|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
02-16-2012, 01:51 PM | #291 (permalink) |
killedmyraindog
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Posts: 11,172
|
So you're saying you like the government off you're back unless its something you favor, then it should be a federal law?
I'm not being an *******, or intentionally misreading that - thats how it reads. |
02-16-2012, 05:11 PM | #294 (permalink) |
Account Disabled
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Ireland
Posts: 230
|
People in general tend to favor laws that appeal to their beliefs and are against laws that are counter to it. Unless you're an anarchist I'm sure you're in favor of some form of government and back its interference on issues you think they should be involve themselves with. I hope I've misinterpreted your post because I don't see the sense in criticising someone for being in favor of a system that agrees with their beliefs.
|
02-16-2012, 07:20 PM | #295 (permalink) | |
Music Addict
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,381
|
Quote:
Unless you're implying tariffs & immigration policy are not within the domain of the Federal Governmetn?
__________________
Have mercy on the poor. |
|
02-17-2012, 05:54 AM | #296 (permalink) | |
Dat's Der Bunny!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,088
|
Quote:
Libertarianism basically has two rights: The right of self ownership, and the right of ownership in general. What it amounts to is that noone has the right to tell you what to do, and neither do you have the right to tell them what to do, unless both sign a contract to that effect. Similarly, with ownership, you have the right to decide how you use what you own, provided it doesn't affect the belongings of another, anything that does is again, subject to contract. You can build any system from fundamental Libertarianism, the difference is that the concept of being born into certain obligations doesn't exist - everyone has the right to choose whether they will or will not conform to society, and if they want they can go off and have their own self-sufficient commune with totally different laws, that's their choice. In short, no meddling without permission in the lives of others. What hip hop bunny hop seems to be saying, is that paleo-conservative views have much in common with this, except in the matter of Social Issues, namely that they feels that everyone has a right to live however they want, unless it offends their image of how people should live, which doesn't make much sense to me, and seemingly Big3 either; surely if you have no qualms with forcing minorities into a way of life they don't agree with, you are compromising the fundamental reasons for a libertarian-like governing system? How would you feel if someone decided that men shouldn't be allowed outside unshaven, or something equally ridiculous? People have right to be gay if they want to, and someone having an abortion in a different state to you is hardly going to have a major effect on your life... it's just over-controlling, incredibly arrogant, and goes by the assumption that the "majority" know what the "best" way to live is. Do correct me if I'm wrong, that's just the way it's coming across.
__________________
"I found it eventually, at the bottom of a locker in a disused laboratory, with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard". Ever thought of going into Advertising?" - Arthur Dent |
|
02-17-2012, 08:27 AM | #297 (permalink) |
Account Disabled
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Ireland
Posts: 230
|
Oh ok I see where you're coming from, but while they may agree with libertarians on certain issues they don't share the same philosophy. They're more a reaction to neocons being far too leftist for the conservative name, they're the conservatives of the conservatives if you will.
|
02-17-2012, 09:58 AM | #298 (permalink) | |
killedmyraindog
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Posts: 11,172
|
Quote:
|
|
02-17-2012, 03:26 PM | #299 (permalink) | ||
Music Addict
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,381
|
Quote:
In recent policy, we've seen this work out in a few ways. Paleo's, in terms of Foreign Policy, were highly critical of Iraq 1 & 2, Clinton's intervention in Serbia on behalf of Kosovo, our sprawling military bases, etc.. Economically, Paleos opposed NAFTA (as well as all free trade agreements), medicare part D, etc. Quote:
Anyways, in regards to your question; what you're hitting on is the difference between Paleoconservatism's pragmatism(*1) and Libertarianism's idealism. This shouldn't be surprising, as Paleo's ideological roots would be best defined as pre-Enlightenment or counter-enlightenment, whereas Libertarianism is squarely in the Englightenment mold. Paleos, as i hope is clear by now, embrace a very Burkean form of Conservatism. *1 - I say "pragmatism", because it's the closest approximation of what I mean; I'm not referring to Bentham's philosophy.
__________________
Have mercy on the poor. |
||
02-17-2012, 04:27 PM | #300 (permalink) |
Dat's Der Bunny!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,088
|
Hmmm, ok. I'll need to think about that for a while to see how it pans out, but I think I understand where you're coming from.
__________________
"I found it eventually, at the bottom of a locker in a disused laboratory, with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard". Ever thought of going into Advertising?" - Arthur Dent |
|