What are the ideals of Libertarianism?
455002
I asked this question, too.  Here are the responses I received.
836717
The Libertarian view on abortion is a shaky one. Some Libertarians are for abortion, some arn't. Me. I am for it but only to a certain extent. I believe that during the embryo stage, because it isn't able to live outside the body, it is still part of the woman and should be allowed if wanted. But at the later stage when it is able to live outside the body, I believe it is a seperated individual, and should not be done. But that is my views many Libertarians don't view that. But we do believe that the decision should be made at a state level and not a federal one.\n\nThe thing is if this was a Libertarian governed country, it will all depend on what the State believes. That is if the State thinks partial birth abortion is wrong, then it would be illegal for that person to get a partial birth abortion. But because Libertarians believe that the govt, should not intrude into the Abortion Clinic's business, it would be hard for that to be enforced. I hope that makes sense. I think I'm confussing myself. (Alot of deletes.) But I really don't know how this would be taken.\n\nIf you really would like to know more about Libertarianism, email me at Chsel_06@yahoo.com. I don't know everything, but I'm pretty knowledgable about many issues and principles regarding Libertarianism.
513686
Economic Left/Right: 0.63\nSocial Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.69 \n\nI have always said that I am a fiscal conservative and a social liberal.  I guess I'm a fiscal moderate, and social libertarian.  Very nice.
625893
The role of the government is to provide structure and consistency. Looking at the Constitution (Preamble), there are five things that were the goal of the federal government: "establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common Defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty".\n\nLiberals as a party focus mainly on the "promote the general Welfare and secure the blessings of Liberty". Conservatives focus more on the "ensure domestic Tranquility [and] provide for the common Defense". But let's look at each of these five goals relative to morality.\n\nIf your goal is promoting welfare, then morality isn't much of an issue. People generally agree that feeding people is good, that murder/mayhem in the streets is bad, that paved roads and clean drinking water are good, that driving 90 in a school zone or residential neighborhood is bad, and so on.\n\nFor defense, again generally people agree that being safe is good, police (as a concept) are good, a strong military (for defense) is good, buildings blowing up is bad, etc. How much can be sacrificed to achieve these is a different issue (see liberty, below). So again, morality isn't a big factor in these issues.\n\nFor "establish Justice", it doesn't matter what your morality is, justice is good. What constitutes justice may vary, but that goes more to the other issues (liberty and tranquility, see below). So again, the concept of wanting justice by itself is not morality-dependent.\n\nWhich leaves us with the balance between ensuring domestic tranquility and ensuring the blessings of liberty. Here's where we get interesting. \n\nConservatives want tranquility, harmony, consistency, even at the expense of some liberty interests. Liberals want greater personal liberties, even if that means letting some criminals go free or not regulating certain behaviors, thus impacting tranquility. \n\nMorality is the set of beliefs that determine what is more important to us. Valuing liberty over tranquility means allowing other people to do things you don't approve of, while holding tranquility over liberty means that you want your values to apply to everyone, in order to avoid conflict.\n\nIs the right to choose who you want to marry (regardless of race or gender) more important than preserving a traditional historical opposite-sex same-race marriage? Until 1967, mixed-race marriages were illegal in many states (mostly conservative ones) because marriage was "by definition" a union between people of the same race. It was a moral issue, because their religions didn't favor mixed-race marriage. The US Supreme Court said that legal restrictions shouldn't be based on religions dogma, and that the right to marry who you want isn't subject to state controls. So far, that ruling only applies relative to race-based decisions, not gender-based decisions.\n\nIs it right for a woman to choose what happens inside her own body? The conservative view is that society as a whole mandates controls, and that based on religious beliefs since the embryo can become a person it should be treated as already being a person. Hence abortion is immoral. However, let's say you don't share the same religious perspective. Let's say you believe that it is the soul that makes someone human, and the soul doesn't show up until the fetus is capable of independent life (viability). In that case, based on your religious beliefs, terminating a pregnancy before the soul enters the body is not murder. How can you prove when the soul enters the body (conception, viability, birth)? You can't. It's a religious issue. So the US Supreme Court went with a medical (not religious) definition of life, and said that states cannot dictate religious definitions as a matter of law.\n\nAmerica is a republic. That means we collectively get together and elect people to make decisions for us. In a p
55054
You sound like you are a libertarian. They believe in things like less government and relaxed drug laws. On their website there is even a quiz to tell you what you are politically. The quiz is on the top left of the page listed.
320757
Liberal is the opposite of Conservative.  Libertarian is the opposite of Authoritarian.   Libertarianism means giving power to the people.  Meaning a small government, with few laws.  Liberal, on the economic scale, means a regulated economy, as opposed to a deregulated economy.  \n\nIt's kind of confusing, but they explain it well at http://www.politicalcompass.org
80817
Philocracy is based on the idea that persons who love what they govern should be in charge of governance.  It is a response to the perception that capitalism is not a sustainable system for society and that changes are needed to protect the future of the human race.
1043820
I converted from Republican.  Libertarianism is more classical liberalism so there is no basis for the statements that "it won't work".  Many Jeffersonian beliefs are involved in Libertarianism.  And for God's sake, there is NO correlation between Libertarianism and communism.  They are two diametrically opposed philosophies.  \n\nWe're out here.  We will continue to gain support.  You can thank us now, or you can thank us later for saving America.  That's a little strong.  I'll work on it.
654691
Libertarian Party.  This is the party of "Original Intent".
846983
The basic difference is that Republicans follow a conservative philosophy and Democrats follow a liberal philosophy. \n\nA liberal would say that a proper role for government is to regulate and oversee the economy. Liberals say it's proper for government to ensure that companies do the right thing (such as pay minimum wages), and to ensure that people act responsibly in their finances (such as requiring contributions to retirement savings).\n\nA conservative would say that a proper role for government is to regulate and oversee morality. Conservatives say it's proper for government to ensure that people are punished for immoral acts (such as taking drugs), and that people act appropriately in their marriages (such as banning homosexual marriage).\n\nA libertarian would say that neither of those is a proper role for government. Libertarians say that the only proper role is to maintain an army for defense against invasion, to maintain a court system for ensuring justice, and other constitutionally defined roles. \n\nA populist would say that both economic and moral intervention are proper roles for government. \n\nSome people classify libertarians as conservatives and some classify populists as liberals. Those definitions fall apart when libertarians talk about moral issues like abortion (pro-choice) or drugs (pro-legalization). \n\nRalph Nader and Pat Buchanan both consider themselves "populists," but the press usually classifies Nader as liberal and Buchanan as conservative. Yet they agree entirely on their most important issue, opposing free trade and globalization. \n\nThe problem with a one-dimensional definition like liberal and conservative is that it doesn't define well political reality. The two-dimensional definition is better.
248382
I am Republican, with Libertarian tendancies.  I the government out of our lives, & out of our pocket books.  \n\nToo many people have the philosophy that if something must be done, the government must be the one to do it.  I believe charities & private interprise should do much of what Uncle Sam is in charge of now.
1063249
Most principal economic reforms usually revolve around economic liberalism.  Economic liberalism is predicated on the principles of private property and individual contracts. The early theory was based on the assumption that the economic actions of individuals are largely based on self-interest, and that allowing them to do so without any restrictions will produce the best results, provided that at least minimum standards of public information and justice exist, e.g., no-one should be allowed to coerce or steal.\n\nThis implies that the privileges and restrictions should be abolished and everybody should have the freedom to choose a profession, sell and buy, make contracts etc. as long as all participants are voluntary. Every restriction reduces the set of alternatives and thus often forces people to choose less beneficial alternatives.\n\nThe key advantages of economic liberalism is individual freedom and efficient markets.  The key disadvantage is marshalling resources to a common national purpose can be more challenging.
483348
LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL WHO CAN AFFORD IT \n\n GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT \n unfortunately that is how the law really works
922552
Notable ideas: tabula rasa, "government with the consent of the governed"; state of nature; rights of life, liberty and property \nInfluences: Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Grotius, Descartes, Hooker, Hobbes
626063
take this test, see how close you are to being a libertarian.http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html\n'liberals' these days are democrats. the neo cons or 'conservatives' are republicans. they tend to lump everyone who sees thing differently from them as 'liberals' & use the term as a derrogatory. cant really trust what they say, pretty closed minded & elitist.
532006
1)freedom of speech\n2)freedom of religion\n3)the right to own property and to operate in a capitalist system.
219745
Libertarians are not affiliated with any party.  Check out the Cato Institute - a true libertarian group - and the only ones who make any sense in this present atmosphere