How About a REAL Liberty Perspective

[euphemia]

Don't know anything about him but what about Darrell Castle?

Well, if people were really looking for a principled liberty thinker, they wouldn't have spent the last four years asleep at the wheel waiting for a political savior. They would have been talking to their state legislators about changing the rules for ballot access.

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

That might have been me. But it wasn't an "admission". It was simply an acknowledgment of fact.

Just because Ron Paul was a libertarian doesn't mean that his base of support was. Ron's support was due to the fact that he spoke truth to power.

Austrian economics had damn little to do with it.

In fact,..Ron Paul's base of support was Nationalists.

The same Nationalists who are supporting Trump today.

There is room for a Nationalist society within a Libertarian society but not the other way around. Libertarianism is the big tent that allows coalitions to happen.

 

[Smitty]

. Libertarianism is the big tent that allows coalitions to happen.

When? It's not like we have all the time in the world. 20 trillion dollars in debt, and for all practical purposes the Democratic Party has gone Communist and its candidate should be in a Federal Prison.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Don't know anything about him but what about Darrell Castle?

The CP is quite libertarian, with the following exceptions:

-protectionist tariffs
-immigration restrictions
-outlawing porn

They also favor the war on drugs and gambling restrictions, but only at the state level, so I suppose it's moot for a federal election.

 

[Natural Citizen]

There is not an agreement on what a liberty candidate even is.

Well. Hm. Okay. Let's straighten sht out so everyone is on the same page, then. Good idea, P3ter_Griffin.

Here is my position...

A true Liberty candidate holds a position that an Individual or a group of Individuals should be free to make rules for themselves provided that the rules that an Individual or a group of Individuals make for themselves do not prevent other Individuals or other groups of Individuals from equally doing the same.


Does everyone here agree with that? Yeah or naw?

 

[euphemia]

The CP is quite libertarian, with the following exceptions:

-implementing protectionist tariffs
-outlawing porn

They also favor the war on drugs, but only at the state level, so I suppose it's moot for a federal election.

And that's mostly becaue of who founded the party and who forms the majority. If the people who are Libertarian only in their own minds would look at something besides their own navels, they would see that some of these issues could be brought more in line with a true liberty position.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

And that's mostly becaue of who founded the party and who forms the majority. If the people who are Libertarian only in their own minds would look at something besides their own navels, they would see that some of these issues could be brought more in line with a true liberty position.

How's that?

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

When? It's not like we have all the time in the world. 20 trillion dollars in debt, and for all practical purposes the Democratic Party has gone Communist and its candidate should be in a Federal Prison.

It is not a matter of when, it is the principles that make the movement. If you change the nature of the movement from a libertarian movement to a nationalist movement it loses its inclusive, coalition building nature. Promotion of principles contrary to the movement should be done off-site so this can remain a place for all who are sick of their government and want to see a return to individual liberty so they can build the society they want.

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

Well. Hm. Okay. Let's straighten sht out so everyone is on the same page, then. Good idea, P3ter_Griffin.

Here is my position...

A true Liberty candidate holds a position that an Individual or a group of Individuals should be free to make rules for themselves provided that the rules that an Individual or a group of Individuals make for themselves do not prevent other Individuals or other groups of Individuals from equally doing the same.


Does everyone here agree with that? Yeah or naw?

hear hear.

eta.... yeah

 

[Smitty]

It is not a matter of when, it is the principles that make the movement. If you change the nature of the movement from a libertarian movement to a nationalist movement it loses its inclusive, coalition building nature. Promotion of principles contrary to the movement should be done off-site so this can remain a place for all who are sick of their government and want to see a return to individual liberty so they can build the society they want.

Not even the libertarians on here can agree to a consensus on what kind of society they want. So how can you say that it has a better record at coalition building than Nationalism?

From what I've seen over the past decade, libertarianism hasn't been able to build a coalition even with people actively working at it, while Nationalism has erupted spontaneously with no real central effort at all.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Originally Posted by P3ter_Griffin

There is not an agreement on what a liberty candidate even is.

Originally Posted by Natural Citizen


Well. Hm. Okay. Let's straighten sht out so everyone is on the same page, then. Good idea, P3ter_Griffin.


Here is my position...

A true Liberty candidate holds a position that an Individual or a group of Individuals should be free to make rules for themselves provided that the rules that an Individual or a group of Individuals make for themselves do not prevent other Individuals or other groups of Individuals from equally doing the same.


Does everyone here agree with that? Yeah or naw?

hear hear.

eta.... yeah

Very good. I'm glad that we agree. That's what I call a REAL Liberty Perspective.

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

Not even the libertarians on here can agree to a consensus on what kind of society they want. So how can you say that it has a better record at coalition building than Nationalism?

From what I've seen over the past decade, libertarianism hasn't been able to build a coalition even with people actively working at it, while Nationalism has erupted spontaneously with no real central effort at all.

There may be efforts I'm not aware of but Fox after 2012 went on a bender about illegals and Islam along with several other media sources doing the same, but to the greatest extent it has erupted because of the central efforts of our government! It is an effect of poor governance. And the libertarian looks to channel that into eliminating the government where the nationalist looks to channel that into division amongst the people and growth of the state.

The reason me and you are having this conversation is because a libertarian built a coalition. Where did I say libertarianism has a better record at coalition building than nationalism? So does leftism and rightism. But none of them are based on the sound principles that can unite all -isms.

 

[Smitty]

the nationalist looks to channel that into division amongst the people.

I don't see that. I see the division coming from the Obama administration, the leftist radicals who show up and hold mini riots at every Trump rally and from the Black Lives Matter people.

The Nationalists just want to put America first.

 

[Ender]

There may be efforts I'm not aware of but Fox after 2012 went on a bender about illegals and Islam along with several other media sources doing the same, but to the greatest extent it has erupted because of the central efforts of our government! It is an effect of poor governance. And the libertarian looks to channel that into eliminating the government where the nationalist looks to channel that into division amongst the people and growth of the state.

The reason me and you are having this conversation is because a libertarian built a coalition. Where did I say libertarianism has a better record at coalition building than nationalism? So does leftism and rightism. But none of them are based on the sound principles that can unite all -isms.

That can only happen if we love our neighbors as ourselves.

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

I don't see that. I see the division coming from the Obama administration, the leftist radicals who show up and hold mini riots at every Trump rally and from the Black Lives Matter people.

The Nationalists just want to put America first.

Nationalist don't attempt to fix the issue they just place band-aids in the form of walls and police... because it is not the state it is 'those guys' causing the problems. I completely agree that there is division coming from the left too. Both sides are being lead to hate each other instead of focusing on the state. By design imo, how else could they claim this un-just power?

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

That can only happen if we love our neighbors as ourselves.

I don't even necessarily think that is true. We've had quite a few white nationalist here who just wanted to be able to have a segregated community away from other races, etc. People can hate each other and still respect each other's rights.

eta: I guess you could say we need to love our neighbours rights as we love our own!

 

[Smitty]

Nationalist don't attempt to fix the issue they just place band-aids in the form of walls and police... because it is not the state it is 'those guys' causing the problems. I completely agree that there is division coming from the left too. Both sides are being lead to hate each other instead of focusing on the state. By design imo, how else could they claim this un-just power?

As I said previously, Nationalism provides more personal liberty than globalism and the current state of the Liberty Movement is no threat to globalism.

Ideology is fine, but the globalist wolf is at the door. Look at France and Germany if you don't think so.

What is to be done to*day* to thwart the globalist agenda that will be continued at an accelerated pace if Hillary wins the Presidency?

 

[AuH20]

Nationalist don't attempt to fix the issue they just place band-aids in the form of walls and police... because it is not the state it is 'those guys' causing the problems. I completely agree that there is division coming from the left too. Both sides are being lead to hate each other instead of focusing on the state. By design imo, how else could they claim this un-just power?

Meanwhile, some libertarians want to keep borders open while leaving a enticing welfare state intact.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Meanwhile, some libertarians want to keep borders open while leaving a enticing welfare state intact.

Post an example of a libertarian saying they want to leave the welfare state intact.

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

Meanwhile, some libertarians want to keep borders open while leaving a enticing welfare state intact.

That is not even a band-aid, they are just leaving the wound gushing. And I'm no fan of letting the victims bleed out because the people are the real victims. You do not support protectionism or national borders as the proper solutions... I know that from our talks... and so I have much less problem with you supporting a candidate like Trump because you are not claiming his flawed principles are liberty ones... much like the Johnson folks aren't claiming being forced to bake cakes is the liberty position. You instead give your opinion on why you think he is the best path forward. I can completely respect that.