes to jobs.
Yet you think yourself superior to a "liberal" who is highly educated,
is mentally superior to you, has a higher paying job, and is near the
top when it comes to his job status.

You really have to explain that. Because to most people you are the
loser in that contest.

Hawke

On 6/4/2011 11:02 AM, wrote:
If I meet someone who owns and frequently uses a mill or metal lathe,
I can be almost certain that he is a conservative.

Yet on rec.crafts.metalworking, there are a number of liberal
metalworkers making flaming posts.

Why do the few liberal metalworkers come here?

Why causes that?


Simple, they come here because they have an interest in metalwork. Then
they find they are constantly bombarded by conservatives spewing hateful
political views. So they respond. If the conservatives could keep their
mouths shut about their politics you would see almost nothing from the
liberals here. But asking a conservative to keep his politics to himself
is just about asking the impossible. They're so ****ed off all the time
they just can't shut up.

Hawke

"Hawke" wrote in message
...
On 6/3/2011 10:22 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message
...
On 6/3/2011 8:20 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
"David R. wrote in message

The Libertarian Party is libertarian right. The libertarian left is
less concerned about economics and more focused on individual
rights, but also less inclined to politics.

The libertarian left and right are more unalike than the
authoritarian left and right. As far as their effects, the Dems and
Reps, as they represent the authoritarian left and right, are
becoming indistinguishable. Lots of bluster and righteous
indignation, but they end up serving the same interests.

David

"Emphasis" is all well and good, but I'm asking about which specific
policies a left libertarian would support or not. Maybe you can clear
it up with few examples. Does a left libertarian support the idea
that we should not have state-supported education, that every parent
is responsible to pay for the education of his kids, in a
private-school market? And, second, does a left libertarian support a
completely free banking market, in which anyone can set up a bank,
issue credit at will and trade in derivatives under the table, with
no government oversight of securities markets? Third, does a left
libertarian support selling food and drugs with no Pure Food and
Drug Act in place, no inspection of meat, and no certification of
pharmaceuticals?

I've noticed you usually read what you reply to, why not this time?

Those are key points of contention between the people who usually
call themselves libertarian and the rest of us.

I don't speak for those who "call themselves libertarian", just myself.

Well, you're calling *yourself* libertarian, so the question is what you
mean by that.

It sounds like your views are like those that used to be called "civil
libertarians." Maybe you guys need a new description that distinguishes
you
from Libertarians. d8-)


It sounds like you're saying that those are "right" libertarian
positions. Are they also left libertarian positions?

I'd be surprised if you could find two left libertarians who would agree
enough on much to be able to say there really are any positions.
Authoritarians have it so much easier since they have leaders to tell
what
their positions should be.

David

You've left it unclear how "authoritarian" you would be about economic
issues. If you don't care, that's one thing. If you oppose all
regulation,
then you're close to what you're calling a "right" libertarian, or a
Libertarian. If you favor some regulation, then you're closer to the
center,
with a strong civil-liberties interest.

That makes it hard to identify what someone means when he says
"libertarian." Maybe the Libertarians will set up a sub-category for you
guys...


I'm pretty sure that you know that most of the guys who are calling
themselves libertarians aren't really libertarians. People who are true
libertarians belong to the party and believe in the party platform. Take a
poll and you find hardly anyone belongs in that category.

What you have instead is a bunch of right wingers who are in essence anti
government, but pretty much only when Democrats are in power. When
republicans are in power you find these same anti government guys
supporting all kinds of intrusive big government policies like war,
deficit spending, and police state expansion.

They're really just conservatives who are anti government when Democrats
run the country. They're whiners who partake from the "socialist" welfare
state as much as anyone else and would not like that to end. They're
libertarians just like we all are libertarians when the government does
something we don't personally want done. You can tell they're not really
libertarians because when it comes to election day virtually all of them
vote straight republican tickets. In reality they're just fair weather
libertarians, meaning they're a libertarian whenever it suits them. But
most of the time they're just conservative republicans.

Hawke

That's a good observation, and pretty close to being spot-on. The "left
libertarian" type that David described, and as Curly describes himself,
would be interesting to observe in terms of their voting patterns.

--
Ed Huntress

" wrote:

Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is
aesthetics, are dominated by liberals.
Generally, occupations, where the final arbiter of truth is replicable
measurements, are dominated by conservatives.

I would assume that most dance choreographers are liberal.
I would assume that most machinists are conservative.

I haven't run into many liberal machinists. Not very many liberal engineers either.

Well there was one engineer that was all over the board. Listened to NPR religously, home
schooled his kids, wore a bunch of I care bracelets, rode a bike to work, was an arborist
in his spare time and left my place of work during the most recent collapse the the
economy to work for SIGarms. I really liked that guy, he was interesting!

Wes

" wrote:

and a national debt that is approaching the
GDP, which is almost always fatal to a country.

Except when it isn't

The last time the debt equaled the GDP
It was followed by the greatest period of economic growth
and prosperity in the entire history of the USA?

wrote:
On Jun 4, 11:39*am, Hawke wrote:

I'm pretty sure that you know that most of the guys who are calling
themselves libertarians aren't really libertarians. People who are true
libertarians belong to the party and believe in the party platform. Take
a poll and you find hardly anyone belongs in that category.

The best test I have seen was on Cspan:
Do you believe in more gov interference financially?
Do you believe in more gov interference morally?

In order of popularity in the US:
1) no, yes [conservative]
2) no, no [libertarian]
3) yes, yes [populist]
4) yes, no [liberal]

s/populist/statist/

Or try this:
http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz

Hope This Helps!
Rich

On Sat, 04 Jun 2011 16:34:42 -0500, jim "sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net
wrote:



" wrote:

and a national debt that is approaching the
GDP, which is almost always fatal to a country.

Except when it isn't

The last time the debt equaled the GDP
It was followed by the greatest period of economic growth
and prosperity in the entire history of the USA?

So you think it will be exactly like WW2? Who are we going to be
unindating and then destroying?

Im shooting for Leftwingers. A deadly enemy to everyone and it will be a
short war, followed by a vibrant economy for many years. And the parks
built over the mass graves they were bulldozed into will make perfect
places for picnics, BBQs and RC car tracks

Gunner

"Lenin called them "useful idiots," those people living in
liberal democracies who by giving moral and material support
to a totalitarian ideology in effect were braiding the rope that
would hang them. Why people who enjoyed freedom and prosperity worked
passionately to destroy both is a fascinating question, one still with us
today. Now the useful idiots can be found in the chorus of appeasement,
reflexive anti-Americanism, and sentimental idealism trying to inhibit
the necessary responses to another freedom-hating ideology, radical Islam"

Bruce C. Thornton, a professor of Classics at American University of Cal State Fresno

On Sat, 04 Jun 2011 13:04:43 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


"john B." wrote:

I don't watch TV. Too many good books I haven't read.


My TBR List is over 100 books at the moment. I read about 25 last
month.

A tiny portion of "good books". For this group I recommend The
Federalist Papers, which might otherwise be refereed to as
Constitution 101 :-)

On 6/4/2011 1:02 PM, wrote:
If I meet someone who owns and frequently uses a mill or metal lathe,
I can be almost certain that he is a conservative.

Yet on rec.crafts.metalworking, there are a number of liberal
metalworkers making flaming posts.

Why do the few liberal metalworkers come here?

Why causes that?

Could it be that they are looking for machining info?

I know, it's hard to find amidst the ranting.

David