Discussion in 'Politics, Etc. (Archived)' started by Waterd, Nov 2, 2016.
It's true, both approaches have produced an echo chamber.
Also it's easy for the dominant side to say they just want a free exchange of ideas.
Is libertarianism dominant?
I think if you're comparing libertarianism and socialism in the United States, libertarianism is the more dominant philosophy. There are elements of socialism but it feels like if we propose a social program there better be a god-damned good reason why, whereas sorta free market "make the pie bigger" trickle down stuff is basically the norm. I mean, the 2016 election was basically neoliberal economics vs neoliberal economics. HRC was pulled in a slightly socialist direction in the primary but overall her economic worldview probably isn't all that different from Trump's. Same with the 2012, 2008, 2000 elections, and so on.
The ACA is a great example of how dominant libertarianism is, or more broadly, right-wing/free-market economics is. The nominal left's solution to healthcare in the United States is to create a "marketplace". Yeah, there were some social elements to it like subsidies and the medicaid expansion, but it is essentially the Republican plan that Mitt Romney used in MA and that Bob Dole was pushing for for 20 years.
I guess you could say "that's not libertarianism", but it's a lot closer to libertarianism than socialism. The status quo is more libertarian than it is socialist in the United States. That's all I'm saying.
More dominant or dominant? There's a big difference, and this matters a lot for your point. I wouldn't say that libertarianism is dominant in the USA compared to, say, authoritarianism. It doesn't make sense that r/libertarian would have the rules it does simply because libertarianism is dominant when you compare it directly with socialism.
Yeah, I don't think ACA is remotely libertarian but I don't really want to argue about it.
I don't know what neoliberal economics is, but if its anything related to HC or Trump promoposed economics, then it has strong connection with Libertarian capitalism.
What has THE ACA has to do with libertarianism? there is close to ZERO libertarians in teh world that would propose or want ACA or anything REMOTELY similar.
And yes, Libertarianism is dominant compared to Authoritarianism? I would say its not even dominant compared to socialism.
What are we talking abou there? this is insanity.
At the very least, Gallup polls apparently indicate that people approve of capitalism more than socialism. That's not quite the same as libertarian vs socialism but it's something.
The most important point is that Libertarianism opposes authoritarianism, and No, it's not the dominant force there. Authoritarianism clearly wins over the world.
On r/libertarian, yes. Weak libertarianism is pretty overrepresented on sites like Reddit too (i.e. the 'socially liberal + fiscally conservative' crowd). The whole notion is silly, anyway. I have never seen a lightly- or un-moderated space online with a significant number of users generate consistent quality discussion, and highly specific subreddits is pretty much the entire point of reddit's design. Anyone who's spent time there knows that the only way to prevent an echo chamber forming in a popular subreddit is to employ an army of moderators like r/science does, which is of course impossible for most subreddits. There's very little value in allowing absolutely anyone to say anything in a space for discussion on a particular topic, and what little there is disappears as soon as you get more than a handful of users.
The main impact of the different rulesets seems to be that r/libertarian has more memes on the front page.
I'm sad , how it's possible that after this thread and all I say someone can claim the ACA is libertarian. To make it clear.
The Libertarian HEalthcare system is one where Keith is allowed to open in the next hour a site and an office to Offer Dinofarm insurance, without any liscence or permission of anyone. Where he can charge in sexual favors and only accept White young straight clients, whom he deem healthy, and offer that in case any of them get cancer, they will be insured for the service of REIKI of JUAN " EL LOCO". And make coverage where they only cover Cancer and Bone fracture.
And tell any transexual that enter their establishment they are scum and will not ever offer any services.
We want 100% freedom of association, free speech and use of their own property.
We want 0% subsidies, 0% obligations, 0% demands.
We do not want the goverment to have ANY SAY AT ALL , on what he can or can't do, we want the goverment to have No business at all in healthcare.
Yet the ACA, is about subsidies (auto reject for libertarianism), Mandates, REQUIREMENTS to accept all applicants, REQUIREMENTS on what should be covered., FORCE prices, and have a lot of other regulations and demands from the goverment. And any non follow of these requirements or demand of the goverments will be meet with the full force of government violence.
Who in his sane mind that understand even a little of libertarianism and the ACA could claim the ACA has anything to do with libertarianism.
It shows a total lack of understanding of either, or a complete lack of honesty.
I suppose if keith's preferred solution is a government monopoly on health care, the ACA would look more libertarian than that.
This is a natural consequence of the two philosophies being in very different stages of life. There's overwhelming evidence for the problems with socialism, as it's been in practice in various places all over the world for nearly 100 years.
Libertarianism in as much as it diverges from modern day liberalism is basically untested. It's lack of legitimacy is primarily because there's no great data on it. This puts detractors on the back foot because they're forced to propose theoretical flaws to the policy which are more easily hand waved away. In debates against the new, exciting, untested thing, especially in our modern progress (not to be confused with progressiveness) worshiping society, it tends to be easier to argue the grass is greener side than the conservative "lets wait and see" side because we have SO many examples where the grass actually has been greener. We overlook how many offensives and ideas have failed along the way though.
An echo chamber is formed by grouping together with like minded people at the expense of spending time with those who disagree with you. Being willing to let people wander into your community and hand waving them away when they do does not preclude you from being an echo chamber.
It's a natural consequence of socialism believing in top-down control of the population, and libertarianism believing in bottom-up self-organisation.
The rubin report as been heavy the last months interviewing Libertarians, saying that maybe he is becomming one himself. He is also calling the decent libertarians.
So to learn more about different types of libertarianism I strongly suggest go check those interviews. So far that I know off of DECENT libertarians.
That Guy T
These libertarians are not necesarily terrible, but I don't strongly support them and may be interesting or not.
Paul Joseph Watson
Let me know if i'm missing anyone.
I wouldn't put this guy's name near anything you want taken seriously.
I can totally see why, but is a libertarian, and was on the show. I prefer him over Gary johnson tough.
Sam Seder was on a Libertarian podcast. I think he starts talking politics maybe 16 minutes.
Dissapointing Sam seder decides to lie, Im almost tempted to call him on the phone if it wouldnt be a 2/3 hour process on that.
No , its a lie most libertarians that call or discuss on his show say the last gay wasnt a real libertarian, you can see TONS of videos where he says that , when talking with a libertarian, but you can find it maybe in a 5% of the cases.
To what extent does Sam Seder agree with Bernie Sanders-esque politics?
Separate names with a comma.