While there are currently some libertarian leaning politicians (Ron Paul, Rand Paul and a few others) in the Republican Party, Libertarians are neither Democrats nor Republicans.
Here are some of the Libertarian Party's positions on various social and political issues of our time. Read through them and respond to the questions I've asked at the end of the blog post.
Here are some of the Libertarian Party's positions on various social and political issues of our time. Read through them and respond to the questions I've asked at the end of the blog post.
1.0 Personal Liberty
Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices.
1.1 Expression and Communication
We support full freedom of expression and oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology. We favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others. We oppose government actions which either aid or attack any religion.
1.2 Personal Privacy
Libertarians support the rights recognized by the Fourth Amendment to be secure in our persons, homes, and property. Protection from unreasonable search and seizure should include records held by third parties, such as email, medical, and library records. Only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes. We favor the repeal of all laws creating “crimes” without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.
1.3 Personal Relationships
Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption,immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships.
1.4 Abortion
Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.
1.5 Crime and Justice
Government exists to protect the rights of every individual including life, liberty and property. Criminal laws should be limited to violation of the rights of others through force or fraud, or deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of harm. Individuals retain the right to voluntarily assume risk of harm to themselves. We support restitution of the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or the negligent wrongdoer. We oppose reduction of constitutional safeguards of the rights of the criminally accused. The rights of due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must not be denied. We assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law.
1.6 Self-Defense
The only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights — life, liberty, and justly acquired property — against aggression. This right inheres in the individual, who may agree to be aided by any other individual or group. We affirm the individual right recognized by the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense.
We oppose all laws at any level of government requiring registration of, or restricting, the ownership, manufacture, or transfer or sale of firearms or ammunition.
2.0 Economic Liberty
Libertarians want all members of society to have abundant opportunities to achieve economic success. A free and competitive market allocates resources in the most efficient manner. Each person has the right to offer goods and services to others on the free market. The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute
wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society.
2.1 Property and Contract
Property rights are entitled to the same protection as all other human rights. The owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference, until and unless the exercise of their control infringes the valid rights of others. We oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and interest rates. We advocate the repeal of all laws banning or restricting the advertising of prices, products, or services. We oppose all violations of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and freedom of trade. The right to trade includes the right not to trade — for any reasons whatsoever. Where property, including land, has been taken from its rightful owners by the government or private action in violation of individual rights, we favor restitution to the rightful owners.
2.2 Environment
We support a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of our natural resources. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Pollution and misuse of resources cause damage to our ecosystem. Governments, unlike private businesses, are unaccountable for such damage done to our environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection. Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet's climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.
2.3 Energy and Resources
While energy is needed to fuel a modern society, government should not be subsidizing any particular form of energy. We oppose all government control of energy pricing, allocation, and production.
2.4 Government Finance and Spending
All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor. We call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution. We oppose any legal requirements forcing employers to serve as tax collectors. Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without their consent. We support the passage of a "Balanced Budget Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution, provided that the budget is balanced exclusively by cutting expenditures, and not by raising taxes.
2.5 Money and Financial Markets
We favor free-market banking, with unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types. Individuals engaged in voluntary exchange should be free to use as money any mutually agreeable commodity or item. We support a halt to inflationary monetary policies and unconstitutional legal tender laws.
2.6 Monopolies and Corporations
We defend the right of individuals to form corporations, cooperatives and other types of companies based on voluntary association. We seek to divest government of all functions that can be provided by non-governmental organizations or private individuals. We oppose government subsidies to business, labor, or any other special interest. Industries should be governed by free markets.
2.7 Labor Markets
We support repeal of all laws which impede the ability of any person to find employment. We oppose government-fostered forced retirement. We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in labor unions, and an employer should have the right to recognize or refuse to recognize a union. We oppose government interference in bargaining, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain.
2.8 Education
Education, like any other service, is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality and efficiency with more diversity of choice. Schools should be managed locally to achieve greater accountability and parental involvement. Recognizing that the education of children is inextricably linked to moral values, we would return authority to parents to determine the education of their children, without interference from government. In particular, parents should have control of and responsibility for all funds expended for their children's education.
2.9 Health Care
We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions. People should be free to purchase health
insurance across state lines.
2.10 Retirement and Income Security
Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. Libertarians would phase out the current government-sponsored Social Security system and transition to a private voluntary system. The proper and most effective source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals. We believe members of society will become more charitable and civil society will be strengthened as government reduces its activity in this realm.
3.0 Securing Liberty
The protection of individual rights is the only proper purpose of government. Government is constitutionally limited so as to prevent the infringement of individual rights by the government itself. The principle of non-initiation of force should guide the relationships between governments.
3.1 National Defense
We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression. The United States should both avoid entangling alliances and abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world. We oppose any form of compulsory national service.
3.2 Internal Security and Individual Rights
The defense of the country requires that we have adequate intelligence to detect and to counter threats to domestic security. This requirement must not take priority over maintaining the civil liberties of our citizens. The Constitution and Bill of Rights shall not be suspended even during time of war. Intelligence agencies that legitimately seek to preserve the security of the nation must be subject to oversight and transparency. We oppose the government's use of secret classifications to keep from the public information that it should have, especially that which shows that the government has violated the law.
3.3 International Affairs
American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world. Our foreign policy should emphasize defense against attack from abroad and enhance the likelihood of peace by avoiding foreign entanglements. We would end the current U.S. government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid. We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselves and their rights. We condemn the use of force, and especially the use of terrorism, against the innocent, regardless of whether such acts are committed by governments or by
political or revolutionary groups.
3.4 Free Trade and Migration
We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property.
3.5 Rights and Discrimination
We condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant. Government should not deny or abridge any individual's rights based on sex, wealth, race, color, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs.
3.6 Representative Government
We support electoral systems that are more representative of the electorate at the federal, state and local levels. As private voluntary groups, political parties should be allowed to establish their own rules for nomination procedures, primaries and conventions. We call for an end to any tax-financed subsidies to candidates or parties and the repeal of all laws which restrict voluntary financing of election campaigns. We oppose laws that effectively exclude alternative candidates and parties, deny ballot access, gerrymander districts, or deny the voters their right to consider all legitimate alternatives.
3.7 Self-Determination
Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of individual liberty, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to agree to such new governance as to them shall seem most likely to protect their liberty.
Take a moment, reflect on, and respond to the questions below:
Which one (or more than one) of these Libertarian positions do you find unacceptable? Why do you find it unacceptable? Or, do you agree with all of them? What about these Libertarian positions do you find agreeable? Why do you like them?
How would a libertarian respond to the assassination of an American citizen by the US President?
I agree with their position on expression and communication because anyone should be able to practice any religion they believe in. The only limit they should have is that they should not harm anyone during their practices. I like this position because many problems are started over religion and that there are so many different ones that are being practiced today. If a US citizen was ordered to assassination by the president, the libertarians would respond by saying its wrong to harm other people due to the fact that they were not put the a judicial process of their wrong doing.
ReplyDeleteJ.C. Mao-Alston
PSCI 100:03
9:35AM-10:50AM
I agree with you when it comes to expression and communication, but like the example of Westboro Baptist Church protest at soldiers funeral, I find myself on the opposite side, agreeing that there is a time and place and that much freedom my incite more issues then stop.
Delete-Jessica Fort
MFW PSCI100
Unacceptable: 2.10 Retirement and Income Security, spooked myself in class and reading online. Individuals left to their own devices planning for retirement doesn’t sound achievable consider that most individuals are financially treading water during working years planning for retirement on their own seems close to impossible for most. To believe that they would be at the graces of a “charitable” and “civil” society, I wouldn’t hold my breath. An argument could be made that “they didn’t plan as well as I did, why should I help them out?”
ReplyDeleteAcceptable: 1.3 Personal relationships : seems like common sense, as long as they are consenting adults, government should play no role in a person’s preference of personal relationships. Along with 1.4, although abortion is a touchy subject, it should be left up to the individual not left up to the government to decide.
- Jessica Fort PSCI 100 MWF
I do not agree with most of the Libertarian points, but agree with 1.3 Personal Relationships and 1.4 Abortion. I believe that adults should be able to decide who they want to be involve with in any kind of relationship and when to be parents. When it comes to underage children it is up to them and their parents.
ReplyDeleteAlthough we like to be "free" of any government we need to realize that not everybody has the capacity to decern what is best for them, like children, mentally ill and disable people. I think that if everything is private it won't make people kind, caring or unselfish, we need to fix social issues first, before we can become a truly free society.
About 1.6 Self Defence point, as some of us know, it is a very controvercial topic, specially after the Trayvon Martin case. I do believe in regulations, I do not want to buy a weapon that was used in a crime. I think that people sometimes become so angry that they do not know what they are doing, and they can use some cool down process. But my concern is, those out there that feel threaten just because how somebody looks like, or the color of their skin. Stereotyping, racism or plain ignorance could lead to one, too many deaths.
I just believe that freedom is a personal state, we determine what it is for us. A homeless person may not care about how many surveillance camaras are around, but where to spend the night; but somebody in the upper/middle class maybe concern with those camaras.
Everything is about perception and priorities, we do not see life in the same way, and we are all different, causing many of the problems in our society.
JANET LOUE
MWF PSCI100-02
I agree with their National Defense notion, we need to stop policing the world, and take care of our own problems. Have a trained and efficient military that is for protecting America against aggression. I agree with a lot of the views of liberals, especially gun registration, and it doesn't need to be in some database letting everyone know what's in my house, To respond on JANET LOUE's comment, if you're going to buy a gun to use it for, whatever you think you're going to use it for, who cares if it was used to kill someone? The facts are, you're purchasing a gun, and its not being used on you. I think these idiots out here who think well if the government had a list of all gun owners, then we will be safe. NO. No you wont, the fact is, the only time you hear that someone is a legal registered gun owner is after they did something with the gun.
ReplyDeleteI semi disagree with the social security issue. People have been paying into the SSA, and unless they are refunded everything they put in, and had some program in place for people who wanted to participate, then that seems fine. As long as the person is given the option, if they want to save let them save. If they want to be poor, they will be poor. I'm just tired of hearing the government give excuses when they need to cut spending and they go straight to social security, veterans, and money that we paid into TSP. I'm fed up with all that.
Chelse O'Connor
PSCI100
I don't really agree with the policy on environment and how to best protect it. I don't feel as though giving people private ownership of parks/waterways that are now considered public will truly help protect it. People already disrespect the world around us, so giving someone ownership of it and telling them they can do whatever they see fit will in no way protect it.
ReplyDeleteAs far as a US president assassinating a citizen, I feel as though libertarians would be outraged. Considering they do not believe in any violent acts among the people unless it is for defense, I feel as though this situation of assassination would go directly against typical libertarian beliefs.
Katelyn Amspacher
PSCI 100:03
I completely agree with 1.0 Personal Liberty, 2.2 Environment,1.6 Self-Defense and many others. I find them acceptable because 1.0 is very obvious. Of course I believe that we should make our decisions on our own and not have to be told to do this or that and I think that we should be able to do whatever we want unless we hurt someone else, or ourselves. Even if we hurt ourselves it is still our decision. 2.2 I am all for Organic, small land owners, farms and using off the land from small family owned corporations. I think that grass fed, organic and yes "going green" is where we need to be going as a country. I think that if we start realizing what we are doing to our world then we will realize that we need to cut back on all of this huge industrialized crap that we all think is so good for us. 1.6 I believe in free arms and the right to bear arms. I do not think that every citizen should be in a sense walking around with guns in their hands or holsters but I think that you should have the option to be able to do whatever you want in the case of self defense. I am all for defending myself against other people, and I do not want to be slandered because of protecting myself.
ReplyDeleteI would have to say that I am pretty libertarian, I try to keep an open mind though. I just really do not want to be conformed by any label... I also do not want to be naive, like most of us are.
Chelsi Kling
PSCI 100:03
I agree with many of the libertarian views and how they are set up. The one I mainly disagree with is their view on education. I believe that the government should provide an education system for kids. If parents were left to teach kids then they would only learn what their parents know, and have a biased view on everything. Another thing, what if the parents are working? When would they be able to educate their kids?
ReplyDeleteA libertarian would go nuts if a U.S. president assassinated a citizen. The libertarians do not want harm done to anyone and this would probably make them furious.
Blake Johnson
PSCI 100:03
I am finding that I do not find any unacceptable, but the reason is I feel like I need more information. I do not fully understand all of the implications in a free market society. The issues I'm having trouble agreeing with are the economic based liberties. I feel as if it is much more complicated than the basics I have learned about and I can not make an educated decision at this time.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I'm having trouble understanding some issues, I do agree with the individual liberties. Under our current constitution these are already laid out for us, but we still do not have them. Citizens are supposed to have the right to free speech, well unless the government doesn't like what we say. Right? We have a right to bear arms, unless the government tells us only certain people, only certain kinds of guns, only in certain situations. We're letting the government control our unalienable rights set out in our constitution. If we truly listened to our constitution in regards to separation of church and state I do not believe peoples personal relationships or abortion would be issues that we would even be talking about. The only reason they are issues is because citizens are forcing their beliefs on everyone else. Beliefs that have been taken from the Bible...a religious book.
The last issue I take heart to is self determination. The way the government is set up now I feel helpless in changing it. I feel if I try I could be thrown in jail or maybe worse just totally ignored. I feel like not enough people realize their personal liberties are being erased. Everyone is blissfully unaware so much so that there can never be an uprising, a change, a fire for politics like when this nation was created.
In the matter of the President assassinating a citizen I believe he or she would have the same rights as everyone else. A speedy trial, trial by jury. If it was self defense then libertarians agree that it was his right to protect himself.
ALICIA HIMES
PSCI 100.02
"Pollution and misuse of resources cause damage to our ecosystem. Governments, unlike private businesses, are unaccountable for such damage done to our environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection."
ReplyDeleteFalse. Gasoline used to contain lead, a well-known neurotoxin. Government, not the free market, is responsible for its removal. Private business was so against lead removal that Ethyl Corporation sued the EPA in an attempt to stop the lead ban. Private businesses have shown time and time again that they do not care about environmental protection.
Libertarians do have some good points. I completely agree with their views on energy production. Coal, oil, and gas are excessively subsidized. According to the Department of Energy, wind, geothermal, and hydroelectric power are the three cheapest sources of electricity. If we got rid of energy subsidies, coal, oil, and gas would die.
I am completely against a president killing somebody, but I don't see why it matters whether or not the person is American. The idea that it's okay to kill a non-American, but it's not okay to kill an American citizen is selfishness, and nothing more.
Alex Smith
PSCI 100:02
Many of the libertarian’s ideals are reasonable, because they do still call for government intervention, but it must be very limited. Though I do like some of these ideas, I do still support our government, because I believe that sometimes instilling fear in people causes them to be better individuals. For instance, my mom was very hard on my about my grades and had rules I had to abide by, as a child I thought these were stupid, but fearing the consequences I never wanted to break the rules. As an adult, I now understand why my mom was the way she was. I think about what could happen as a result of my actions, and I believe it has allowed me to make better decisions. Having said that I will now continue to a few of the libertarian ideas I think are completely ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteFirst drug use is not a “victimless crime”. People die every day from using drugs. What’s worse is that innocent people die, are killed or even murdered, by drug users. So classify drug use as a “victimless crime”. Sure there are drugs like marijuana that do not alter the state of mind, and are in fact used to help cancer patients, but not all drugs have the same effects and therefor for the safety of society they must be outlawed.
Secondly, education must be left for the government. Every child deserves a chance at a decent education. If education was left up to the parents to decide only the wealthy would be educated, because they have the most resources. It would almost be as if we were moving backwards if we left education up to the parents to decide. It would practically ensure that the rich would stay rich and the poor would stay poor.
I do agree with the idea that we are all created equal, and thus we should all be treated as such. Whether you are African America, woman, or homosexual you should be entitled to the same rights as a straight Caucasian man. We also should all be entitled to purchase the healthcare of our choosing.
As far as the national budget, I understand that sometimes you have to spend some money to make some. However just like many things in the world, more isn’t always better. So on this issue I believe we do need to have a better budget, but not only reducing the budget by cutting funding from various programs. We need to reallocate funding and also increasing taxes if need be.
Alicia White
PSCI 100:02
Many of the arguments above share common ideas with my views.. When looking at things such as marriage, abortion, and gun rights, I believe the government shouldn't regulate as much; however, other topics like drugs and international affairs should be looked at more closely. Drugs don't just affect one individual, but it affects society in general. And as far as international affairs goes, I believe that having a military is wonderful. yet, we aren't the world's backup plan; I believe that defending our country from terrorists and other threats is acceptable, but going into other countries to play "mom" isn't necessary. Also, rights & discrimination is an issue that we have faced for centuries in history. You'll always find someone who claims to be superior for whatever reason. Although the possibility of having equality has been preached for decades now, there are still others who find monetary or some reason to believe they're better (whether it's race, gender, financial standing, or even heritage). Having a libertarian government or way of life is very possible, but we still need a government to regulate things to restrain others from being selfish or/and abusing medical procedures like abortions.
ReplyDeleteVictoria Wilson
PSCI 100:02
I really agree with almost all of the libertarian policies. They sound like they would form a perfect society in writing, but it's really unclear what would happen if these policies were actually implemented in today's world. I think that people have become so dependent on the government that they wouldn't know what to do with themselves if they lost the support that the government gives them. For example, the libertarian view about how people should plan for retirement themselves and not get help for the government would leave a lot of elderly people poor because they rely on social security as their income when they can no longer work. Also, their views on education that pretty much require the parents to teach their kids are a little harsh. If a parent has to work to provide for their families, they don't have time to teach their children everything they would learn in school, especially if they have multiple children. People have become so dependent on the government that I think today's society would have a tough time pulling the chord that attaches them to government support.
ReplyDeleteIf an American citizen was assassinated by the U.S. President a libertarian would go absolutely berserk. That's a complete violation of the rights that libertarians believe in and it would make them argue against the government even harder. I think even an American citizen who isn't libertarian would go crazy if this occurred, but only if the person being assassinated was being killed for no good reason. If the person being killed was a rapist baby murderer then I think Americans would be ok with it, actually they'd probably be very happy about it. Libertarians wouldn't like it no matter what though because they would probably argue that there's a better way to get rid of a bad person, such as shunning them.
Matt Deal
PSCI 100
I like the personal liberty views, because the government shouldn't really have that much control over what I say or do. The government shouldn't be involved in social issues like abortion and marriage. The economic stances make a lot of sense, but so many people depend on the government for social security and many of them wouldn't save for retirement and would then struggle later. If the government is only involved in protesting our liberties from foreign invaders that would stop us from interfering with other countries affairs and making them hate us. If the president assassinated an American citizen, the libertarians would arrest the president and through him in jail for harming another citizen and threatening their liberties.
ReplyDeleteI like the personal liberty views, because the government shouldn't really have that much control over what I say or do. The government shouldn't be involved in social issues like abortion and marriage. The economic stances make a lot of sense, but so many people depend on the government for social security and many of them wouldn't save for retirement and would then struggle later. If the government is only involved in protesting our liberties from foreign invaders that would stop us from interfering with other countries affairs and making them hate us. If the president assassinated an American citizen, the libertarians would arrest the president and through him in jail for harming another citizen and threatening their liberties.
ReplyDeleteKayla Piechowiak
PSCI 100-03
The two questions asked, it is the second I’ll address first. How would a libertarian respond to the assassination of an American citizen by the US President? If given the power, meaning there is libertarian minded government. Their first act would be to follow the rule of law, to impeach the sitting president and have the senate trial. Upon removal, should there be a conviction, that President and the accessories to the fact would face a criminal trial for murder receiving the same due process as we all are entitled too. Upon a conviction is where libertarian views might differ. Some support capital punishment and in the above case, they might want the death penalty. On the other hand, some libertarians would equate the death penalty as the same state violence as that which was committed by the President. They might find banishment under the pain of death more agreeable.
ReplyDeleteWhere I disagree with the libertarian platform involves that of corporations especially within the legal system and I’ll get right to a possible solution before I explain my position. Corporations need a separate court system to resolve disputes between other corporations and can never bring a civil action against a living person. Distinctions have to be made between a living person and a dead person. By definition, a corporation is a legal fiction and a person. Its sole purpose is to make money. We know that fiction is not real. Yet somehow, a corporation is a person with rights just like you and I. This seems like ten pounds of fecal matter in a five pound bag, it doesn’t hold weight. So I thought I’d write some fiction to illustrate my point.
We have Uncle Tom. Uncle Tom comes out of his cabin and wants to start a chain of brokerage firms. Uncle Tom cannot do this by himself, so he needs some “agents” to act on his behalf. Uncle Tom once was a slave and the 13th amendment frees him. “Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” Through the 14th amendment, Uncle Tom becomes a citizen because his agents gave birth to this person called Uncle Tom. Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
So we now have Uncle Tom Inc. Uncle Tom Inc. becomes a very successful firm, in terms of making profit; however, there is that pesky competition. In Uncle Tom’s way are Edward Jones, the Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, and Merrill Lynch. Uncle Tom talks with the agents of Edward Jones and Jones’s agents sell Edward and all of Ed’s property to Uncle Tom voluntarily and Ed has no problem with it. The other firms do not like this but Uncle Tom has more money and Uncle Tom feels the need to enact some social justice from the wrongs committed by the other firms. Uncle Tom Inc. does a hostile takeover and buys the Lehman Brothers, Merrill, Goldman, and even poor old Sachs. Uncle Tom has just enslaved a number of persons contrary to the supreme law of the land. If you and I bought, sold, or traded persons, we’d be in jail. Maybe these fictitious persons have their eyes on the non-fictitious persons as a form of property. After all, in the corporate world, you and I are a “human resource.”
I agree with all of the libertarian policies. I believe they all make sense because the government should not have any type of control over me. There is no reason the government should be able to tell me how to live my life. I am my own person and don't need someone to tell me what to do everyday and how to do it. As long as im not hurting anyone else why should it matter what i do with my life.
ReplyDeleteMike Reed
Although I agree with many of these the one I couldn’t possibly agree more with 1.3, personal relationships. The government should have no say in personal relationships. Hell if there are two consenting adults than I do not see the problem at hand. Leave religion and government out of personal relationships. I also completely agree with 3.5, rights and discrimination. I believe that 1.3 and 3.5 go hand in hand in some cases. No one should be denied anything because of their race, sexual orientation, color or political preference.
ReplyDeleteBeing a possible first time political voter, my views on politics are new. Although I do agree with many libertarian views, I would definitely like to get more insight on all political parties. So far I agree with most libertarian views. One of the views I do agree with are liberals' thoughts on health care. Americans should have the right to choose what treatment, doctor, and hospital is best for them without it being approved by their insurance. Americans should also never be denied treatment by insurance companies that they pay for because the insurance companies think its experimental treatment.
ReplyDeleteThe one view that I disagree with the most is the retirement and income security. I do not agree with their view on this because I feel that the government should help the elders financially. The government should at least give the retired citizens money to pay their bills, but the citizens should save up their own money for trips or vacations they want to take in their golden years. I feel that it is their responsibility. It would be better if we lived in a caring enough environment where everyone makes tons of money that they could easily save up and donate to the less fortunate, but we do not. Everyone has bills and other expenses to pay for. The rich are mostly greedy, so I believe the government should step in to help the retired citizens. They could at least give the retired citizens enough money to pay their bills and buy them food each month.
Amanda Malave
PSCI 100.02
I agree with 3.5, rights and discrimination. The government should not be discriminatory because we are all different and that is not a bad thing. For example, a person should get a job based on their skills not based on their color or sexual orientation. I also agree with 3.1 National Defense. Sometimes we tend to stick our noses in other countries businesses and it can be very unnecessary. I disagree with 1.6 Self Defense. There needs to be strict regulation on gun control. There have been too many crimes that could have been avoided if there was a fix on extensive background checks and patching the loop holes in the system. It has become too easy to get a gun, and if it gets any easier that could end badly.
ReplyDeleteCarleigh Underwood
PSCI 100. 03
I forgot to post on the second question. In a libertarian view the government only steps in if there is harm taking place, so I guess the president would go to jail in that case because he harmed another person.
DeleteCarleigh Underwood
I agree with almost all of the libertarian points made in this post. The more government is involved in peoples lives, the more powerful and corrupt it can get. I'm in line with reasoning that the government's responsibilities are to protect it's people from outside threats and to enforce a contact between two consenting individuals. Also he would be put to death by the community.
ReplyDeleteRyan Miller
PSCI 100:02
I agree with almost all of the libertarian points made in this post. The more government is involved in peoples lives, the more powerful and corrupt it can get. I'm in line with reasoning that the government's responsibilities are to protect it's people from outside threats and to enforce a contact between two consenting individuals. Also he would be put to death by the community.
ReplyDeleteRyan Miller
PSCI 100:02
Some of these views I can agree with like health care, securing liberty and international affairs. Expression and communication is especially a good statement because the internet is such a powerful tool for education, the government should never limit it. Some of the views I disagree with are firstly with education, namely "responsibility for all funds expended for their children's education." There are parents who cannot afford private schooling or even have trouble getting funding for books and school supplies which the government sometimes helps with. Another is Environment. Not all private landowners have the best interest in mind when it comes to the environment. What if a landowner decided to put a golf course on their land? Although they are fun to play on, golf courses are not particularly helpful for the overall environment. National parks are one of the most positive things America has exported to other countries. I think the government, for the most part, does a pretty good job of preservation of parts of our environment.
ReplyDeleteI think a libertarian would not respond well at all if an assassination of an American citizen was done by the US President because of their view on crime and justice. It states that "The rights of due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must not be denied" so it's safe to assume they are strongly against this law.
Joey Diaz
PSCI 100.03
I do agree with most of the libertarian policies, I believe people should control their own life. The government should not be controlling my daily choices. The government should not have laws against religious choices like abortion and gay marriage. I do believe that the government should step in when physical violence arises.
ReplyDeleteBrenna Rose
PSCI 100:03
For the most part, I agree with a good majority of the Libertarian viewpoints/policies.
ReplyDeleteOne Libertarian policy I don't agree with is the gun rights in 1.6. As I mentioned in my posts on the discussion forums, I believe that guns purchased should be registered, as well as a background check on those buying the firearms. I'm not saying everyone who buys a gun is a lunatic who's going to shoot up a convenience store, but somehow, there are those that slip through and get their hands on them.
Policy 2.10 is another one I sort of agree yet disagree with. There are people who are going to need some assistance with retirement. Not everyone is going to have a hefty life savings to live the rest of their lives with. Leaving it entirely up to the individual sounds like a great idea in writing, but will it actually help things or will it just make it worse? Yes, there will be those retirees who can make it on their own, but I would say that the majority won't be able to make it the rest of their lives trying to make what they have saved last long enough. So assistance would then be needed.
Megan Douglas
PSCI 100.2
I agree with most all the libertarian policies because I believe Americans should be able to live there life rather than constantly be worrying about breaking some kind of rule. People should be able to control their own lives, but with the government always intervening, it's hard to. When physical conflict arises, and there's a chance of someone getting hurt, then that's a good reason for the government to step in, and protect the people in our society.
ReplyDeleteIf the US president assassinated someone, then I believe the punishment should be the same for them as it would be for anyone else.
Kelsey Phelan
PSCI 100:02
Phew, that was a lot of reading and research in one post...
ReplyDeleteI will start off with the policies I agree on:1.0,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,2.1,2.7,3.0,3.1,3.3,3.5, and 3.7. All of those I feel are fair and use basic language to enforce our natural rights given to us as citizens under the constitution.
I strongly disagree with the views on sec 1.6; I think that there should be regulation (stricter) on firearms and not anyone should be able to purchase one. I also disagree with 2.2 and 2.3; "National Parks are one of the most positive things America has exported to other countries," I could not have said it better than Joey (Diaz). The government plays a very important role in preserving our environment not only through the parks but many other outlets as well. On energy, I agree with what Alex (Smith) brought up with the subsidies, which is a very valid point. I also could not argue more with sec 2.8 (education), government needs to be involved in the nations schools systems to allow equal opportunity for every person to succeed through a public school system: Alicia White stated "Every child deserves a chance at a decent education." To finish up the sections I don't believe would hold up without government, I agree with many people and especially Jessica Fort who understand the need for government assistance in regards to retirement and security.
For the last few that I had left I could not decide whether I would agree or disagree. Many of them I was on the fence about and I think it would have to be situational for me to side with the libertarian view. Those included 1.5,2.0,2.4,2.9(I think I'm leaning toward agreeing),3.2(only disagree on the last part-wording isn't clear), and 3.6.
I am not quite sure how libertarians would respond to that situation because I find a lot of their policies and theories to be overlapping and contradicting. Jail time?
Haley Smith
PSCI 100:02
Personal Property:
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with the Libertarian view of personal liberty, for everyone should be free to do as they please.
Expression and Communication:
I oppose government censorship along with attacks on religion.
Personal Privacy:
I also support the rights of the Fourth Amendment.
Abortion:
I believe that abortion is up to each person.
Crime and Justice:
I agree with the libertarian view on crime and justice.
Self Defense:
I agree that every individual has the right to bear arms. However, I believe people should have to register a gun and must pass a test to do so. I do not agree with the libertarian point of view on this matter.
Economic Liberty:
I think a free market would loosen the chains, drop prices, and stimulate the economy.
“The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected,” I think it would be chaotic at first, but it would be a better economy once the people got there heads behind it and the government had a the sole position of monitoring
Property and Contract:
I do not agree that everyone has the right to do whatever he or she would like to his or her property. I believe environmental protection should come before right of property.
Environment:
Because our environment is so fragile, I do not believe the laid back libertarian approach will do the job. Restrictions and environmental laws must be put in place. However our government does have a horrible track record when it comes to environmental protection.
Energy and Resources:
I also oppose government control of energy pricing
Government Finance and Spending:
The abolishment of the internal revenue service and the income tax could very well stimulate the economy. The government uses taxes and an income channel and an excuse not to balance the budget and cut expenditures.
Money and Financial Markets:
I agree to the halt of inflationary monetary policies. Stop printing money!!
Monopolies and Corporations:
I agree that free markets should govern industries, and the government should only step in if a monopoly is created and is not serving the best interest as the consumer.
Labor Markets:
I agree with the libertarian standpoint on labor markets. Minimum wage is said to help the people get a fair wage, but it actually inhibits competition amongst employees and leaves people jobless. For example Johnny doesn’t have any skills and therefore cannot get hired but for five bucks an hour a company might hire him and then he has an opportunity to develop some skills.
Education:
I think the free market should run the education system because it would lead to higher education however, the government cannot expect parents to pay for all educational expenses because the poor would not have the same opportunities as the rich. The child should not be punished for the parent’s incompetence.
Health Care:
I receive health care through the state of Maryland right now and without it I would not have any health insurance. I believe everyone should have the right to health care and that countries around the world have been able to make this work.
Retirement and Income Security:
I agree. It should be ones’ responsibility to plan for the future and not the rest of society to support them at the time of old age.
Securing Liberty:
The principle of non-initiation of force should guide the relationships between governments.
National Defense:
ReplyDeleteExactly. Protect our country and stop policing the world
Internal Security and Individual Rights:
Adequate Intelligence must not take priority over maintaining the civil liberties of our citizens. The NSA and other government agencies haven’t been able to prevent a thing!
International Affairs:
Pull all of our troops out of these random countries please. Look, terrorists strike us not because we are a free country but because we try to control theirs. Ben laden wrote a note to the United States after 911 stating the reason for the attack being the refusal to pull out the U.S station and control in Saudi Arabia.
Free trade and Migration:
Taking the borders down ehhh. I am skeptical, but taking the borders down may very well stimulate trade.
Rights and Discrimination:
Real Talk
Representative Government:
The powerhouses make it impossible to vote anyone else to office, so I agree with the libertarian standpoint.
Self Determination:
Revolution
If the President assassinated a U.S citizen then he is breaking the cardinal rule and shall be put to death.
National Defense:
ReplyDeleteExactly. Protect our country and stop policing the world
Internal Security and Individual Rights:
Adequate Intelligence must not take priority over maintaining the civil liberties of our citizens. The NSA and other government agencies haven’t been able to prevent a thing!
International Affairs:
Pull all of our troops out of these random countries please. Look, terrorists strike us not because we are a free country but because we try to control theirs. Ben laden wrote a note to the United States after 911 stating the reason for the attack being the refusal to pull out the U.S station and control in Saudi Arabia.
Free trade and Migration:
Taking the borders down ehhh. I am skeptical, but taking the borders down may very well stimulate trade.
Rights and Discrimination:
Real Talk
Representative Government:
The powerhouses make it impossible to vote anyone else to office, so I agree with the libertarian standpoint.
Self Determination:
Revolution
If the President assassinated a U.S citizen then he is breaking the cardinal rule and shall be put to death.
I agree with many of the libertarian views proposed. Views I strongly agree with are marriage, abortion, and health care. Whether man or woman you should have the freedom to marry whoever you want. In my opinion, why shouldn't someone be able to marry the one they love? Abortion should also be a personal choice. I strongly agree with a libertarian view on health care. You should be free to go to what ever doctor you choose and get whatever treatment you want. This should not be limited to what your insurance allows you to receive.
ReplyDeleteA view I don't agree with is Retirement and income security. The elderly do not deserve to be left on their own. The government should at least support them with enough resources to pay their bills. In our society it would not be easy for the elderly to live on their own without the governments help because of the many expenses.
In a libertarian society, if the president murdered a US citizen, I believe he would be put in prison. The president would receive the same punishment a regular citizen would if they committed murder.
Cara Mason
Section 02
I find some of the economic and environmental ideas to be the most unacceptable. Private industry pollutes just as much as government does. If not even more. Mountain top removal is privately done typically. They DESTROY entire ecosystems in the process by taking the tops of mountains off and filling the valleys below.
ReplyDeleteEconomically speaking, a complete hands off economic system would be disaterious even more so to the lower class citizens. The 2008 financial collapse was caused by speculation on the land and housing markets. Which created an artificial bubble. When that bubble burst people lost their homes and the economy tanked. The banks were bailed out and the people were still screwed over. Now I do agree with not bailing out banks. Especially when those banks bet against something they themselves created. But what should have happened was an investigation on those banks. People should have gone to jail for what they did and a free market allows/allowed them to get away with that.
This also ties into monopolies. Monopolies hurt the civilian population and do promote economic growth. The late 19th early 20th century are prime examples of this.
When it comes to civil liberties I stand with them. What you do is your business and if you are not hurting anyone else then why care? Is your life so boring that you have to jump into someone else's life to just keep yours more interesting? Or is it that you just have a superiority complex that needs to be fulfilled? It makes no sense to me.
If the president had a US citizen assassinated he would be crossing a line and the government would have to get involved. He authorized the assassination of a citizen, someone whom he is supposed to protect. The US government would have to step in and handle it
(Some reason my first post didn't get uploaded from on sunday 9/22.) I agree with many of the libertarian policies however with minimum government intervention society can be problematic. However I believe government should leave responsibility held to the people on issues such as abortion, privacy, and personal relations. On issues such as education when their are regions of the country are teaching topics differently such as the south teaching the civil war as the War or Northern Aggression then the federal government should be able to intervene and be able to help shape some of the curriculum, this also goes for people who live in a poor community 'everyone should be able to entitled to education. If the president assassinated a U.S. citizen then the president would be tried as a regular citizen with no special treatment because of the criminal offense.
ReplyDeleteBen Howar 100:02
When I was reading through these points I realized that I agreed with most of them. But just like the majority of these other people commenting, I mainly agree with the marriage and abortion topic. I definitely believe that everyone should have the right to do what ever they please with their personal life.
ReplyDeleteI am sort of stuck in the middle with the whole defense thing, you have been saying that they believe that we don't do anything unless they come to us first, but if you really think about it if we go bomb them after they bomb us theyre just going to come right on back here and bomb us twice as bad and its just going to turn into this ongoing chain. If someone comes to bomb us and we don't do anything back then they will probably just stop and we don't have to worry about it again. but if we just keep our noses in our own business then we shouldn't have a problem to begin with.
and I think a libertarian would be completely against the president killing someone unless it was self defense.
Danielle McManus
PSCI-100:02
I do not agree with the policy on environment. If parks and things like that were privately owned I do not think that they will be kept up with like they are publicly. I believe some parks will end up better than others but a lot of parks will fall to the wayside and become just piles of trash or a secondary thought in the owners responsibility. If parks are privately owned they need to have standards they need to meet. I do agree with the abortion and the marriage topics, people should be able to marry who ever they want because it deals with their own personal lives and I think abortions should not necessarily be given to everyone but there is not a really good way to decide if the reason a person wants one is ethical so they should be legal.
ReplyDeleteKayla Motheral
I agree with pretty much all of the buttons described above, in particular the right to freedom of expression. However I'm unsure of how wise it is to have a completely free market system as it is easily abused.
ReplyDeleteI like the libertarian notions because natural rights and freedoms mean a lot to me as an American and as a human being.
I expect any libertarian, and in fact anyone who is a fan of freedom or rights at all, would have a serious problem with the president killing an American citizen.
Psci 100 03
I disagree with the abortion policy. Today in class we talked about how Libertarians are all about taking self responsibility. If you are going to have sex and dont want a kid then you should have sex responsibly and use some form of birth control whether if it is a condom or what have you. But once you find out the the girl you just had sex with is pregnant, it is your responsibility to take care of that child. There's always a chance of pregnancy when you have sex but thats an occupational hazard. Once there is a baby in that girls stomach it is both the mother and fathers responsibility to take of the child.
ReplyDeleteMark McCormick
It's hard to really disagree with any of these by just reading about them. They all seem perfectly reasonable and favorable. However, if you think about it, the way that people act now makes it seem as if many of these goals are unattainable (personal liberty, personal privacy, free expression and communication, etc.) There is one libertatian idea that I think would pose significant problems and that is having all property be private. In theory this sounds great. But in reality it just means that you'll probably have to pay to travel anywhere that isn't within your own property. Which is in fact, in a way, inhibiting our freedom. One libertarian idea that I really agree with is that of national defense. I think it is good to limit unnecessary violent actions. In regard to the last question, I think libertatians would find it unacceptable for the president to assassinate a citizen unless they acted with that kind of aggression toward the president first.
ReplyDeleteKayla McFarland PSCI 100.03
I agree with most Libertarian ideals, but i feel like they don't take responsibilities for there own actions. So who would own all the public land in a Libertarian world? who would maintain it. If i created a pot hole after someone else had loosened the cement should i be the one too pay and or fix it? Who is going too maintain the electric and sewers lines? The county does all of that with tax payers dollars, with no tax payers and no county is all of that going too be privately owned? And if so is the price going too sky rocket and defeat the purpose of kicking out a government in the first place.
ReplyDeleteDominic Vaccaro PSCI 100.03
From reading the positions that libertarians would take on these policy issues I find them all to be agreeable. For it can be based off of an individuals dependence on government currently and how supportive they are. National defense along with Free trade and Migration are two policy topics I find most agreeable. As a whole our government should only be involved in those matters that harm our nation within the United States. We shouldn't be in other people's homeland looking for a reason to initiate any kind of conflict, for we're just being nosey. National borders restrict a libertarian's right of freedom, limiting travel to be interconnected throughout the world. We should in fact be able to trade with whomever wants to trade with no boundaries or borders in the way.
ReplyDeleteI dont agree with 3.6 very much. I feel like if that were the case we would have so many different rule for so many different things and people and we would never get anything accomplished. also there is no common ground set. With no common ground it just makes it more difficult to live in a place like that. I do however agree with 3.7. I feel like if the government is violating us as individuals we should have the right to abolish it and stand against it as long as we have an reasonable look on it.
ReplyDelete