Fighting Back Agains the Wealthy Patrons of Libeertarian.Conservative Politics

Your perception of things is unique.

 

America.

 

you must be in the 22 percent

 

What I find hilarious is that according to the thread title this isn't about Libertarians but LiBEERtarian.

I don't know about joining the party but I consider myself a small 'l' libeertarian. :grin:

 

Sorry but under the joseph theory unless you vote for a capital L libertarian (as he is certain the libertarian koch brothers never have, even when running for office as such....) you may not consider yourself a small l-libertarian - at least, this is what joseph is attempting to sway the multitudes re: his nemesis, the glynch.

Though it appears David may have surpassed the glynch as the pistol-wielding Aaron Burr in his saddle in recent days.

 

Fine. I will plan on voting and campaigning for the Libeertarian party on the next election. I already have their campaign song.

Spoiler

<iframe title="YouTube video player" class="youtube-player" type="text/html" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/K3C0b_lJXps" frameborder="0" allowFullScreen></iframe>

 

only if you hate it.

 

Sigh, joseph, why don't you answer my query?

There's obviously a reason you are ginning up this goofy joseph theory of yours in order to forcibly disassociate yourselves from the libertarian Koch brothers.

Which reason is it?

I am not asking which acts of libertarian Koch brothers are not capital-L Libertarian (donating to Republicans) and which are - by your definition, malum prohibidum using the capital-L tenets of the joseph theory. We've established what your theory entails. The peanut gallery shall judge its merits.

I'm asking which libertarian Koch Brothers' acts are malum in se so as to cause their exclusion from your little club.

Anyway, joseph, actually I don't believe anybody, even the glynch, claimed that the Kochs were exclusive to the capital-L Libertarian Party - in fact his thread title (while using a capital L, probably because it's a title) seems to indicate that libertarianism (or technically, Li-beer-tarianism) is but one of the philosophies they espouse - hence his descriptions of them as "libertarian/conservative" or "libeertarian(sic), conservative"

Small l? Yes and yes. In far more ways than you ever could or will. Capital L? They have in the past and indirectly still do, so yes and yes again.

I've read certain criticisms from certain capital-L libertarians that the libertarian Koch brothers have cynically betrayed the captial L's in order to further their various businesses - is the this the view that joseph holds near and dear to his heart?

 

Meh, calls em like I sees em, nothing personal on this side at all. I certainly wouldn't shoot a man for firing his pistol in the air.

Still, if they were LiBEERtarians I would be more inline with their thinking, probably. Maybe the theme song isn't catchy enough to get the word out, judoka, or could be the audio.

 

the only aspect of the joseph theory in effect here is the one that states that if you are voting for and giving millions to mainstream republican candidates you just might be a republican.

these so-called libertarians do quite a disservice to the libertarian cause when they give thousands of dollars to republican politicians like jim inhofe and sam brownback, who supported such non-libertarian issues like the iraq war, the patriot act, torture of prisoners, a constitutional ban on gay marriage and military support for israel to name a few.

sure, i would agree with that statement.

 

ok...thanks.

seems like you are taking things personal when you come into a thread you werent previously posting in just to take pot-shots at another poster.

 

Obviously, the alternative (and far more plausible) connection is that American Libertarianism is just a subset of recent Republican dogma. Certainly, Libertarianism is distinct in theory, but in practice it has been almost completely hijacked by Republican interests. That's not to lend any undeserved "purity" or "political exceptionalism" to Libertarian ideologies, as most of those are polluted by capitalism to the point that American Libertarianism is basically an oligarchy-fueled fraud. In that regard then, one might actually argue that the Republican influence is a good thing* inasmuch as republican moderates temper the activities.

Libertarianism (the American variant) is really nothing more than insanely radical free-market capitalism, or as Rothbard would argue (correctly), anarcho-capitalism. And what, pray tell, would better fit the talking points of various extremist Republicans clamoring for minimalist government and massive deregulation than this very same mantra?

*I will now proceed to smack myself in the face for saying that.

 

thanks!

actually, those rapscallion koch brothers vote for and support candidates who are against such things. and as i said, seeing as how those are core libertarian issues, they really are hurting the libertarian cause when they do support establishment republicans who are against such issues.

 

i think philosophically, most americans are actually small 'l' libertarians.

but most people in this country treat politics as a team sport and they are so wedded to their republican/democrat 'side' that they continually vote against their own interests.

the rhetoric might be there, but time and time again republican and democrat politicians do the exact opposite of what they supposedly stand for, whether its republicans supporting out of control spending and expanding government or democrats supporting civil liberties violations and never-ending wars.

i would like to join your liBEERtarian party though - ive still got a 6er of st. arnolds divine #10 i can contribute!

 

sure, elements of it have - especially on the economic side. much like the tea party was completely hijacked by republican interests. but when it comes to civil liberties, foreign policy/interventionism, corporate welfare/bail-outs, no-bid contracts, support of torture, placing caps on the amount that corporations can be sued for when they pollute, ect the differences are so vast b/t republicans and libertarians that to go around constantly trying to link them seems pointless.

imo, if any two groups are most aligned its the democrats and republicans. both parties are very much into expanding government, out of control spending, corporate welfare (fascism), civil liberties violations, 'homeland' security, nation-building, unregulated government pollution and the like. these are all very 'un-libertarian' positions.

i think we have that now under republicans and democrats.

i dont think there is anything inherently wrong w/ free-market capitalism. i wish we had it in this country instead of the corporate welfare (fascist) state we have under republicans and democrats and the dastardly koch brothers.

 

Couple of points jo mama that will seem terribly repetitive - we have discussed this before and it appears this conversation is headed in the same direction:

1) While I agree with many of your complaints about the current situation, that is really nothing more than deflection. The point is not how bad it is now (which is easy to document/prove) but how little libertarian policies would help inasmuch as they follow some of the more brazenly extremist positions advocated by the less-intelligent but far more noisy members of the republican party.

2) There certainly are many problems with "true" free-market capitalism, which is why regulation is a consistent aspect of any such economy.

 

One of the main pillars of libertarian belief is that you don't use force to push your morals on others. Thus you are wrong.