The abolition of slavery and women suffrage were Republican issues.
Are you a Democrat?
They were progressive issues. The kind of issues that put human rights and equality under the law over business interests. At the time, the Republican party was more progressive than the opposition. It doesnât take a political historian to realize thatâs no longer the case.
3 Likes
This is very well put and succinct, Brainspore. Thanks.
So often when those wishing to place progressive issues in the modern Republican camp bring up the pre-southern strategy Republican ideals, they wish to equate the two in name alone. These two sentences should be placed in quick copypasta accessible format for all boingersâŚ
3 Likes
So, there is no such thing as a progressive libertarian?
This is a fun word game. I could play all night.
If there is, they werenât the ones who ended slavery or gave women the vote.
2 Likes
Iâd say that libertarians should be progressive (at least socially, if not economically) - if itâs really about individual freedom they should be pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-equal treatment for people regardless of race or gender.
As opposed to Ron Paul-esque libertarianism, which seems to be more about states rights (to establish religion, restrict marriage rights etc etc), rather than civil ones.
1 Like
I beg to differ. Recall that my assertion was that we were more libertarian, as a nation, than we are now.
To the pictorial evidence!!!
A group of people waiting for a representative from building code enforcement to show up. 
No - and definitely no if you think that means supporting everyone who has ever carried that banner for all time. I care about people and what happens to them, including what rights they have.
Meanwhile, your example of a state that hews closer to your libertarian principles was the US from the beginning, a time when it denied rights to a majority of its people. Thatâs in direct contradiction with what youâre trying to do now, claiming those rights follow from those principles. Especially if youâre saying that time ends with Lincoln.
Maybe you could clarify what youâre talking about. jerwin already asked: exactly what time period do you think America reflected the libertarian principles youâre talking about?
2 Likes
Iâm afraid I still donât see the appeal.
âPa says after weâre done genocidinâ them injuns we can stay home not-votinâ and dream about how nice it will be once weâve saved up enough money to buy a slave. And we donât have to worry about them gummint folks telling us that weâre about to get crushed under our unsafe hovelâbecause we got FREEDOM! Well, Pa does anyways.â
2 Likes
Says the Democrats( still waiting ).
No, there is an attempt by those who wish to argue with me to conflate libertarianism with slavery and oppression of women.
No worries. Look, the last words I ever expect to read from you would be similar to: "Say, trolley, thatâs a good point you have there. "
Just keep being you, weâll be fine.
âŚnor, for that matter, busted the cartels, nor created the trans-continental highway system, nor the TVA, nor universal education. They actively campaign against universal healthcare, which is possibly why your country pays twice as much per capita as anyone who has such, for an outcome that is definitely not twice as good (the average lifespan in the US is about 3 years less than in my country - that is a significant difference).
Your country became a world power and economic powerhouse in the 20th century, and it didnât happen because your government was âhands-offâ, quite the contrary. Our aptly-named friend is pushing highly revisionist history here.
2 Likes
Besides being terribly off-topicâŚyes, we pay more for health care than the denizen of the most income-equal country in the world.
sigh, Your point?
Can you let me know what your country is? I would like to retire there and let your kids pay for my medical care in my elder years. Warning, Iâm a smoker AND I like to turn a bottle, if you catch my drift⌠tell them to work hard!
No, I call it âhistoryâ.
What is the average lifespan for people in the US who can afford the insurance though? I imagine the average is dragged down by pesky poor people selfishly dying young and uninsured.
2 Likes
The one example youâre offering of a state better following libertarian principles â America at its foundation, as youâve made explicit â is one where slavery and oppression of women feature prominently, where they are defining features of the lives of most people.
This does not mean they are libertarian principles, and I agree they are properly not. But picking that as your example does say that you personally do not consider them as great violations as whatever is wrong with America now, big government and enforced building codes. From your own words, it didnât yet amount to a divergence from libertarian principles in a âmeaningful wayâ.
To the point that where you didnât even think it was relevant your example was a nightmare state where most of the population was disenfranchised and humans were treated as property that could be traded, exploited, abused, or raped at will. Who was talking about that? Not you, you were concerned with libertarian principles and how well they were respected back then, not this other stuff.
Suffice to say, while Iâm sure youâre vaguely for respecting human rights in theory, this comes off as a dramatic indifference to when they are actually violated. Iâm sure neither of us are keen on government-supported monopolies or legal slave trade. But I know which of the two Iâd consider more meaningful, and itâs not the one favorable to the ante bellum atavism you picked as the exemplar of your principles.
3 Likes
Not neccessarily, The John Lewis Partnership would be an example of a big business that isnât authoritarian, all employees are considered partners in the business, have shares in the company and can vote for representatives to run the business. It is at the conservative end of workers cooperatives.
If you think that business would lead to authoritarianism (by my definition) then thatâs a BIG issue with libertarian-capitalism.
How do you do that in a company town? Thereâs nothing stopping them from happening in a libertarian region, and If there isnât full employment theres always a group of people desperate enough to take the jobs.
I think weâre starting the old argument about what libertarianism is about, the one Libertarian-Capitalists and Libertarian-Communists have had for decades without resolution. Iâm going to pull out for the sake of my mental health.
1 Like
Just look at the East India Company. That company effectively controlled a huge portion of the world for centuries and was orders of magnitude more powerful that most governments at the time.
1 Like
Nice response, thank you.
With regard to my selection of the Lincoln Administration, I want to make clear that this was not a reference to slavery. I was referring to Lincolns abuses of power⌠arresting journalists, crony capitalism.
I take the blame for taking the conversation in this direction. I got snookered, walked right into it.
Certainly not any modern day Democrats.
As I pointed out( and everyone else pretty much ignored ) It was the Republican Party at the vanguard of abolition and womenâs suffrage.
So how does slavery and oppression of women serve as a critique of libertarianism while statists like the Democrat party get a pass?
Good, constructive response, again, I thank you!
No, I said that businesses are authoritarian. I cannot vouch for your John Lewis Partnership, but by and large businesses are often governed like fiefdoms, there is no responsibility only accountability.
BUT!!! this âauthoritarianismâ ends at the company property or employment agreement.
Also, really, think about it, would you want it any other way? Would you want take a mortgage( or two) on your home, cash out your retirement and saving accounts so you can put all of your capital into an entrepreneurial enterprise only to find out that you donât have as much to say about the conduct of the business as you thought?
These types of matters figure large in the assessment of risk. When risks are high -costs are sure to follow.
This leads to âŚ
A goal of libertarianism is the reduction of costs and scarcity. In such an environment a family would be much less likely to find itself in a âcompany townâ and if it did the option to leave would be apparent.
