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. True libertarians have their own political party.
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?
They would want justice for the president. It says that " the only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights" and the president would not be stopping any of your individual rights in a libertarian society. Then the court would punish the assasin for killing someone and taking their right to live.
ReplyDeleteKevin Gerard PSCI 100:3
I do not believe that education should be provided by the free market. I believe everyone should have to at least attend some form of schooling system. While our public school system may be flawed it is better than no schooling what-so-ever. Which is what our poorer citizens would receive if we switched over to this free market schooling. How are they supposed to get away from poverty if they cannot get the education they need to push themselves to do better.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the government should have less of a say in our civil liberties like who we marry or whether or not you decide to have health care. If it is hurting no one but yourself I do not see why it should be an issue for the government.
I believe a libertarian would first ask if the person was a danger to anyone around them and if they were not than a libertarian would be outraged by this. If the person was a danger to people around them I believe that a libertarian would ask if the crime was severe enough to ensure that type of repercussion.
Rebecca Stotler PSCI 100:01
I disagree with how libertarians think the US should keep out of the rest of the worlds business and just keep to themselves. I think its important that the US is involved in the worlds problems i think it helps us gain information and always prepares us so other countries do not come to the US and start attacking we keep war out of the US.
ReplyDeleteIf the presidents were To assasinat an american citizen i think a libertarian would have to know the circumstance of why the american was killed, was he a threat to someone or the president himself. And if the only way he had to be stopped was to assassinate. i believe it depends on the situation and a libertarians reaction would be okay with the presidents decision if it was for defense.
Rebecca Miller PSCI 100:03
2.8 Education
ReplyDeleteI agree with the libertarian view to an extent, but I honestly believe the government is a big part of our education in today's times. The government supplies schools equally wit resources, things we wouldn't be able to obtain if students were home schooled. Education is linked to moral values, and a majority of those values are learned in schools while students are around peers. Education goes beyond the classroom, lessons are taught on an everyday basis. College is very expensive, and there are many who chose not to attend, college isn't for everyone but society makes us believe it is. There are ways to be successful without college. I believe parents should receive much more help from the government. Or colleges could be funded more by the government which would lead to reducing college tuitions.
^^^^ Ryan Sturdivant PSCI 100:03
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI support a majority of libertarian viewpoints. I like the idea of minimal government involvement when it comes to an individual’s personal freedom. I don’t think that any person should have authority over another person if he/she is not harming anyone else. I like freedom. For example, I don’t want to buy prostitutes, do hard drugs, or participate in same sex marriage – but I don’t want anyone telling me that I can’t. (Also, I’m not putting same sex marriage in the same category of drugs and prostitution, I’m proving a point.) That being said, I think that privatizing institutions like education for example would not be in our country's best interest. I think that in general, libertarianism would hurt the lower class and would probably create even larger class divisions. To answer the last question: I would say that libertarians wouldn't appreciate the assassination of an American citizen – or an person really. I don’t think any sane person would?
ReplyDeletePSCI 100:03
Lorna Morton
Damian Beane
ReplyDeletePSCI 100:01
I agree with the Libertarian view on Energy resources and pricing. I believe that the people should be able to regulate these pricing and keep the government from imposing unjust practices on essential goods and services. The one that I dont agree with is the view on retirement and income security. I do respect the right for people to find private means of future financial security but I think the government has to have a plan in place to make sure that the less fortunate of our society also has something to fall back on.
As for the last question I believe that a Libertarian would frown upon the assassination of an American citizen by the president. The governments role is to only use force if the threat poses harm or danger. If this were just an assassination without just cause then Libertarians would be highly disappointed.
I do not agree that education should be all up to the parents of the chid. You have to take in account of the family's background and education. Sometime there are instance where the parents are not educated enough to want to send their kids to go have education even if the child might want to. Also there won't be public school and most likely it will be all chartered school which will be very expensive and most will not be able to afford it. And when it comes to college there will be lots of problems because many of us rely on pell grants and financial aid to help us get through college and with that gone it will be very difficult to get to college.
ReplyDeleteWhat I do agree with is that abortion should be up to the person who decides to have it and not the government. It is the persons body and the government should not have a say on how she wants to deal with it.
An assassination of a US citizen by the President would have to mean that, that person is considered highly dangerous to the citizen of the States and if there is a clear reason as to why he was assassinated the Libertarians would understand it. And according to the article I think it was right for the government to do what they did because Al-Awlaki was a threat to the United States and its citizens.
Kimi Khiangte
PSCI 100:01
I do not agree that the education part should be free. Although there are many rules in the schooling district that need to be addressed properly, it shouldn't be free. Everyone should get an education whether it is a public or private school or even home schooling. How would they expect people to get anywhere in the world without some type of basic knowledge.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that abortion should be a free choice. No one should have a say in whether or not that person can terminate the pregnancy unless its the mother. The government doesn't own that one persons body. It's their body and they should have the right in what happens to it.
I believe libertarians would be ok with it. That is because the president must have saw that person as an extreme threat to more than one person. Obviously if there is no reason behind the president killing the person, then the libertarians would not understand. There would have to be a legitimate reason.
Kim Nicholls PSCI 100:01
I find myself agreeing with a great deal of the libertarian points of view, such as on abortion and the environment, but I disagree on the point of education. I believe that children should be assured a baseline education, covering certain basics across the country. While privatized education tends to seem most effective for those who can afford it, those who can’t would be left without any way to better themselves and their economic position. Imagine being condemned to a life of labor work because your parents couldn’t send you to school, and therefore you didn’t even learn to read efficiently. I have no doubt that the church would step in to provide certain free schools, but a religious education tends to differ from a broad, public one.
ReplyDeleteAnd now for something completely different. On the subject of the drone strikes of Americans, I believe libertarians would feel it could have been handled better, and an apology, at least, should be issued. Neutralizing a threat it one thing, endangering civilians is another.
Lauren Duckworth PSCI 100:01
I found most of the Libertarian policy positions to be quite appealing in theory. I think all of them sound promising, but in reality I believe most of their polices would not be effective in progressing society. To me, It sounds like they are trying to create a very selfish society where equality is completely abolished. For example, the education system in which Libertarians want is completely unfair. Public schools are a way for kids of all economic backgrounds, to get an education. If we privatize our schools, not only will it limit students everywhere from getting an education, but it will sergegate communities. I believe segregation would be the downfall of a Libertarian society.
ReplyDeleteI think a Libertarian wouldn't be concerned with the assassination of the President, as long as there is no threat to the nation as a whole.
Katherine Madden PSCI 100:03
I agree with the majority of the Libertarian positions. The ones that I disagree with are their views on wages and income tax. I think that there should still be a minimum wage so that workers can survive off of their income. I think there should still be an income tax, even if it is a smaller percentage than today, so that the government has enough money to appropriately pay its employees and fund the military. All of the other positions I agree with because they limit the influence of the government in our daily lives, which is especially good today since our government is run by mostly corrupt politicians and I don’t want their opinions and policies affecting by day to day life.
ReplyDeleteA libertarian would respond to the assassination of a U.S. citizen by the President by impeaching him from office and possibly putting him on trial for murder.
Tom Jones PSCI 100.01
I personally agree with most of the Libertarian policies posted. However, I disagree that parents should be in charge of their child's education. Frankly, some parents would be unfit to teach their children about certain things. This could affect the child in a negative way and then go on to impact future generations if the same things are being taught.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that abortion should be an issue left up to the person directly effected. If a mother feels she would not be able to raise a child, she should have the option to terminate the pregnancy without fear of punishment or government intervention. I also agree that national defense should be conducted by an unobtrusive military.
I believe that if the assassination was justified in a clear-cut manner, Libertarians would not disagree with the choice. If the person was placing the lives of others in danger, Libertarians would be okay with the assassination.
PSCI 100.01
I feel that I agree with almost all rules and regulations of a libertarian society except for a few. However all of these rules seem to be more like "wishes". I feel that the way people are in nature is what destroys us. Everyone will never be completely equal in this nature. Every person will always want more and will always compete with others. There are people that are willing to give up some of what they have in aid of others but thats about it. Violence also comes into play. Because of this want of more people will do whatever it takes to get those things or that wealth. I believe that a tax is necessary in order to aid the things that not everyone can get and to fund the things that the government does thats good. However personally, I dont think social security is necessary. Reagan said that the day the people can vote themselves a paycheck is the day everything goes down hill...and it has. I agree that people deserve the fruits of their labors and thats it. You get what you're willing to put out. So in conclusion I do believe I lean libertarian but i also thing that a medium level of government intervention is necessary.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to the Libertarian ideals i agree with most of them.
ReplyDeleteA point I do not like is the ideal of abortion. I feel like its giving too much power to an individual to keep a living thing alive or not. Even if it is dependant on the mother or not ts a living thing. Also it is the result of having the choice of whether to have sex or not. If they make the choice to have sex they should have to live with the consequence of doing so.
I do like most of their ideal of individual freedom excluding gay marriage and abortion. One in particular is their stance on guns. I like it because they don't limit what guns or what you get for them at all. The idea of being able to buy ammo and get whatever gun I want is great.
If the President were to assassinate somebody it would have to be for a clear and conscise reason. The main reason would have to be to protect the people or their property, otherwise it would lead to the downfall and incarceration of the President. -Kody Hinzman PSCI101:01
While I agree with the libertarian positions concerning social issues, I disagree with its stance on economic issues. As a result, I find the libertarian policies on abortion, economic liberty, property and contract, environment, government finance and spending, monopolies and corporations, education, retirement and income security, securing liberty, international affairs, and free trade and migration unacceptable. These tenants of libertarianism assume a fundamental idea to which I am opposed, that humans are generally good-natured. This is explicitly stated and some of these tenants even depend on good will and voluntary action (environment and retirement and income security). It follows that the free market is always better than the government at providing services, a philosophy that I wholeheartedly disagree with. Conversely, I advocate limited government authority over personal matters. I believe that individuals should have the freedom to do whatever they want as long as it does not harm others.
ReplyDeleteI think libertarians would for the most part deem the assassination of an American citizen by the president a violation of individual rights. Even if he took part in an anti-American conspiracy, libertarians want to overthrow the majority of the government anyway. They also endorse the right of anyone to overthrow what they consider an unjust government.
Elijah Spinney
PSCI 100:03
I am in agreement with most of the libertarian positions. The two positions I don't totally agree with is the energy and resources tab stance and the labor markets. I think that most of them sound pretty reliable, safe and smart. I guess here is where my inner libertarian comes out, because the descriptions for most of these segments are my exact beliefs in words. I think the assassination of an American citizen by the President would throw this country into a media generated madness state. I don't think the President would ever have a chance to overcome the media and justify his reasoning for the assassination. Unless, the American citizen is a traitor and converted into a domestic terrorist or something along those lines. If it were anybody else, I think the President would be impeached shortly after, and then slammed in trial for murder.
ReplyDeleteStephen Ryan PSCI 100:01
I agree with most of the libertarian positions, however I don't agree with the fact that money after retirement should come from an individual. Many people spend years working only to make enough ends meat for the time being, and all individuals should be able to look forward to a retirement in which they are still able to afford basic necessities. I agree strongly with the fact that we should seek for peace between America and other nations. We spend far too much time and money sticking our noses where they don't belong, putting our people in danger as a consequence. I do however like these positions because most of them advocate for some sort of self-responsibility, which I feel is something we lack as American's. It is far too easy for us to put the blame on the government or expect someone else to solve their problems for them.
ReplyDeleteAll of these Libertarian positions seem acceptable to me. They are all based on personal choice which also comes with personal responsibility. If people were held to such a standard, they would research and make informed, effective decisions. Some people would cease to exist, creating a more advanced civilization with higher intelligence, less bigotry and intolerance, greater productivity, higher quality of life. We would become more reliant on people helping people rather than a government taking care of everyone. If a libertarian saw the assassination of an American citizen by the U.S. President he or she would seek to remove the President by whatever means were necessary because he or she had become tyrannical, corrupt, and abused its power by taking away the rights of another person.
ReplyDeleteEdward Jackman- PSCI 100:03
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIf these policies were to take effect tomorrow, I would generally be cooperative. However, there are two policies I would be opposed to relieving the government with enforcing. The policy on self-defense would not be acceptable in my opinion. A libertarian's perspective is that people are generally good and should be allowed to make their own choices. Allowing people to take self-defense in their own hands with regulation or registration of firearms would be openly advocating for armed conflict across the state. Law enforcement would no longer be the leading coercing force of the state, instead neighbor would take up arms against their neighbors. Communities would lose trust in one another and slowly, but surely, the idea of nationalism would begin to corrode from the inside. This might seem like an extreme prognosis but this is where I see the policy leading society. The other policy I have trouble with accepting is the policy on retirement and income security. I do not believe allowing society to take responsibility for the poor and less-fortunate is the best choice. As the government does their best to push the middle class into poverty, they also have programs in effect that mean to alleviate our poor and old from poverty. Public services by the government to help veterans find jobs and fund for soup kitchens and shelters is a necessity many people have come to depend on. Pushing this responsibility on a society that is struggling to put food on their own tables would not be willing to feed anyone else before their families or themselves.
ReplyDeleteIf the U.S. president were to authorize the assassination of an American citizen, a bold libertarian would ask the president if that person was a threat to any one's safety or property. Under the circumstance the target was a danger to the security of state, a libertarian would not lose a wink of sleep. On the other hand, in the situation the target was innocent a libertarian would be livid. PSCI 100:01
The only point that struck out to me to be "completely unacceptable" what #1 personal liberty. As horrible a it sounds, that we as American's shouldn't have our own personal freedom, I just feel that people can take things way to far and when you give them an inch they take a mile, so I feel that the government always should have some form of imaginary reigns to keep people in check.
ReplyDeleteI surprisingly agreed with a lot of these libertarian views. But i also found the personal liberty unacceptable. What happens when there is no control and people can do what ever they want. That would be a world of chaos. That is why i like some sort of control to make sure i do not do anything super stupid. If individuals should have the freedom to do what ever they choose, that would be a world with no peace but only violence. I agree with most of them because they become from personal preference and things that make sense. Finally a libertarian would feel that an assassination of a person by the government would be acceptable if only it is for self defense and the protection of the country.
ReplyDeleteMichael Solomonik PSI 101:01
I completely support 1.3 personal relationship. People should be able to love whoever they want without any change of treatment from the government. People should be able to marry same sex and other sex individuals without any problems. Anyone should be able to enlist and serve in combat including females as well as males no matter their sexual orientation. I disagree with the fact that libertarians think that the government should stay out of the school and should be run locally. The government helps schools provide books and supplys for the students to use. To cut the government out of the school system would not be the best thing for the education of future students.
ReplyDeleteRoman Monzon
PSCI 100:03
I though that this would be the same as when doing the libertarian scale discussion post, where I agreed with only about half of their beliefs. With the policies being broken down and actually explained, some of it made more sense. Although the Environment policy, it seems that they would try to use social pressure but other than that not intervene which i still feel as though the government should do more and be very involved in keeping the environment clean. Also, I feel as though there should be government involved in education,. It should not just be on the parents because many would slack off and then the child has to suffer from it later in life.
ReplyDeleteI guess the assassination of a citizen by the president, if it was out of of self defense or something? Otherwise i feel like it is common sense that it is wrong and unacceptable no matter what political view.
Chevelle WHichard 100:01
I agree with most of the views overall but there are a few that I don't agree with at all. Abortion is one of those. Many will say that it is that persons body and that person should solely be able to decide what to do but it is not just their body once they are pregnant. From the point of conception there is a potential life inside of the woman's body and to take that away because of accidents, being irresponsible, or (even in extreme cases) rape, is not just. I also find it ridiculous that in California it is a law that abortion is legal but if someone kills a pregnant woman it counts as two murders. People seem to want to have their cake and eat it too and this is not ok by any stretch of the imagination. Once a woman is pregnant, it is no longer just their life that they need to consider, it is also the life inside them.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with the view on education. Educators have a hard time trying to teach their students because of standardized testing created by the government. It has come to a point where it no longer matters if the student is learning but what grade they get on a test. For others to state that parents will not send their children to school is ridiculous. Most parents believe that education is extremely important and will go to extreme lengths to help their children advance. A huge example is us as college students. Most of us would not be here without our parents help.
The assassination of a president is a call for defense and the military would act accordingly. It is a threat to the well being of the people in the United States and goes along with self defense.
Stacy Mummert 100:01
I agree with all of the positions of the party, with one minor exception to 2.0 Economic Liberty. I believe that welfare is necessary in our society for those who need it. Whether it be a single parent who needs financial assistance so they can stay home and raise their child, or afford to send their child to day-care, or someone who is unemployed and cannot find work.
ReplyDeleteI would assume that libertarians would want to know if the citizen was going to harm anyone of their fellow citizens, since the libertarians believe that the only military action should be that of defense. So if this individual was going to harm other people on a large scale, they would probably support the president in the assassination.
Mitch Woolley PSCI 100.01
I agree with most libertarian ideals, however there are a few exceptions. 2.2 states that the government should back out of environmental concerns, however I don't believe that is the best idea. Since all property is privatized someone effectively has complete control over what they do to their land. This could affect others though and should be monitored. 3.4 is the other questionable ideal. The idea of not having borders could result in drastic population changes
ReplyDeleteKennedy Cook 100:3
I agree with your worry about environmental worries, however; i also believe that if the government would back off of the issue that people would have more freedom to take care of it themselves. When people are allowed to own their own property without worrying about the government interfering with their personal property, they are more inclined to take care of it. I can also see your concern about the lack of borders but I honestly believe that our big issue now is the fact that borders create their own illegal market (drugs, etc) and if we got rid of borders that market would disappear and so would all of the undesirables that come with it.
DeleteCoryn Barger
100:3
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI read through all these libertarian ideals, and I agree with all of them. I have noticed that all these ideals protect our individual rights. I like them because it keeps the government at bay, and out of our personal lives. Also because it seems that the governments priorities are in better order than they are right now. I believe if the person was going to harm a lot of people or harm a significant amount of property the libertarians might be for it. But also they might not be until that person does the deed, because they believe government intervention isnt needed until a person harms another or destroys property.Until then, theyd probably wait and see what the person actually ends up doing.
ReplyDeleteMichael Montana 100:3
I completely agree with you. The government should not be allowed to be in the personal lives of the individual.
DeleteCoryn Barger 100:3
I agree with the principles that libertarians put forth, as they are principles that many peoples share; that is personal liberty without interference from others. However I must admit that I find their faith in capitalistic systems disconcerting. I simply don't believe that a focus on private property and free market principles will result in a free society. Of all the chains of humanity, money is by far one of its heaviest. As long as the acquisition of wealth remains the most important aspect of society, humanity will suffer. Greed and sociopathy will continue to be the most rewarding values, as they are in our current society. Altruism and mutual aid will be seen as ultimately detrimental and discouraged. Capitalism encourages selfish thinking and is ultimately self-destructive.
ReplyDeleteI cannot think of any existence more miserable than one in which public property does not exist. I having to pay to simply drive on a road or being unable to assemble on a sidewalk without being forced off due to the fact that it is privately owned is not freedom.
I do agree that immigrants should be allowed to come unrestricted from other countries. However, I feel that the motivations for such a unrestricted access is suspect. A recurring theme I've found in libertarian philosophy seems to be a reduction of the worth of the individual. Human beings become little more than assets; the idea that an individual could offer themselves and their "future value" as "investments" to others is nothing short of sickening to me.
I think that 2.2 can be disproved simply by looking at our current society. The majority of all the world's pollution comes from industry and the corporations that own them. Consideration of the well-being of the environment gets in the way of profit, which is the number one priority over all other things in life, including the well-being of fellow men and creatures. In the case of the Exxon Valdez oil spill, the tragedy could have been avoided had the company spent a few million dollars on a double hull. After the spill, they wound up spending billions in reparations, clean-up, and other matters. This is because capitalism encourages short-sighted thinking; an obsession over profit, to the detriment of their own profit.
Stephen Audia
100:3
(I know I'm late, I apologize)
I agree with all of the Liberitarian positions. I fully believe that the word “freedom” should mean exactly that. I agree with all of these positions because their emphasis is on the idea that the government should not intervene in any aspect of individual rights so long as the rights of others are not being infringed upon. I also strongly believe with the positions on foreign relations. While I believe that a U.S. military is completely necessary to protect citizens in the case of war or any other issues which require protection on a mass level, I also believe that our government should keep from being entangled in the affairs and issues of other countries. I also fully agree with the statement that if the government looks into anything personal about the individual that they should have to remain transparent so that citizens at least know what is being looked into and why. Of course there are issues that would come along with developing this type of government ...there are issues with any type of large scale change. However, I believe that Liberitarian government could work very well.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, Liberitarians would only be concerned if there was a threat to the larger community. That would be a reason to call for government intervention.
Coryn Barger
100:3
While I align with many Libertarian ideals, I think that their vision for society is infeasible. Were there no government, no matter how weak, to regulate how people and businesses interact, they would attempt to take advantage over one another no matter how much competition existed. Instead of deciding, to some degree, who has power over us, it would instead fall to however had the resources to take power.
ReplyDeleteJacob Blackall
100:03
I don't think that individuals should be held solely responsible for keeping the environment clean. Libertarians claim that governments have contributed to the demise of it, but our government has put bans on many harmful substances (like freon and pcb) that would probably still be in production today if it weren't for government intervention and regulation. The government also has a number of wildlife protection services, like the US Fish & Wildlife service, that protect endangered species and try to prolong life for them.
ReplyDeleteI also believe that schools should still be centralized, just not to the extent it is currently. I don't think that a free-market school system would be very fair, because people who grow up in rural areas vs urban ones wouldn't be given the same opportunities. If a rural child is only given an education on how to farm, they'll have no chance but to farm their entire life, even if they don't want to. A centralized school system means that poor, rural kids will have the same opportunity to explore the world as rich, urban ones.
With that being said I do agree with most of the other libertarian stances, because I believe that people should be responsible for themselves and nobody should tell them what they should and shouldn't do as long as it doesn't harm anything or anyone.
Emily Brown PSCI 100:01
While I believe in a person's right to protect themselves, not every person in the country is born able to handle the responsibility that comes with owning a powerful weapon. I think the government should still be allowed to place certain restrictions on the possession of firearms. It should not be legal for any person, regardless of factors such as age and mental stability, to buy, own and bear a firearm. I don't even need to list the potential dangers this would pose for society.
ReplyDeleteI think that there are certain problems the free market system could bring, especially in regards to education. I think its a big assumption to make that every single city/county in America would easily be able to pop up even one, let alone a few, good quality school. This could lead to a lot of inequality, which could in turn lead to high poverty levels and a large wealth gap. There are other hesitations I have about a free market, mostly because I've never seen one in action so I'm not sure if it would all work out exactly the way libertarians expect (or hope) it would. I think its a lot of trust to put in people to all cooperate perfectly, and there could be a lot of corruption without any regulation whatsoever.
Pandora Affemann
PSCI 100:03
I agree with most of the libertarian views discussed here, though the only thing I really disagree with is how private and seemingly separate everyone would be. I feel that the sense of community would be lost a little bit because of how everyone is trying to protect their own private interests. The libertarian view seems way to focused on material goods rather than providing wellbeing for everyone. I agree that people should be able to do what they want as long as they do not hurt anyone and that people do not owe anyone else anything, but I feel that some libertarian views are just too much. I don't feel that everything needs to be privatized in order to be free.
ReplyDeleteOn the issue of how libertarians would view the assassination, I think they'd feel that that is an infringement on personal security, especially if that person did nothing to threaten the president personally. There would be no reason for that person's death, and it would be unacceptable.
-Summer Varso PSCI100:01