Libertarian Purity Test

[__27__]

It depends on what kind of anarchism it is. Many socialists are anarchists (more specifically, anarcho-syndicalists), but libertarian anarchists like Murray Rothbard and David Friedman are anarcho-capitalists.

I greatly admire Murray Rothbard, but I am definitely not as extreme as he was.

anarcho-syndicalism is an oxymoron. It requires the individual cedes his rights to the collective, meaning the collective has a higher claim on his life, liberty and property than does he, thus the collective is his "archy".

Even if you believe it were possible to be an anarchist while giving all individual rights to the collective, it would be fairly obvious which branch of anarchy I was referring to since I was talking about the logical conclusion of libertarianism, not to mention my avatar is the ancap flag.

 

[john_anderson_ii]

I stopped taking the test in part II, it's too ambiguous. For instance:

Should all of the public lands be privatized?

State, federal or county? Actually this clarification needs to be made on nearly every question. I for one would like to see public Federal lands turned over to the State in which the land resides and let that state do with it's territory what it will. But abolish all public lands? No, I don't think so. I happen to like camping, hunting and hiking in state parks. All sorts of questions on that test are flawed in this manner.


And then there is this:

Should the FDA and medical licensing be abolished?

To which I respond with a Mitch Hedburg quote, "Have you every tried sugar or PCP?". There's no yes/no answer. What if I would like to see States regulate their building codes, medical license requirements, etc, and do away with the FDA and Federal involvement?

Weird test, the questions need to be better thought out and more specific.

 

[Unspun]

Test is flawed. It is not a Libertarian purity test. Its an Anarchist purity test.

An anarchist is nothing more than a consistent libertarian.

 

[jmlfod87]

I stopped taking the test in part II, it's too ambiguous. For instance:



State, federal or county? Actually this clarification needs to be made on nearly every question. I for one would like to see public Federal lands turned over to the State in which the land resides and let that state do with it's territory what it will. But abolish all public lands? No, I don't think so. I happen to like camping, hunting and hiking in state parks. All sorts of questions on that test are flawed in this manner.

This is the libertarian purity test, not the anti-federalist purity test.

And then there is this:



To which I respond with a Mitch Hedburg quote, "Have you every tried sugar or PCP?". There's no yes/no answer. What if I would like to see States regulate their building codes, medical license requirements, etc, and do away with the FDA and Federal involvement?

Weird test, the questions need to be better thought out and more specific.

Then your answer is no. The question wasn't FDA OR licensing, it was FDA AND licensing.

The questions are fine, they are supposed to be absolutist, its testing your libertarianism.

 

[paulitics]

Anarchism purity test B.S. once again disguised as libertarianism. Completely dishonest to call it a libertarian test, as if you are not libertarian if you do not subscribe to their utopian idealism that can't ever work in the real world.

It's the same as if a progressive would post a communism test and start off with reasonable questions giving one point each, and than end with radical stuff like abolishing all private property.


True anarchism is a pipe dream, and can't exist for any length of time on its own, before a a centralized power structure takes shape. What you are left with is localized feudalism at best. All the anarchists can do is come back with examples of caste systems, feudalism, slavery, etc, and try and pass it off as succesful anarchy. It becomes a lame semantics pissing match with little to no original thought.

 

[__27__]

Anarchism purity test B.S. once again disguised as libertarianism. Completely dishonest to call it a libertarian test, as if you are not libertarian if you do not subscribe to their utopian idealism that can't ever work in the real world.

It's the same as if a progressive would post a communism test and start off with reasonable questions giving one point each, and than end with radical stuff luck abolishing all private property.


True anarchism is a pipe dream, and can't exist for any length of time on its own, before a a centralized power structure takes shape. What you are left with is localized feudalism at best. All the anarchists can do is come back with examples of caste systems, feudalism, slavery, etc, and try and pass it off as succesful anarchy. It becomes a lame semantics pissing match with little to no original thought.

If you enjoy the boot on your throat, have at it friend. But kindly leave me the option to not participate in your masochistic state worshiping.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

154

 

[mrMISDEMEANOR]

76, You are a medium-core libertarian, probably self-consciously so. Your friends probably encourage you to quit talking about your views so much.

That's so true, jesus

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Anarchism purity test B.S. once again disguised as libertarianism. Completely dishonest to call it a libertarian test, as if you are not libertarian if you do not subscribe to their utopian idealism that can't ever work in the real world.

It's the same as if a progressive would post a communism test and start off with reasonable questions giving one point each, and than end with radical stuff like abolishing all private property.


True anarchism is a pipe dream, and can't exist for any length of time on its own, before a a centralized power structure takes shape. What you are left with is localized feudalism at best. All the anarchists can do is come back with examples of caste systems, feudalism, slavery, etc, and try and pass it off as succesful anarchy. It becomes a lame semantics pissing match with little to no original thought.

I see you confuse libertarian with Libertarian. This is the source of your confusion. You have a lot of reading to do fefore you get it, I can tell.

 

[LBennett76]

95
Sounds good to me as I am a constitutional libertarian. I quite like the Constitution and how it organized government. If only we could actually have the government run the way it was designed and laid out.

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

Have you done this?

http://www.bcaplan.com/cgi-bin/purity.cgi

I got 152.

Try it out and post your result.

My apologies if it is posted in the wrong place, I thought might be more appropriate here than in general politics as it is not a discussion of a particular political issue but might be a tool to share with others.

I scored 131

-t

 

[Young Paleocon]

Got a 160, yet I balked a little on the vouchers as they would require government dolling out of funds but the question was worded so that it would be a step up from public so I acquiesced. Also balked a little on the two immigration questions, but realized that if all property was private and if security was provided via private service or community/personal measures then immigration would really only effect labor and prices. But this would only be momentarily as markets adjusted. Yet I am still unsure if a voluntarist/anarcho-capitalist society could occur or by the process it would best occur. I am still on the fence on the whole government is a natural kick back for the typical human mind and is thus impossible to be implemented due to lack of human comprehension. Unlike utopian socialism this isn't a real economic flaw such as pricing mechanism or work incentive, it is more a biological, moral, and/or educational flaw.

 

[powerofreason]

160. Pure libertarian here.

 

[jlaker]

61

 

[heavenlyboy34]

160. Pure libertarian here.

Awesome! I was pretty close to you. Probably just a fluke on my part. :o

 

[South Park Fan]

158. Put yes on all questions except the ones about school and housing vouchers.

 

[jmdrake]

As someone who got a 160, I feel the need to defend myself. For me, taxation is a moral issue. Anytime someone says, "Give me X% of your money or go to jail" I have a problem with that. I own myself and my money. And yes, society would still function quite nicely without government. To use your example of privatizing Fire, its basically already done in many places. Volunteer fire departments are common in rural areas. I would be glad to discuss this more. One book that sums up my views fairly nicely is "The Machinery of Freedom" by David Friedman. I recommend it very highly.

I'm familair with volunteer fire departments (I live in a rural area), but how would "private police" work? Who holds these private police accountable? Private prisons have been a disaster. (Admittedly that may be because they just basically subcontract with the state).

Oh, and I got a 78.

 

[Draco33]

Got an 80 and I feel good about it.
Way too many extreamisms.

 

[Epic]

I'm familair with volunteer fire departments (I live in a rural area), but how would "private police" work? Who holds these private police accountable? Private prisons have been a disaster. (Admittedly that may be because they just basically subcontract with the state).

Oh, and I got a 78.

I think you understand, but they aren't "private" in any meaningful sense.

The prisons are paid by the state, so they can't be considered privatized.

As for law, courts, and police, read this:

http://mises.org/rothbard/newlibertywhole.asp#p215
http://freekeene.com/2009/07/18/fsp...ingen-guests-on-wkbks-talkback/#comment-80980

 

[Epic]

160. That was easy.