Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
Fraqtive42 wrote:I think that it depends on the libertarian, and the ethical viewpoint that they subscribe to. For example, a utilitarian libertarian may demonstrate realist policies, whilst a natural rights libertarian may be fond of idealism.
On a side note, what exactly is neolibertarianism? :?: I couldn't find a wiki article.
Harold Saxon wrote:Indeed, I disagree with none of this, and it's precisely what I base my calculation on. Note that the vast bulk of neolibertarians are utilitarian, being economically informed more by Chicago School thinkers than Austrian ones and politically more aligned with the Cato-Reason axis than the Mises Institute crowd. I base this on such interventionist libertarans as: Neal Boortz, Larry Elder, Tom Palmer, Brink Lindsey, Dan Drezner, John Hospers, and to a certain extent Wayne Allyn Root though he's backing off the "libertarian" label quite quickly.
Harold Saxon wrote:Natural rights libertarians tend to be Ron Paul sorts, who are classified as isolationist per this typology and certainly do not believe in the democratization-based intervention of neoconservative/liberal idealism. The exception among natural rights libertarians are Objectivists who would indeed be idealist, but reject the "libertarian" label and thus are not quite neolibertarian.
Neolibertarianism: http://www.qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=650 As you can see, it's an explicitly realist geopolitical outlook.
Isolationism is the policy or doctrine of isolating one's country from the affairs of other nations by declining to enter into alliances, foreign economic commitments, foreign trade, international agreements, etc.
Fraqtive42 wrote:I noticed my mischaracterization of natural rights libertarianism as soon as I clicked the submit button -- they almost always are isolationists.
Fraqtive42 wrote:I wonder why though -- would it be inconsistent with this ethical justification of NAP to use military or economic sanctions in order to make sure that these rights aren't violated?
Isolationism: Isolationists believe that they have no right to interfere in the affairs of other nations, except directly for self-defense. They aren't interested in spreading ideology, or expanding their influence abroad. This is distinct from realism in that realists are amenable to intervene abroad if it is in national interests neutralizing a potentially threatening power, or securing resources abroad for the home market).
Oh the hypocrisy! Who's the 'snowflake' again? h[…]
<<< Contacts between Russian officials an[…]
I bring this up repeatedly................. the p[…]
@stephen50right @Political Interest Just beca[…]