The Venezuelan Socialist Utopia ...

[AC_Exotic]

... is a massive failure. It's a tragedy on many levels, particularly how the people are now suffering under the hand of an ideological fiend.

http://www.rightsightings.com/miche...crackdowns-where-is-the-outcry-from-the-left/

 

[AC_Exotic]

Somewhere on an island called Tahiti ... Obama sheds a silent tear.

 

[HighStickHarry]

You don't get it ac. Everyone is suffering not just a few so this is more fair.

 

[aix_xpert]

Somewhere on an island called Tahiti ... Obama sheds a silent tear.

He's not on an island called Tahiti. He's on a multi-million dollar yacht off the coast of Tahiti. Get it right.

 

[MegaPoke]

 

[NZ Poke]

Bernie discussing breadlines:

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Maybe they should strive to be like the libertarian utopia of Somalia?

 

[MegaPoke]

Maybe they should strive to be like the libertarian utopia of Somalia?

Of your lame repeated lyrics, this is the dumbest.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Of your lame repeated lyrics, this is the dumbest.

How am I wrong? Very little government regulation. Freedom out the ass.

 

[ThorOdinson13]

Maybe they should strive to be like the libertarian utopia of Somalia?

Yes, the realization that philosophical anarcho-libertarianism is unachievable is a reasonable rebut to the failures of socialism and the same unachievability of philosophical communism. You know, because anyone who would point out such failures must undoubtedly be a an anarcho-libertarian ideologue.

 

[MegaPoke]

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Yes, the realization that philosophical anarcho-libertarianism is unachievable is a reasonable rebut to the failures of socialism and the same unachievability of philosophical communism. You know, because anyone who would point out such failures must undoubtedly be an anarcho-libertarian ideologue.

I'm alleging that anybody is an ideologue. But now that you mention it, I wonder who might take my statement that way? (Does it maybe rhyme with "livertarian tridealogue?")

If Somalia is "anarcho-libertarianism" then can Venezuela be "dictator-socialism?"

It would be interesting to compare some first world, "non-anarcho" libertarian countries with some first world, "non-dictator" socialist countries. Maybe I'm wrong and there are some libertarian countries with economic growth, affordable and real health care, economic opportunity, good education, a good lifestyle, etc. It seems some european countries that are commonly sneered at for being "socialist" have those things.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Styxenhitler666master is to Sys

as

Somalia is to Mega

 

[Ponca Dan]

I'm alleging that anybody is an ideologue. But now that you mention it, I wonder who might take my statement that way? (Does it maybe rhyme with "livertarian tridealogue?")

If Somalia is "anarcho-libertarianism" then can Venezuela be "dictator-socialism?"

It would be interesting to compare some first world, "non-anarcho" libertarian countries with some first world, "non-dictator" socialist countries. Maybe I'm wrong and there are some libertarian countries with economic growth, affordable and real health care, economic opportunity, good education, a good lifestyle, etc. It seems some european countries that are commonly sneered at for being "socialist" have those things.

Sys, the fundamental debate between the ideological anarchist-libertarian and the ideological big government statist revolves around the purpose of the individual. The libertarian ideologue maintains the individual is a whole unto himself, a person with free will, with the right to exercise his free will as he desires and deems necessary for his well being. The statist ideologue, on the other hand, believes the individual is a puzzle piece to be put in his appropriate place by the society in which he inhabits. His "rights" are to be determined by society (read: the state). His purpose is to advance the betterment of the society, as determined by the agents of the state. He is not permitted to exercise his free will, he is to act as a worker bee without regard to his own self interest.

It is argued by most on this board that each side of the debate is utopian, has never existed - and can never exist - human nature being what it is (a conflicted desire for freedom coupled by an equally conflicted desire to escape from the necessities of existence, to have someone else tell him what to do, to have someone else responsible for the consequences thereof). They may be right, maybe both sides are utopian, neither side can ever win the argument. Life as we know it is the continual tug of war between the opposing arguments. That is an unfortunate state of reality. If we are going to survive we have to pick a side and use every persuasive argument at our disposal to sway society to our way of thinking. I, for one, choose the individualist, libertarian argument. You appear to desire the collectivist, statist side.

 

[BIGOSUFAN]

How am I wrong? Very little government regulation. Freedom out the ass.

Yeah, because Somalian culture has so much in common with Western culture.

 

[ThorOdinson13]

Shocking, a false dichotomy following a false dichotomy

 

[BIGOSUFAN]

The average IQ in Somalia is 68. The cutoff for mental readation is 70. Most European countries and the US hover around 100....I can understand the argument for a statist-type system in low IQ countries such as Somalia, it actually is a logical argument. But no need for those systems in higher IQ countries.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Sys, the fundamental debate between the ideological anarchist-libertarian and the ideological big government statist revolves around the purpose of the individual. The libertarian ideologue maintains the individual is a whole unto himself, a person with free will, with the right to exercise his free will as he desires and deems necessary for his well being. The statist ideologue, on the other hand, believes the individual is a puzzle piece to be put in his appropriate place by the society in which he inhabits. His "rights" are to be determined by society (read: the state). His purpose is to advance the betterment of the society, as determined by the agents of the state. He is not permitted to exercise his free will, he is to act as a worker bee without regard to his own self interest.

It is argued by most on this board that each side of the debate is utopian, has never existed - and can never exist - human nature being what it is (a conflicted desire for freedom coupled by an equally conflicted desire to escape from the necessities of existence, to have someone else tell him what to do, to have someone else responsible for the consequences thereof). They may be right, maybe both sides are utopian, neither side can ever win the argument. Life as we know it is the continual tug of war between the opposing arguments. That is an unfortunate state of reality. If we are going to survive we have to pick a side and use every persuasive argument at our disposal to sway society to our way of thinking. I, for one, choose the individualist, libertarian argument. You appear to desire the collectivist, statist side.

I'm not endorsing either extreme. Those philosophical ideologies are just about irrelevant to me. Call me a pragmatist. Those binary choices don't fit modern society or developed economies any more.

I'm all ears though. Its just that the libertarians won't point to real world examples when asked. Okay, not Somalia. We should only use third world countries when critiquing the left I guess... So which libertarian example can we look to then?

 

[GunsOfFrankEaton]

I'm not endorsing either extreme. Those philosophical ideologies are just about irrelevant to me. Call me a pragmatist. Those binary choices don't fit modern society or developed economies any more.

I'm all ears though. Its just that the libertarians won't point to real world examples when asked. Okay, not Somalia. We should only use third world countries when critiquing the left I guess... So which libertarian example can we look to then?

Compare the economies of East and West Germany before the fall of the Berlin wall and compare the economies of North and South Korea now. Same peoples and cultures but different results. I know we are not talking libertarian here but we are talking about the difference between free and less free.

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

I have a great idea for a governmental system. Let's establish three different branches of government and have them check each other. We can call them the legislative, juduliciary, and executive. We can call the system a Democratic Republic. Yes, that's it! It may take a revolution to get there, but I think it's achievable.

 

[Ponca Dan]

I'm not endorsing either extreme. Those philosophical ideologies are just about irrelevant to me. Call me a pragmatist. Those binary choices don't fit modern society or developed economies any more.

I'm all ears though. Its just that the libertarians won't point to real world examples when asked. Okay, not Somalia. We should only use third world countries when critiquing the left I guess... So which libertarian example can we look to then?

Off the top of my head the society that has come closest to a libertarian ideal would be the United States following the Revolutionary War. Governmental power was limited and dispersed. Protection of property rights ranked high on the priority list. The US went from one of the poorest societies in the world to the richest in just a couple of generations. Individual freedom was praised across the globe. On the collectivist side we could point to the communist countries of the 20th century. Those societies went from the frying pan directly into the fire. Their governments collectively murdered in excess of 100 million of their own citizens, and interred countless millions in what can only be described as slave camps. Think Gulag archipelago.

Societies are constantly pulled in one direction or the other. Pragmatists prevail. They see good points on both sides. Discord abounds.

 

[MegaPoke]

Styxenhitler666master is to Sys

as

Somalia is to Mega

 

[GunsOfFrankEaton]

Off the top of my head the society that has come closest to a libertarian ideal would be the United States following the Revolutionary War. Governmental power was limited and dispersed. Protection of property rights ranked high on the priority list. The US went from one of the poorest societies in the world to the richest in just a couple of generations. Individual freedom was praised across the globe. On the collectivist side we could point to the communist countries of the 20th century. Those societies went from the frying pan directly into the fire. Their governments collectively murdered in excess of 100 million of their own citizens, and interred countless millions in what can only be described as slave camps. Think Gulag archipelago.

Societies are constantly pulled in one direction or the other. Pragmatists prevail. They see good points on both sides. Discord abounds.

This.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Off the top of my head the society that has come closest to a libertarian ideal would be the United States following the Revolutionary War. Governmental power was limited and dispersed. Protection of property rights ranked high on the priority list. The US went from one of the poorest societies in the world to the richest in just a couple of generations. Individual freedom was praised across the globe. On the collectivist side we could point to the communist countries of the 20th century. Those societies went from the frying pan directly into the fire. Their governments collectively murdered in excess of 100 million of their own citizens, and interred countless millions in what can only be described as slave camps. Think Gulag archipelago.

Societies are constantly pulled in one direction or the other. Pragmatists prevail. They see good points on both sides. Discord abounds.

Okay, but any example of successful libertarian government that's contemporary and relevant? I'm not sure a late 1700's/early 1800's government model or expectations is practical today. They didn't think about interstate highways, a fed, fannie mae, trident submarines, national utility grid, air traffic control, food safety, lead poisoning, acid rain, etc. Can you point to a successful libertarian government where they've had contemporary needs? And has a sensible life expectancy? Maybe there is one. I've given several examples of socialist countries that seem to do well.

The generalities are hard to argue. Those slave camps, etc. are as much a product of authoritarian government as any economic model.
Rwanda? That wasn't some socialist stalwart. Slavery is enabled by the will of people with an economic interest in slavery. I doubt Darfur is known for their volumes of stifling financial regulations. Government-sponsored mass murder took place all over unregulated Africa, Asia, here, pre-regulated England (all over the globe)... Your libertarian antebellum south U.S. was killing indians and enslaving black people as fast as it could. I'm just saying it's intellectually lazy to correlate any economic model to murderous government.

 

[CowboyJD]

Okay, but any example of successful libertarian government that's contemporary and relevant? I'm not sure a late 1700's/early 1800's government model or expectations is practical today. They didn't think about interstate highways, a fed, fannie mae, trident submarines, national utility grid, air traffic control, food safety, lead poisoning, acid rain, etc. Can you point to a successful libertarian government where they've had contemporary needs? And has a sensible life expectancy? Maybe there is one. I've given several examples of socialist countries that seem to do well.

The generalities are hard to argue. Those slave camps, etc. are as much a product of authoritarian government as any economic model.
Rwanda? That wasn't some socialist stalwart. Slavery is enabled by the will of people with an economic interest in slavery. I doubt Darfur is known for their volumes of stifling financial regulations. Government-sponsored mass murder took place all over unregulated Africa, Asia, here, pre-regulated England (all over the globe)... Your libertarian antebellum south U.S. was killing indians and enslaving black people as fast as it could. I'm just saying it's intellectually lazy to correlate any economic model to murderous government.

Not to mention that federal government assumption of state debt played a large part in the post revolutionary economic boon in the US....that's not exactly a libertarian concept right there.

 

[Ponca Dan]

There was a great deal about post-Revolutionary War America that was not libertarian. Slavery comes immediately to mind. The Articles were much closer to libertarian ideas than the Constitution. It didn't take long for the more statist element to begin pecking away. Even poor old Sam Adams, the true Father of the Revolution, was badgered into endorsing the constitution, something he regretted the rest of his days.

In a desire to avoid being called a libertarian hypocrite again this week, please note that I said it was the closest to a libertarian society I could think of off the top of my head. The closest thing, not the real thing, get it?

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Not to mention that federal government assumption of state debt played a large part in the post revolutionary economic boon in the US....that's not exactly a libertarian concept right there.

Plus, the country was literally expanding into a frontier. Give us another continent to exploit, regulation or not, and we're gonna boom.

I'm not even sure the antebellum period was out best economic expansion.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

There was a great deal about post-Revolutionary War America that was not libertarian. Slavery comes immediately to mind. The Articles were much closer to libertarian ideas than the Constitution. It didn't take long for the more statist element to begin pecking away. Even poor old Sam Adams, the true Father of the Revolution, was badgered into endorsing the constitution, something he regretted the rest of his days.

In a desire to avoid being called a libertarian hypocrite again this week, please note that I said it was the closest to a libertarian society I could think of off the top of my head. The closest thing, not the real thing, get it?

Yeah and I'm not critical of it. It just kind of validates my thesis that that libertarian ideal isn't practical.

 

[Ponca Dan]

Yeah and I'm not critical of it. It just kind of validates my thesis that that libertarian ideal isn't practical.

Sys, the libertarian ideal is an ideal: a suggested target that society ought to aspire to. There is no way a society could be libertarian until the vast majority of the populace agreed to it, practiced it. That's not the society we have today. I certainly don't dispute that. But discounting it as impractical does no one any good. It's only impractical as long as we think it is.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

There is no way a society could be libertarian until the vast majority of the populace agreed to it, practiced it. That's not the society we have today. I certainly don't dispute that. But discounting it as impractical does no one any good. It's only impractical as long as we think it is.

You can say the same thing about a theocracy, communism, etc.

 

[Ponca Dan]

You can say the same thing about a theocracy, communism, etc.

Essentially I did say the same thing in my original comment.

 

[squeak]

Not to mention that federal government assumption of state debt played a large part in the post revolutionary economic boon in the US....that's not exactly a libertarian concept right there.

I'm not sure your point.

 

[CowboyJD]

I'm not sure your point.

The point was that the economic/gorvernment promoted as closest to the the libertarian ideal....really wasn't all that libertarian.

 

[CowboyJD]

There was a great deal about post-Revolutionary War America that was not libertarian. Slavery comes immediately to mind. The Articles were much closer to libertarian ideas than the Constitution. It didn't take long for the more statist element to begin pecking away. Even poor old Sam Adams, the true Father of the Revolution, was badgered into endorsing the constitution, something he regretted the rest of his days.

In a desire to avoid being called a libertarian hypocrite again this week, please note that I said it was the closest to a libertarian society I could think of off the top of my head. The closest thing, not the real thing, get it?

Thin skin much?

Please note nobody called or implied you are a libertarian hypocrite. This week or last for that matter.

Also, please note I quoted and responded to Sys and not your statement directly.

Finally all I was saying is that the "closest to a libertarian society" really wasn't all that close.

Get it?

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

I just can not agree with the lefts narrative of US government. I guess the government newly established on the world stage could do no right. The wants to paint a heavy brush of slavery and idiots. When you take a look it is a much different narrative. It may not be Libertarian, but you can see a heavy bend towards freedom and liberty. Lets take a quick look.

In April 1783 Massachusetts Supreme Court outlaws slavery, citing the state Bill of Rights “all men are born free and equal.” The US was quickly moving away from slavery and citing their own documents to do so.

In November 1783 Noah Webster publishes "Webster's Dictionary." Webster's Dictionary is credited for standardizing spelling and pronunciation in the United States of America. Over a million copies were sold.

In March 1784 all children born after this date in 1784 in Rhode Island are free. Rhode Island's passage of its Emancipation Act provided for the gradual abolishment of the right to hold slaves.

By the end of 1784, trade with Great Britain had returned as Britain receives its first bales of imported American cotton. Peace was formally finalized in Jan 1784. The establishment of commerce with Britain is important to Europe.

In January 1785 Dr. John Jeffries, an American physician, joins John-Pierre Blanchard, a French aviation pioneer, to become the first men to cross the English channel by air, traveling from Dover, England to Calais, France in a hydrogen gas balloon. The US is young but is helping to set the standards for new scientific research to come.

In July 1785 the United States adopts a decimal coinage system, with the dollar overwhelmingly selected as the monetary unit, the first time any nation has done so. If you like getting your change back this one is for you.

September 1786 five state delegates at a meeting in Annapolis, Maryland call for Congress to hold a convention in Philadelphia in order to write a constitution for the thirteen states. This is a direct challenge to the current US government, and many did not think that the US be able to write a new constitution that didn’t involve a new monarchy or a return the British Monarchial rule. Instead we would eventually get our current working Constitution of the US.

I just covered a few years before the Constitution was put in place. The US government will make mistakes along the way. The handling of Tribal relationships would be one them, but less than a century later the US will fight a bloody war that ends slavery in the US for good. Can any country in Europe say that? Can any country in Asia say that? The US is the only country that I am aware of that ended slavery the way it did, and that speaks a lot about our ancestor's belief in our own documents that were sent to King George, and is something to take great pride in. US history is something to be celebrated. We all need reminding from time to time about liberty and it's cost.

I can’t understand how quickly the left and the right want to move away from this model. It has worked. If anything we need a return to a more pure model of the original by abolishing the 17th Amendment, but that would be another debate.

 

[ThorOdinson13]

I just can not agree with the lefts narrative of US government. I guess the government newly established on the world stage could do no right. The wants to paint a heavy brush of slavery and idiots. When you take a look it is a much different narrative. It may not be Libertarian, but you can see a heavy bend towards freedom and liberty. Lets take a quick look.

In April 1783 Massachusetts Supreme Court outlaws slavery, citing the state Bill of Rights “all men are born free and equal.” The US was quickly moving away from slavery and citing their own documents to do so.

In November 1783 Noah Webster publishes "Webster's Dictionary." Webster's Dictionary is credited for standardizing spelling and pronunciation in the United States of America. Over a million copies were sold.

In March 1784 all children born after this date in 1784 in Rhode Island are free. Rhode Island's passage of its Emancipation Act provided for the gradual abolishment of the right to hold slaves.

By the end of 1784, trade with Great Britain had returned as Britain receives its first bales of imported American cotton. Peace was formally finalized in Jan 1784. The establishment of commerce with Britain is important to Europe.

In January 1785 Dr. John Jeffries, an American physician, joins John-Pierre Blanchard, a French aviation pioneer, to become the first men to cross the English channel by air, traveling from Dover, England to Calais, France in a hydrogen gas balloon. The US is young but is helping to set the standards for new scientific research to come.

In July 1785 the United States adopts a decimal coinage system, with the dollar overwhelmingly selected as the monetary unit, the first time any nation has done so. If you like getting your change back this one is for you.

September 1786 five state delegates at a meeting in Annapolis, Maryland call for Congress to hold a convention in Philadelphia in order to write a constitution for the thirteen states. This is a direct challenge to the current US government, and many did not think that the US be able to write a new constitution that didn’t involve a new monarchy or a return the British Monarchial rule. Instead we would eventually get our current working Constitution of the US.

I just covered a few years before the Constitution was put in place. The US government will make mistakes along the way. The handling of Tribal relationships would be one them, but less than a century later the US will fight a bloody war that ends slavery in the US for good. Can any country in Europe say that? Can any country in Asia say that? The US is the only country that I am aware of that ended slavery the way it did, and that speaks a lot about our ancestor's belief in our own documents that were sent to King George, and is something to take great pride in. US history is something to be celebrated. We all need reminding from time to time about liberty and it's cost.

I can’t understand how quickly the left and the right want to move away from this model. It has worked. If anything we need a return to a more pure model of the original by abolishing the 17th Amendment, but that would be another debate.

The republican form of government and philosophy has been lost.

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

The republican form of government and philosophy has been lost.

Now that is a statement I can support.