Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 100

Thread: How do libertarians differ from constitutional conservatives?

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Acala View Post
    I would agree with this. As a libertarian, all I ask for poltically is government by the consent of the governed. Assuming one can see through the phony consent of democracy, then you end up with government by consensus and without coercion. So any government that ALL of the governed agree to is fine with me.
    Not possible. There are far too many people and opinions for there to be a 100% coercion-free consensus. It will always wind up as tyranny of the majority. See "Democracy: The God That Failed", by Hoppe.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    Not possible. There are far too many people and opinions for there to be a 100% coercion-free consensus. It will always wind up as tyranny of the majority. See "Democracy: The God That Failed", by Hoppe.
    That was Acala's point.
    All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
    -Albert Camus



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post
    Some libertarians believe in this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism . I used to as well.
    So what are you now, FreedomFanatic?

  6. #34
    Chester Copperpot
    Member

    I think one way to look at it is that a constitutional conservative believes in a strict conservative interpretation of the constitution whereas a libertarian would feel that doesnt go far enough because there are things in the constitution that itself are not libertarian.

    ive always been of the mindset that the non-aggression principle was more aligned with someone being a voluntaryist.

  7. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Mitrosky View Post
    I think one way to look at it is that a constitutional conservative believes in a strict conservative interpretation of the constitution whereas a libertarian would feel that doesnt go far enough because there are things in the constitution that itself are not libertarian.

    ive always been of the mindset that the non-aggression principle was more aligned with someone being a voluntaryist.
    http://www.google.com/custom?q=non-a...ewrockwell.com

  8. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by otherone View Post
    That was Acala's point.
    Huh. I suppose I read it too hastily. And I was a bit tired (out late last nite, didn't sleep much). This here:
    So any government that ALL of the governed agree to is fine with me.
    is what threw me. In my tired state I understood him to be making a highly qualified endorsement of democracy. Previous comment withdrawn.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  9. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    So what are you now, FreedomFanatic?
    More of a minarchist in limbo.
    This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading

  10. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post
    More of a minarchist in limbo.
    ...pretty sure the Pope destroyed limbo...
    All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
    -Albert Camus

  11. #39
    From a non-philosophical political point of view, I'd SWAG that all genuine libertarians do not bother to ever vote or even to register.

  12. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Acala View Post
    I would agree with this. As a libertarian, all I ask for poltically is government by the consent of the governed. Assuming one can see through the phony consent of democracy, then you end up with government by consensus and without coercion. So any government that ALL of the governed agree to is fine with me.
    What qualified as consensus though? Majority rule?



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    If they were consistent, they would.
    But they generally do not.
    This is what turned me away from constitutional conservatism. It became clear that I could either be the only person in existence who has actually read the US constitution, comprehended the plain English meaning of its words, and determined to live by that,
    or I could look for something that actually has a chance of working as advertised.
    As one who (also) read the constitution, I cannot agree with your 'easy to read/comprehend' comment - some phrases of old English caused me to read parts twice.
    But I ask, does your last line imply that the constitution doesn't have a chance of working?

  15. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by TommyJeff View Post
    What qualified as consensus though? Majority rule?
    No, because then the majority violates the rights of the minority. Consensus means every single human subject to their rule.

  16. #43
    A constitution is a means to an end, namely setting up a government, and it is not necessarily libertarian or conservative in nature. The libertarian view of an ideal government seeks to avoid the initiation of force, or to minimize order based on state coercion to the maximum extent possible, apart from the issue of what means, constitutions or other practical mechanisms are used to achieve this. Conservatives are attitudinally committed to minimum state power, but are clearly not systematic in their understanding of how authoritarian tendencies conflict with minimizing the size of government.

    The American Constitution, as originally written and intended (based on Founders' documents and quotes) was in essence a libertarian leaning attempt to structurally minimize government, through a variety of mechanisms. It stresses "We the People" (individuals) are the sovereign governors (not monarchs or bureaucrats) of the nation, with their powers and rights expressed by a common law, and delegated through a decentralized matrix of separately sovereign states.

    A federal entity was created with very limited powers to address a very short list of needs common to the states. In fact, the federal government was to be considered to have no power unless it was expressly stated in the document, as originally written or as amended. Beyond this, divisions of power between the federal branches, and between the states and the federal government was meant to further prevent the state from centralizing power and from usurping the common law, popular sovereignty basis for protecting the people's rights and freedom.

    Though imperfect, this constitution has been essential to minimizing or slowing the growth of state power for a large fraction of its history. It permits libertarians and constitutional conservatives have common ground, and act as a mainstream device to stress limited government to modern audiences who have no concept of maintaining strict limits on federal power. This common ground is far more important than trying to stress differences between the two factions. Our real differences are with those who fail to accept limits, be they constitutional or ideological, on the power of the state.
    Last edited by Peace&Freedom; 01-27-2015 at 11:56 PM.
    -----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
    Blog: https://electclifton.wordpress.com/2...back-backlash/

  17. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    Not possible. There are far too many people and opinions for there to be a 100% coercion-free consensus. It will always wind up as tyranny of the majority. See "Democracy: The God That Failed", by Hoppe.
    It IS possible. When the radical right of secession becomes an ingrained part of the culture such that everyone has a choice to opt out of any official jurisdiction, whatever government exists will be by consent of the governed.
    The proper concern of society is the preservation of individual freedom; the proper concern of the individual is the harmony of society.

    "Who would be free, themselves must strike the blow." - Byron

    "Who overcomes by force, hath overcome but half his foe." - Milton

  18. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by TommyJeff View Post
    What qualified as consensus though? Majority rule?
    Majority rule is not consensus (as I tried to indicate with my reference to democracy as "phony consent").

    Consensus means that nobody is bound to any set of rules or enforcement unless they choose it. The ability to secede from any government you don't like means government by consent of the governed.

    This was the predominant state of affairs prior to the neolithic era. It was the predominate state of affairs in North American upon the arrival of the Europeans. Among American Indian tribes, the only people who went to war were those who wanted to. And if anyone didn't like the chief of the tribe, they could walk away and take as many families with them as wanted to go. THAT is government by consensus.

    Being tied to the land by agriculture caused this system to die out. But it is a valid form of society that simply needs to be revamped to take into account secession without relocation.
    The proper concern of society is the preservation of individual freedom; the proper concern of the individual is the harmony of society.

    "Who would be free, themselves must strike the blow." - Byron

    "Who overcomes by force, hath overcome but half his foe." - Milton

  19. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post
    More of a minarchist in limbo.
    If Satan controls the whole world, wouldn't that make this Hell?

    1 John 5:19: We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of Satan.

  20. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Acala View Post
    Being tied to the land by agriculture caused this system to die out.
    I agree and say this can't be emphasized enough. Poorer eating habits go hand-in-hand with poorer political arrangement.
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    ...I believe that when the government is capable of doing a thing, it will.
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post
    which one of yall fuckers wrote the "ron paul" racist news letters
    Quote Originally Posted by Dforkus View Post
    Zippy's posts are a great contribution.




    Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members

  21. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    If Satan controls the whole world, wouldn't that make this Hell?
    The word "world" in that verse means "the world of non-believers". John is contrasting the world of believers (children of God) and non-believers (the rest of the world of non-believers).

    The verse does not mean that Satan has control of the universe or this earth. God is in sovereign control of every atom of existence and the heavenly host...Satan also.



  22. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  23. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Sola_Fide View Post
    The word "world" in that verse means "the world of non-believers". John is contrasting the world of believers (children of God) and non-believers (the rest of the world of non-believers).
    If the good are on one world and the evil on the other, why do bad things happen to good people? And why do they both have the same Bible?

    And since we know there are bad people in this world, what does that make us?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sola_Fide View Post
    The verse does not mean that Satan has control of the universe or this earth. God is in sovereign control of every atom of existence and the heavenly host...Satan also.
    God's in control of Satan but can't delegate to him? Not even when the Bible says so?
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    We believe our lying eyes...

  24. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by The Gold Standard View Post
    No, because then the majority violates the rights of the minority. Consensus means every single human subject to their rule.
    That sounds like a practical impossibility.

  25. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by Acala View Post
    It IS possible. When the radical right of secession becomes an ingrained part of the culture such that everyone has a choice to opt out of any official jurisdiction, whatever government exists will be by consent of the governed.
    When men become angels, I will believe this. Till then, I see trying to reign in satanic forces/institutions (such as governments of men) beyond my control as a futile exercise. At best it's a farcical comedy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  26. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    If Satan controls the whole world, wouldn't that make this Hell?
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Ronin Truth again.
    Someone +rep brother Ronin for me, plz.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  27. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by TommyJeff View Post
    Would anyone be able to help me from a political (not philosophical) stance, and please tell me how a libertarian differs from a constitutional conservative? I imagine they share many similarities.
    Thank you
    Quote Originally Posted by TommyJeff View Post
    That sounds like a practical impossibility.

    So what is your background? Where do you fall politically and philosophically?
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    ...I believe that when the government is capable of doing a thing, it will.
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post
    which one of yall fuckers wrote the "ron paul" racist news letters
    Quote Originally Posted by Dforkus View Post
    Zippy's posts are a great contribution.




    Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members

  28. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    A 'libertarian party' is an oxymoron and a contradiction in terms.
    It really isn't. Libertarians believe in free association, and if a bunch of libertarians got together and all agreed to be called the "libertarian party", I don't see how that's a contradiction at all.

    Plus, a libertarian party with balloons and clowns sounds kinda crunk.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sister Miriam Godwinson View Post
    We Must Dissent.

  29. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Spikender View Post
    It really isn't. Libertarians believe in free association, and if a bunch of libertarians got together and all agreed to be called the "libertarian party", I don't see how that's a contradiction at all.

    Plus, a libertarian party with balloons and clowns sounds kinda crunk.

    Statement of Purpose: Voluntaryists are advocates of non-political, non-violent strategies to achieve a free society. We reject electoral politics, in theory and in practice, as incompatible with libertarian principles. Governments must cloak their actions in an aura of moral legitimacy in order to sustain their power, and political methods invariably strengthen that legitimacy. Voluntaryists seek instead to delegitimize the State through education, and we advocate withdrawal of the cooperation and tacit consent on which State power ultimately depends.

    http://voluntaryist.com/
    //

  30. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post
    More of a minarchist in limbo.
    On the way to where, do you think?



  31. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  32. #57
    Branding. I would suggest that you call yourself a constitutional conservative if you're working through the GOP.

  33. #58
    libertarianism in one sentence: Other people are not your property.

  34. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    On the way to where, do you think?
    Well, if I thought I was on my way elsewhere, I'd just go ahead and do it

    Probably something close to minarchism. I just don't believe the idea that there shouldn't be any civil magistrate with authority at all is very Biblical, and there are too many theological problems.
    This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading

  35. #60
    Well, apparently some folks here seem to believe that every sheeple flock requires a shepherd (to do their thinking for them).

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. The Difference Between Conservatives and Libertarians
    By Ronin Truth in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-07-2015, 05:55 PM
  2. Replies: 144
    Last Post: 04-10-2014, 06:22 PM
  3. Constitutional Conservatives
    By Carehn in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-10-2011, 09:51 PM
  4. True Constitutional Conservatives should OPT out!
    By No Free Beer in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-14-2011, 10:50 AM
  5. Libertarians vs Conservatives: CPAC criticized by libertarians
    By Matt Collins in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-19-2010, 06:43 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •