Thread: Libertarians: jetway for the human spirit or goat path to feudalism?

Originally Posted by Libre

Don't worry Davo, we will all be banned soon enough...

I doubt it. I've stopped reporting insults, racial epithets and anti-semitism, and the mods don't seem to care either. So Manny, Moe and Jackoff are safe as far as my efforts go.

And I oppose banning on those grounds anyway. It's more impressive to see thinking people wear you down.


...Manny = FFA, Moe = Defensore.

Originally Posted by Davocrat

Based on Ponzi's ideal of "libertarian," i.e., no public property, no taxation, no government services, what is the difference between libertarianism and feudalism, if you please?

On the other hand, I understand that not everyone sees libertarianism as an absolute option and correctly understands it as a PRINCIPLE that works sometimes, rather than a form of government.

Feudalism involves knights pledging loyalty to a lord in exchange for some land. Libertarianism is simply limiting the federal government to restraining it's citizens from injuring one another through acts of aggression.

Originally Posted by Zarathustra

Feudalism involves knights pledging loyalty to a lord in exchange for some land. Libertarianism is simply limiting the federal government to restraining it's citizens from injuring one another through acts of aggression.

In their purest forms your definitions are, of course, correct.

But my original statement here was to suggest that libertarianism might be a "goat path to feudalism."

Indeed, as you describe it, Ponzi's ideal libertarian state COULD lead to feudalism. Once corporate and wealthy individual interests own all the property, land and resources, "subletting" might be a natural revenue stream for the owners.

That IS "pledging loyalty for land"...even if the "pledge" is rent paid every month.

Originally Posted by Zarathustra

Feudalism involves knights pledging loyalty to a lord in exchange for some land. Libertarianism is simply limiting the federal government to restraining it's citizens from injuring one another through acts of aggression.

You forgot the part where huge sections of the lower classes become borderline serfs caught in a poverty trap of capitalistic subsistence due market factors and externalities that can't possibly be addressed within a libertarian state framework.

Originally Posted by Davocrat

In their purest forms your definitions are, of course, correct.

But my original statement here was to suggest that libertarianism might be a "goat path to feudalism."

Indeed, as you describe it, Ponzi's ideal libertarian state COULD lead to feudalism. Once corporate and wealthy individual interests own all the property, land and resources, "subletting" might be a natural revenue stream for the owners.

That IS "pledging loyalty for land"...even if the "pledge" is rent paid every month.

Competition would ensure that the land would remain at equitable prices so that normal citizens would be able to afford to buy it. There would be far too much competition that it would be quite unlikely that a few megacorporations would own all the land. That shit only happens in Sci-Fi movies.

Originally Posted by Zarathustra

Competition would ensure that the land would remain at equitable prices so that normal citizens would be able to afford to buy it. There would be far too much competition that it would be quite unlikely that a few megacorporations would own all the land. That shit only happens in Sci-Fi movies.

Your assuming a perfect free market, in which perfect competition and rationality reign and no externalities exist. Concentration of ownership as well as market supply happens in a number of very visible economic sectors today, including media, agriculture, food services, energy and finance.

Oligopoly has been endemic to all capitalist states since their inception, fortunately most of the time legislation and state action as well a variety of interventionist policies ensure that corporations can't utterly dominate entire sectors of the economy alone, in most commanding industries they at least have to deal with 3-4 other rivals.

Yay.

Originally Posted by Davocrat

It's more impressive to see thinking people wear you down.

Well, I guess that means we have nothing to worry about from you then.

Originally Posted by Davocrat

Maybe its the attraction of affordable, high quality public education

Funny since Cuba offers free education all the way through college and has the second highest literacy rate in the world. A sign socialism works? Not when people are literally dying to get out. The reality is, there is no better indoctrination machine than government controlled education and therein lies the problem.

BTW: Cuban Americans' attitudes shift - Los Angeles Times

I agree, trading and friendship wins over people much faster than trying to use force as you advocate.

Pure Libertarianism could never work, but I have yet to meet a serious Libertarian canidate who sought 'pure'-ism. As many have said, no pure-ism will work.

Conservative- Probably the best chance to preserve the Republic, but a huge chance of falling into a military ogliarchy or even authortarianism.

Liberal- Fast track to communism. Hell, we have already fallen to European style socialism. At least there aren't many of the old style leftists, no Nazi's here.

Libertarian- Hard to figure. On one hand they resemble the old Italian leftists from the ANI, on the other they are the exact opposite. Carried out as LIbertarians envision it, it would be utopia, but at some point the Oil/Rubber/Steel/Microsoft Tycoons would take power.

I like what we have, 300 million patriots in 2 camps, with 100 people holding Ron Paul signs.

Originally Posted by Zarathustra

Competition would ensure that the land would remain at equitable prices so that normal citizens would be able to afford to buy it. There would be far too much competition that it would be quite unlikely that a few megacorporations would own all the land. That shit only happens in Sci-Fi movies.

And this shit only happens in libertarian dreams:

Competition would ensure that the land would remain at equitable prices so that normal citizens would be able to afford to buy it.