Why there is no such thing as a libertarian socialist.

Author: TheUnderdog

Posts

Total: 75
Topic's author
#1
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
Libertarians: Want the government out of everything, whether it is social or economic.

Socialists: Want the government out of everything the left agrees with and want the government involved in everything the left agrees with.  In other words, an opinionated and politically passioned leftist.

If you believe in left economic policy, quit calling yourself a libertarian because your not. There isn’t anything wrong with being a socialist, but there is something wrong with incorrectly labeling yourself.
Topic's author
#2
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Theweakeredge
@drlebronski
Heads up!
#3
drlebronski
drlebronski's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 993
3
5
9
drlebronski's avatar
drlebronski
3
5
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
making my response rn
#4
drlebronski
drlebronski's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 993
3
5
9
drlebronski's avatar
drlebronski
3
5
9
Actually libertarianism was originally a leftist ideology but regardless,
libertarian socialism (broad definition):"Left libertarianism is a fairly recently coined term for a fairly old idea. Those people who embrace this view agree with other libertarians in holding that individuals should be free. They regard each of us as full self‐owners. However, they differ from what we generally understand by the term libertarian in denying the right to private property. We own ourselves, but we do not own nature, at least not as individuals. Left libertarians embrace the view that all natural resources, land, oil, gold, trees, and so on should be held collectively. To the extent that individuals make use of these commonly owned goods, they must do so only with the permission of society, a permission granted only under the proviso that a certain payment for their use be made to society at large. In effect, left libertarians, although prepared to recognized private property in oneself, are socialists with respect to all other resources. We each have equal rights over nature."   
libertarian socialism is usually associated with anarchy, anarcho communism etc etc.
" Libertarian socialists advocate for decentralized structures based on direct democracy and federal or confederal associations"

like democratic socialists libertarian socialists reject the idea of authoritarianism and want as little hierarchy as possible as they believe power corrupts.
The definitions I provided to not go for every libertarian socialists there are hundreds of variations this is the most common one.
Topic's author
#5
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@drlebronski
Left libertarians embrace the view that all natural resources, land, oil, gold, trees, and so on should be held collectively.
This is extreme leftism.

like democratic socialists libertarian socialists reject the idea of authoritarianism and want as little hierarchy as possible as they believe power corrupts.
If they reject authoritarianism and the government, why do most want government run healthcare and free college?  That sounds pretty authoritarian right?; the government getting involved with people’s lives fiscally.

If you support this, then fine, but your not libertarian then.
#6
drlebronski
drlebronski's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 993
3
5
9
drlebronski's avatar
drlebronski
3
5
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
This is extreme leftism.
indeed
If they reject authoritarianism and the government, why do most want government run healthcare and free college?  That sounds pretty authoritarian right?; the government getting involved with people’s lives fiscally.

If you support this, then fine, but your not libertarian the
your definition of libertarian is likely very different from mine
"Left-libertarianism,[1][2][3][4][5] also known as egalitarian libertarianism,[6][7] left-wing libertarianism[8] or social libertarianism,[9] is a political philosophy and type of libertarianism that stresses both individual freedom and social equality. Left-libertarianism represents several related yet distinct approaches to political and social theory. In its classical usage, it refers to anti-authoritarian varieties of left-wing politics such as anarchism, especially social anarchism,[10] whose adherents simply call it libertarianism.[11] In the United States, it represents the left-wing of the libertarian movement[10] and the political positions associated with academic philosophers Hillel Steiner, Philippe Van Parijs and Peter Vallentyne that combine self-ownership with an egalitarian approach to natural resources.[10][12] This is done to distinguish libertarian views on the nature of property and capital, usually along left–right or socialist–capitalist lines.[13]"
 
right libertarianism is Right-libertarianism,[1][2][3][4][5] also known as libertarian capitalism[6] or right-wing libertarianism,[1][7] is a political philosophy and type of libertarianism that supports capitalist property rights and defends market distribution of natural resources and private property.[8] The term right-libertarianism is used to distinguish this class of views on the nature of property and capital[9] from left-libertarianism, a type of libertarianism that combines self-ownership with an egalitarian approach to natural resources.[10] In contrast to socialist libertarianism,[4] right-libertarianism supports free-market capitalism.[1] Like most forms of libertarianism, it supports civil liberties,[1] especially natural law,[11] negative rights[12] and a major reversal of the modern welfare state.[13]

If they reject authoritarianism and the government, why do most want government run healthcare and free college?  That sounds pretty authoritarian right?
lol thats not authoritarian at all that's more freedom!?? free college gives everyone regardless of money the freedom to go to college
healthcare gives everyone the freedom to go to a hospital without going bankrupt
#7
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
If they reject authoritarianism and the government, why do most want government run healthcare and free college? That sounds pretty authoritarian right?
Uh... not really, no.
#8
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
/thread
#9
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@TheUnderdog
Before I engage you on this, I want you to permit me to because recently you and I have had severe beef here but for the first time in a long time I actually want to respond to your thread and get your reply.

If you tell me to get lost, I will respect it.
#10
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@TheUnderdog
Libertarians: Want the government out of everything, whether it is social or economic.
That isn't even remotely true. Most libertarians still believe in having a standing police force, army and legislators. 
#11
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
If they reject authoritarianism and the government, why do most want government run healthcare and free college? That sounds pretty authoritarian right?
Uh... not really, no

It would be. The implementation of it would cause authoritarian measures to be taken. 
#12
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
Actually libertarianism was originally a leftist ideology but regardless,
true! thats why libertarianism sucks
#13
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Dr.Franklin
What "sucks"  for one person Doc, doesn't necessarily suck for another.

Libertarianism, socialism, authoritarianism, egalitarianism, leftism, rightism....You can stick an ism on the end of anything, and it will "suck" for someone.

Anythingism....That sucks.
#14
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@zedvictor4
yeah that makes sense
#15
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
You continue your streak of uneducated opinions:
Socialism has literally nothing to do with social policy, it is a purely economic framework, hence the existence of the term "Democratic Socialists" and "Social Democrats", because those describe people who are both against capitalism and are socially left-wing. 

Now, you are correct that their can be no such thing as a libertarian socialist, but not for the reasons you believe: according to the IEP, Libertarianism is:
"...that individuals, and not states or groups of any other kind, are both ontologically and normatively primary; that individuals have rights against certain kinds of forcible interference on the part of others; that liberty, understood as non-interference, is the only thing that can be legitimately demanded of others as a matter of legal or political right; that robust property rights and the economic liberty that follows from their consistent recognition are of central importance in respecting individual liberty; that social order is not at odds with but develops out of individual liberty; that the only proper use of coercion is defensive or to rectify an error; that governments are bound by essentially the same moral principles as individuals; and that most existing and historical governments have acted improperly insofar as they have utilized coercion for plunder, aggression, redistribution, and other purposes beyond the protection of individual liberty...."
There's a lot there, but for now I want you to focus on the bolded sections, particularly the second bolded section: while socialists don't neccessarily disagree with property rights in regards to private regard, I'd doubt that "robust property rights and economic liberty" isn't very marketplace-y. Further, the first bolded section is also important. Essentially is says that forcing interference on someone is wrong, so... yeah, having an entirely government controlled economic system would probably not fit either.

I suppose a broken clock can be right twice a day, even if that clock thinks it's measuring the temperature.
Topic's author
#16
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@drlebronski
lol thats not authoritarian at all that's more freedom!?? free college gives everyone regardless of money the freedom to go to college
healthcare gives everyone the freedom to go to a hospital without going bankrupt
If the government gets involved with anything, it's authoritarian.  Some authoritarianism is necessary, like murder and rape being banned.  However, if the government gets involved with ANYTHING, it's authortarian.
Topic's author
#17
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
If the government gets involved with something, it's authoritarian.
Topic's author
#18
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Wylted
People who call themselves libetarian aren't "government get out of EVERYTHING".  They merely believe the government should be out of more things than the status quo or the average person does.
Topic's author
#19
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Theweakeredge
You continue your streak of uneducated opinions:

As usual, your being an asshole due to your insecurities of being a left wing dot in rural Texas.  I recommend you see a therapist.
#20
drlebronski
drlebronski's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 993
3
5
9
drlebronski's avatar
drlebronski
3
5
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
LOL dude your definition of authoritarian is when the government does stuff?????????
by this logic food tickets=authoritarian
public library=authoritarian
public school=authoritarian
also please tell me what about free school is authoritarian?????
#21
drlebronski
drlebronski's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 993
3
5
9
drlebronski's avatar
drlebronski
3
5
9
You continue your streak of uneducated opinions:

As usual, your being an asshole due to your insecurities of being a left wing dot in rural Texas.  I recommend you see a therapist.
you attacked a single sentence of his that wasnt even his argument.
#22
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
If the government gets involved with something, it's authoritarian.
You must be using a different dictionary than your fellow human people.

Anyway it is a good thing the government is not involved with taxes, the military, public infrastructure maintenance, etc. or we may have to get rid of all that too.
#23
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
You've yet to actually critique my view or correct your own. You were the one who brought me here, you were the one who has been antongistic long before me, and you are the one who loves uncritically claiming some absurd statement or another. If you want respect, try some intellectual honesty, then I'll give you some.
#24
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
Libertarians: Want the government out of everything, whether it is social or economic.

Socialists: Want the government out of everything the left agrees with and want the government involved in everything the left agrees with.  In other words, an opinionated and politically passioned leftist.

If you believe in left economic policy, quit calling yourself a libertarian because your not. There isn’t anything wrong with being a socialist, but there is something wrong with incorrectly labeling yourself.
You keenly highlight an error reflected by those whose political ideologies are riddled with logical inconsistency. Socialism's inevitable extension would be to implement a centralized government, making "Libertarian socialists," "anarcho-syndicalists" or even "anarcho-communists" oxymorons. Those who attempt to sustain the descriptions "Libertarian" and "Socialist" bear no grasp on the logic of each philosophy's tenets and principles.

#25
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
You must be using a different dictionary than your fellow human people.

Anyway it is a good thing the government is not involved with taxes, the military, public infrastructure maintenance, etc. or we may have to get rid of all that too.
All of which are authoritarian. Perhaps you should revisit that dictionary and reflect on the definition of authoritarian.
#26
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Athias
We are obviously using different dictionaries if your definition is "anything involving government" like Alec said.

Which dictionary are you using?
#27
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
Agree with the pro-dictionary set here.  If The Underdog would simply open up any dictionary and hold his definition of LIBERTARIAN and SOCIALISM against any standard definition, his argument would dissolve before he could write it out.
#28
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
We are obviously using different dictionaries if your definition is "anything involving government" like Alec said.
Governments are authoritarian; therefore, anything involving the exercise of government authority is authoritarian. Definitions of Authoritarianism are predominantly tied to government. Which definition have you read that leaves government out?
#29
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@oromagi
If The Underdog would simply open up any dictionary and hold his definition of LIBERTARIAN and SOCIALISM against any standard definition, his argument would dissolve before he could write it out.
Not at all. The definitions don't necessarily coincide. It should also be noted that when it concerns political, economic, social, and moral/ethical theory, citing mere definition does not suffice.

#30
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Athias

-->@oromagi
If The Underdog would simply open up any dictionary and hold his definition of LIBERTARIAN and SOCIALISM against any standard definition, his argument would dissolve before he could write it out.
Not at all. The definitions don't necessarily coincide. It should also be noted that when it concerns political, economic, social, and moral/ethical theory, citing mere definition does not suffice.

Disagree.  The first person to define the terms of the debate almost always wins the debate in my experience.  Making up your own socio-political or economic reality never wins the day.  We make up our own ethical reality whether we rely on other sources or not but morals should always be well-sourced.