Convert me to a Liberal/Progressive
Options
bornnraisedoffCMR
Members Posts: 1,073 ✭✭
As some a you know I am a devoted libertarian. I feel libertarians and liberals have a lot in common in some regard. We both are anti-war, pro-peace, we both believe in freedom of expression and freedom of speech, religion, etc. We believe the government should not be telling you what is the moral/immoral way to live. We are anti drug war, and pro choice. We both don't like huge corporations that take advantage of people and corporate welfare. We both hate Neo-Cons, Fox News, and wing nuts that want to beat you over the head with their bible. We believe every human has a right to life and liberty. We both dislike xenophobia and racism.
That's about where it ends. When it comes to economics, private property, taxation, welfare, etc we are on totally opposite ends of the spectrum.
So convert me, make your best pitch as to why being liberal is the way to go. Tell me why Obama is the ? and why capitalism sucks.
That's about where it ends. When it comes to economics, private property, taxation, welfare, etc we are on totally opposite ends of the spectrum.
So convert me, make your best pitch as to why being liberal is the way to go. Tell me why Obama is the ? and why capitalism sucks.
Comments
-
i wouldn't say you're NOT an American liberal, by the info you've given
you act like Democrats are Bolsheviks that don't believe in private property
Obama has presided over the biggest transfer of wealth from the lower and middle classes to the upper class in... human history, perhaps?
that ? love wall street -
KTULU IS BACK wrote: »i wouldn't say you're NOT an American liberal, by the info you've given
you act like Democrats are Bolsheviks that don't believe in private property
Obama has presided over the biggest transfer of wealth from the lower and middle classes to the upper class in... human history, perhaps?
that ? love wall street
True. But the common belief is he is liberal. And even though he loves Wall Street doesnt mean I do. The Financial sector is way too big in this country IMO. -
yeah you're pretty leftist on the US scale
so what do you think about the alienation and exploitation that occurs when the workers don't control the means of production? -
KTULU IS BACK wrote: »yeah you're pretty leftist on the US scale
so what do you think about the alienation and exploitation that occurs when the workers don't control the means of production?
They can quit and find a job where they are treated better, or negotiate for better working conditions. -
bornnraisedoffCMR wrote: »They can quit and find a job where they are treated better, or negotiate for better working conditions.
in the case of the former, this is perilous when the ownership class colludes together, as they always have done, to prevent the working class from simply finding a better job
in the case of the latter, you mean collective bargaining, unions, striking? -
KTULU IS BACK wrote: »in the case of the former, this is perilous when the ownership class colludes together, as they always have done, to prevent the working class from simply finding a better job
in the case of the latter, you mean collective bargaining, unions, striking?
Sure, unions and striking is ok as long as the government does not get involved.
And the "Ownership Class" that you speak of only comes into existence from (a) the labor that is provided by their workers (b) selling a successful product or service
If unhappy workers cannot help him meet the demand, he will do what he can to please his workers. Workers just have to realize the power they have and so do consumers. I would never shop or patronize a business that is abusing it's workers. -
Also, what are some examples of the Ownership Class you speak of that collude together.
-
wait, so the representative government that the people elect is not supposed to be brought in to look out for their interests?bornnraisedoffCMR wrote: »Sure, unions and striking is ok as long as the government does not get involved.
howcome this isn't supported by... you know... history? owners have always viciously fought against giving any leeway or liberties to workers. they hire the police to beat workers into submission. happiness is not on the agenda.he will do what he can to please his workers. -
bornnraisedoffCMR wrote: »Also, what are some examples of the Ownership Class you speak of that collude together.
the aristocracy and the oligarchy
they protect their interests (maintaining wealth) by opposing the interests of the working class (decent living) -
KTULU IS BACK wrote: »wait, so the representative government that the people elect is not supposed to be brought in to look out for their interests?
Government is supposed to be there to protect people's individual rights, not to force businesses into giving into their demands.howcome this isn't supported by... you know... history? owners have always viciously fought against giving any leeway or liberties to workers. they hire the police to beat workers into submission. happiness is not on the agenda.
You just hit the nail on the button. The corporations would be powerless with out using the forceful hand of government to FORCE workers into submission. Government = Force. Thats what they do. Corporations without that government force is simply and entity that can easily go out of business.
The State has a monopoly on violence and force which is why the most powerful and evil corporations only survived because of government and buying off politicians. -
peoples individual rights and liberties are routinely trampled on by the un-democratic, authoritarian, and often plainly fascist powers of corporations
either the gubment will come in on the side of the owners, or it will come in on the side of the population
you can't create a magical libertarian fantasy where the gubment just won't pick a side
and frankly, in a gubment-less vacuum like many libertarians wish to see, you end up with totalitarian oligarchy -
What are some examples of this. And please dont bring me some ? from the 1820's.KTULU IS BACK wrote: »peoples individual rights and liberties are routinely trampled on by the un-democratic, authoritarian, and often plainly fascist powers of corporations
Government comes on the side of the rule of a law. Period. No matter who's side its on. Problem is when the big businessmen get laws written in their favor like the big banks do all the time to keep competition out the market.either the gubment will come in on the side of the owners, or it will come in on the side of the population
Why not?you can't create a magical libertarian fantasy where the gubment just won't pick a side
There is truth to that. Thats why I am not a full blown anarchist, although I would like to see a small community attempt a state-less society to see how it works.and frankly, in a gubment-less vacuum like many libertarians wish to see, you end up with totalitarian oligarchy -
I don't know how I could argue that Obama is the ? AND capitalism sucks without contradicting myself.
-
shootemwon wrote: »I don't know how I could argue that Obama is the ? AND capitalism sucks without contradicting myself.
Well tell me why Obama sucks and capitalism is the ? . -
bornnraisedoffCMR wrote: »Well tell me why Obama sucks and capitalism is the ? .
Mirror image of the contradiction would still be a contradiction. -
shootemwon wrote: »Mirror image of the contradiction would still be a contradiction.
Well tell me why Obama sucks and Capitalism sucks -
bornnraisedoffCMR wrote: »Well tell me why Obama sucks and Capitalism sucks
Obama sucks cause he's a ? . Capitalism only completely sucks if I'm trolling. Pure capitalism, however, sucks if you try it in reality because it never works out the way you describe it. Like KTULU said, there's never going to be a government that's just completely neutral, and like you said, the banks and big business get too much influence in public policy for us to even attempt having government not falling on one side. And what kind of libertarian society could it be if we told rich people they can't contribute to politicians? -
wtf?bornnraisedoffCMR wrote: »What are some examples of this. And please dont bring me some ? from the 1820's.
you know the unionization movement fought well into the 1970's before Reagan came in and illegally started to ? it off
and they were fighting that fight because the oligarchs were hiring thugs to literally beat people the entire time
in the depression days, before video, they could get away with paying private armies to just massacre people -
bornnraisedoffCMR wrote: »There is truth to that. Thats why I am not a full blown anarchist, although I would like to see a small community attempt a state-less society to see how it works.
They were plenty examples of stateless societies throughout history. such as modern times in new york. the free territory in ukraine. utopia in ohio. or the most recent example the zapitista autonomous municipalites in mexico. they were established since 1994 and are still around today -
viva zapata
-
oh look, CMR's back
let's watch Ktulu try to convince him that his entire economic ideology is wrong -
Swiffness! wrote: »oh look, CMR's back
let's watch Ktulu try to convince him that his entire economic ideology is wrong
To be fair, he requested it. -
i can kinda understand why you dont wanna hang all the capitalists when you are one of the capitalists
-
KTULU IS BACK wrote: »i can kinda understand why you dont wanna hang all the capitalists when you are one of the capitalists
Who are you addressing here? For the purpose of this discussion, is CMR really anything other than a useful idiot? -
CMR is a guy who should post more, that's what he is
