Liberal-tarianism. - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Modern liberalism. Civil rights and liberties, State responsibility to the people (welfare).
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
User avatar
By slybaldguy
#14283314
nucklepunche wrote:Increasingly I am coming to a position that is increasingly liberal-tarian, or a synthesis of modern American liberalism and libertarianism.

I see it a sort of an antipode to American conservatism, which itself is a fusion between traditional conservatism and libertarianism.

I define this liberal-tarianism, or liberal/libertarian hybrid ideology as economic moderation, social libertarianism.

On economics I am strongly supportive of a free market however I believe that at times the state must intervene to prevent monopolies from arising and the concentration of corporate power from destroying competition.

I am a supporter of free trade, free labor (against compulsory unionism), and free exchange of ideas (in contrast to many right-libertarians, I favor scaling down patent laws to limited terms to promote invention, as originally conceived, and limiting copyright to prohibit only excessive infringements
like for instance opening a business called "McDonald's" with an identical appearance and menu to the real McDonald's and portraying it as part of the larger McDonald's corporation while not being a portion of it).

I oppose most regulations inhibiting the operations of businesses and oppose licensing laws when they are designed to protect established businesses and not to protect public safety and health (which are reasonable examples of licensing).

However in spite of this I do favor moderately progressive taxation (with fewer loopholes than we have now) and a social safety net.

On social issues I believe simply in the idea of live and let live, if it is not directly harming anybody else, the state should not be able to legislate for or against it.

I support strong civil liberties and strict adherence to the Bill of Rights.

On defense I (somewhat conservatively) support a strong military to deal with threats from totalitarian regimes like Iran and North Korea.


Sounds like you'd fit in right at home with my pan-national party. There is a vacancy for leader of the US party if you hurry.
User avatar
By emmitt
#14283317
Technology wrote:This position would be an anti-regulation, but pro tax position. Basically the free market, relatively unrestricted in practice, apart from high progressive taxation to dollop a big layer of welfare on top of things.

I don't know who in particular would actually advocate this, but it's a coherent combination.

This is basically identical with left-libertarianism. Left-libertarians try to combine self-ownership with resource egalitarianism which would result in a fairly decent amount of taxation.
Both natural resources and artifacts ought to be distributed equally according to this school of libertarianism.
User avatar
By Eran
#14284236
On the semantic discussion over how to label Nucklepunches, ideology, I would simply call it "moderate libertarian". It is not outside the scope of what people like Milton Friedman, Hayek or even today's Richard Epstein would advocate.

I can understand (while disagreeing with) the call for a moderate level of social safety net. I even see the attraction of a "modestly progressive" income tax, despite the great success of flat tax everywhere it was tried.

I am baffled, however, by the call to use government to "prevent monopolies from arising". There has never been a single case of a private-sector monopoly (not supported by government) which harmed consumers. You might as well advocate for government to protect us from extra-terrestrial invasion. Allowing government to intervene in the economy, being the huge, obvious, predatory monopoly that it is, is the last thing you'd want to do if you are concerned about the evils of monopolies.

In IP, your view is perfectly consistent with the libertarian spectrum. Many more radical libertarians object to IP rights categorically. You example of a McDonalid's lookalike, btw, can be addressed through customer fraud prosecutions. After all, if I purchased a burger from a restaurant that looks like a McDonald's believing that it was one, and was sold an inferior burger, I have a good cause of action against the operator.

Besides, the relevant IP in this case is Trademark, not Copyright.


trombonepolitician wrote:How do you feel about having the government step in and forgive personal debt? Mortgage debt, student loans, etc? I really like that solution. It was put forth by Steve Keen, a post-keynesian

Is the suggestion that government pay the debt on behalf of the individual, or force the creditor to forgive the debt?

If it is the former, it adds to the national debt, while creating a huge moral hazard problem. If it is the latter, it will make getting loans much more difficult for people, as well as creating a huge moral hazard problem.
User avatar
By Technology
#14291612
emmitt wrote:This is basically identical with left-libertarianism. Left-libertarians try to combine self-ownership with resource egalitarianism which would result in a fairly decent amount of taxation.
Both natural resources and artifacts ought to be distributed equally according to this school of libertarianism.


Don't left-libertarians want to limit private property and its use in some way? I know left-anarchists want to.
User avatar
By Eran
#14291696
I believe emmitt correctly characterises a strand within the libertarian movement (closely related to Georgism, I believe) that acknowledges full self-ownership and even, potentially, property rights in external objects (without the incoherent leftist distinction between "personal" and "private" property), while hanging on to the issue of homesteading (initial acquisition of property rights in external resources, especially land) as a key for justifying extraction of property to be used to promote an egalitarian vision of society.
User avatar
By Coyote
#14316935
nucklepunche wrote:Increasingly I am coming to a position that is increasingly liberal-tarian, or a synthesis of modern American liberalism and libertarianism.

I see it a sort of an antipode to American conservatism, which itself is a fusion between traditional conservatism and libertarianism.

I define this liberal-tarianism, or liberal/libertarian hybrid ideology as economic moderation, social libertarianism.

On economics I am strongly supportive of a free market however I believe that at times the state must intervene to prevent monopolies from arising and the concentration of corporate power from destroying competition.

I am a supporter of free trade, free labor (against compulsory unionism), and free exchange of ideas (in contrast to many right-libertarians, I favor scaling down patent laws to limited terms to promote invention, as originally conceived, and limiting copyright to prohibit only excessive infringements
like for instance opening a business called "McDonald's" with an identical appearance and menu to the real McDonald's and portraying it as part of the larger McDonald's corporation while not being a portion of it).

I oppose most regulations inhibiting the operations of businesses and oppose licensing laws when they are designed to protect established businesses and not to protect public safety and health (which are reasonable examples of licensing).

However in spite of this I do favor moderately progressive taxation (with fewer loopholes than we have now) and a social safety net.

On social issues I believe simply in the idea of live and let live, if it is not directly harming anybody else, the state should not be able to legislate for or against it.

I support strong civil liberties and strict adherence to the Bill of Rights.

On defense I (somewhat conservatively) support a strong military to deal with threats from totalitarian regimes like Iran and North Korea.


The safety net is a pain in the ass. But it is probably better than no safety net, on balance. The problems arise when the safety net becomes more than a safety net. When it becomes somebody else walking the wire in your place? That's not a safety net. A safety net is by its very nature designed to create more risk-taking...
User avatar
By Coyote
#14316936
nucklepunche wrote:
My main objection is his chapter "Saving X Industry" he ignores the point that at times the collapse of an industry will have a ripple effect destroying several more industries in the process, as it would have been if we had not baild out banks.



It would have destroyed what industry?

Companies, sure. But whole industries?
#14435123
Nucklepunche, your position as outlined in the op IS IN FACT the position of the Republican party until Barry Goldwater in 1964 and Ronald Reagan in 1980 took over the heart and soul of the party...

They were a fiscally conservatives/socially liberal pro-business party and had been since the days of Lincoln...

But they weren't so enamored of business as to be blind: Eisenhower (R) warned against business collusion with govt and Teddy Roosevelt (R) busted up the business monopolies...Richard Nixon (R) used wage and price controls to control inflation in the 1970's, and these given via executive order no less..."hey businessman...you WILL NOT BY ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA raise salaries or prices in your businesses"...

You heard right...Richard Nixon gave an executive order to businesses to refrain from raising salaries or prices until further notice...no congress or law needed... Link
User avatar
By AFAIK
#14435216
Great Smell of Brut wrote:nucklepunch's position seems very close the the modern UK conservative party.

I think he has changed his position several times since starting this thread 14 months ago.
#14689862
Check out Chomsky for discussion of the distinction between left-libertarianism and right-libertarianism -- often overlooked in contemporary US conception of "libertarianism". For instance, his 1970 lecture "Government in the Future" (available in audio and text formats online)

Thought crimes again? Another reason why we need[…]

Sanders: Can he win broad support?

I've been watching a lot of old footage of Bernie[…]

I hope it crashes, I love a crash. The only time i[…]

I hope the guy on the video does not have covid-1[…]