This just screams, “I’m going to sprinkle some partially true information, then rely on you to make wild inferences.”
So, please, talk more. These types of claims typically will either… 1. teach me something I didn’t know, or 2. disintegrate immediately under scrutiny of explanation.
Not OP, but the Cato Institute is an American Libertarian think-tank founded by one of the Koch brothers (and others). I’m NOT going to try to look up in OP’s specific claim, but they are mostly extreme anarcho-capitalists. Massively oversimplifying here, but they believe in objectively false things like “big government bad, big business good” and “society should BE the free market” and “Ayn Rand is a good author”
Some more extreme Libertarians believe you should be able to buy/sell literally everything, i.e. guns, drugs, children’s teeth, whatever you can think of.
Okay of three things you’ve listed. The only thing that’s illegal to sell in the United States is drugs. Which arguably should be legal. Most of the real crimes associated with drugs are related to the sale and distribution, not the use. So making it legal would reduce crime and allow users to seek help without stigma.
Personally, I’m less concerned about what they want to make legal than I am about what they want to be morally acceptable. Guns, legal to sell, morality is questionable (depends on the buyer and the purpose). Drugs, you’re right. Making them legal would help in some ways, yes. Morality? Again, it depends on a lot of things, but GENERALLY SPEAKING, they can/are often pushed on the most vulnerable members of society. Children’s teeth? Yeah, it’s legal in the U.S. Should it be? I would argue no. Honestly, I only put that in as a reference to Danger 5 (home of the “Agent Hitler, FBI” meme).
More to my point overall, rather than nitpicking the details, Libertarians mostly view the world almost entirely in terms of market value and individual selfishness. They often don’t care about morals or empathy or the welfare of their fellow human beings unless they can turn a profit by at least pretending they do. They are exactly the type of people who think that “the poor” are ONLY poor due to bad personal choices, even though we have scientific evidence that says otherwise
So I honestly don’t really disagree with you. I wonder who downvoted me, the pro baby teeth crowd?
Anyways, I tend to think of myself as libertarian. Though more of the defense of individual freedoms. Than this anything for a buck that the koch brothers promote. I honestly feel like that crowd has taken some of the core libertarian values and perverted them and I blame Ayn Rand. I have always felt that rules should be based on a standard of prevention harm to self or others and honestly I am willing to get a little loose on the harm to self. So for example I don’t think wearing seatbelts should be required under law. I do however think that car companies should be required to install them as standard. Not wearing one would be a harm to self thing were not installing them would be a harm to others. Oh and I think people should wear them, just as an personal choice were you understand the benefit.
The one thing that I do kinda disagree with you on is the regulation based on morals. Simply put who’s morals? All those people try to ban abortion under any circumstances. Are 100% doing it because they think it is morally right and they feel they are morally justice in enforcing their morals on others against their will. Even when it causes harm.
I just find morally based regulation trends to the removal of freedoms and the marginalization of those that do not fit into standard society. Don’t get me wrong, I am fully aware that a fully libertarian state is doomed to fail. It is a full on pipe dream, but so is a righteous one.
Oh and that poor deserved to be poor thing. That is based on the “Protestant work ethic” which started out as a morality judgement where “good” people were rewarded with success and “bad” people had to suffer. That has been so engrained in society that people don’t even know it is there anymore. It is something that I find fascinating.
I think we are getting mostly to the same point we have just suffered under different extremes.
Sorry, I saw this earlier but got busy so I didn’t reply. But yeah, I just wanted to say that even though we probably disagree on some things, I appreciate how civil this conversation has been. Cheers mate!
What? Please elaborate.
This just screams, “I’m going to sprinkle some partially true information, then rely on you to make wild inferences.”
So, please, talk more. These types of claims typically will either… 1. teach me something I didn’t know, or 2. disintegrate immediately under scrutiny of explanation.
I’m open to either outcome.
Not OP, but the Cato Institute is an American Libertarian think-tank founded by one of the Koch brothers (and others). I’m NOT going to try to look up in OP’s specific claim, but they are mostly extreme anarcho-capitalists. Massively oversimplifying here, but they believe in objectively false things like “big government bad, big business good” and “society should BE the free market” and “Ayn Rand is a good author”
Some more extreme Libertarians believe you should be able to buy/sell literally everything, i.e. guns, drugs, children’s teeth, whatever you can think of.
Okay of three things you’ve listed. The only thing that’s illegal to sell in the United States is drugs. Which arguably should be legal. Most of the real crimes associated with drugs are related to the sale and distribution, not the use. So making it legal would reduce crime and allow users to seek help without stigma.
Personally, I’m less concerned about what they want to make legal than I am about what they want to be morally acceptable. Guns, legal to sell, morality is questionable (depends on the buyer and the purpose). Drugs, you’re right. Making them legal would help in some ways, yes. Morality? Again, it depends on a lot of things, but GENERALLY SPEAKING, they can/are often pushed on the most vulnerable members of society. Children’s teeth? Yeah, it’s legal in the U.S. Should it be? I would argue no. Honestly, I only put that in as a reference to Danger 5 (home of the “Agent Hitler, FBI” meme).
More to my point overall, rather than nitpicking the details, Libertarians mostly view the world almost entirely in terms of market value and individual selfishness. They often don’t care about morals or empathy or the welfare of their fellow human beings unless they can turn a profit by at least pretending they do. They are exactly the type of people who think that “the poor” are ONLY poor due to bad personal choices, even though we have scientific evidence that says otherwise
So I honestly don’t really disagree with you. I wonder who downvoted me, the pro baby teeth crowd?
Anyways, I tend to think of myself as libertarian. Though more of the defense of individual freedoms. Than this anything for a buck that the koch brothers promote. I honestly feel like that crowd has taken some of the core libertarian values and perverted them and I blame Ayn Rand. I have always felt that rules should be based on a standard of prevention harm to self or others and honestly I am willing to get a little loose on the harm to self. So for example I don’t think wearing seatbelts should be required under law. I do however think that car companies should be required to install them as standard. Not wearing one would be a harm to self thing were not installing them would be a harm to others. Oh and I think people should wear them, just as an personal choice were you understand the benefit.
The one thing that I do kinda disagree with you on is the regulation based on morals. Simply put who’s morals? All those people try to ban abortion under any circumstances. Are 100% doing it because they think it is morally right and they feel they are morally justice in enforcing their morals on others against their will. Even when it causes harm.
I just find morally based regulation trends to the removal of freedoms and the marginalization of those that do not fit into standard society. Don’t get me wrong, I am fully aware that a fully libertarian state is doomed to fail. It is a full on pipe dream, but so is a righteous one.
Oh and that poor deserved to be poor thing. That is based on the “Protestant work ethic” which started out as a morality judgement where “good” people were rewarded with success and “bad” people had to suffer. That has been so engrained in society that people don’t even know it is there anymore. It is something that I find fascinating.
I think we are getting mostly to the same point we have just suffered under different extremes.
Sorry, I saw this earlier but got busy so I didn’t reply. But yeah, I just wanted to say that even though we probably disagree on some things, I appreciate how civil this conversation has been. Cheers mate!