NH Legislator calls for restricting freedoms of libertarians

[dead0man]

And without right to work laws you are forced to join a union whether you want to or not, does that not violate libertarian principles?

[DevotedDemocrat]

Libertarianism is foolish, backward thinking, and is a danger to progress and stability.

Libertarians are generally naive people who seem to think that if we just turn back the clock to the Gilded Age and get rid of all those pesky things like the social safety net and regulations on big businesses and child labor laws, all will be hunky dory.

They think that big business will act responsibly and only with the public's best interest in mind, if we just take the handcuffs off and allow them to do as they please, without restriction or regulation; That they'll respect the environment and not destroy it; that they'll be true and fair to their employees if only we eviscerate Labor Unions and gut the power of organized labor; That somehow, if we give every wealthy person a gigantic tax cut, they'll reinvest it here in America and make all Americans wealthy and prosperous in the process; That if we get rid of all of our military bases abroad and reduce our military to swords and bayonets, we'll be much more liked and much more safe.

Like I said, Libertarians are foolish, and dangerous. But that doesn't mean they should be treated like second class citizens, or be made to feel uncomfortable where they live. Libertarians and their ideas are just as welcome as any other ideology; this is America, a free nation. Make them feel uncomfortable and it'll only strengthen them in their cause and perhaps even gain some public sympathy for them.

If we have to bully our opposition out of the way by making them feel unwelcome and uncomfortable, we've already lost the war of ideas.

What we should do, rather than make Libertarians feel unwelcome, is let them speak, let them voice their ideas, but also have our people rebut them and refute their ideas and educate the American people, and let the American public know that while Libertarian ideals sound nice on paper, they'd destroy this nation and turn it into a third world country if put into practice.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

And without right to work laws you are forced to join a union whether you want to or not

WITH right-to-scab laws, unionized workers are forced to subsidize nonunion labor whether they want to or not.

[Donerail]

And without right to work laws you are forced to join a union whether you want to or not

WITH right-to-scab laws, unionized workers are forced to subsidize nonunion labor whether they want to or not.

Here's something I don't think I've ever said: I'm with Bandit here. Right-to-work isn't libertarian.

That somehow, if we give every wealthy person a gigantic tax cut, they'll reinvest it here in America and make all Americans wealthy and prosperous in the process; That if we get rid of all of our military bases abroad and reduce our military to swords and bayonets, we'll be much more liked and much more safe.

Tax cuts for the rich are supply-side type stuff; libertarianism is more Austrian. "I am in favor of cutting taxes under any circumstances and for any excuse, for any reason, whenever it's possible."--Milton Friedman.

Find me a quote of someone saying "swords and bayonets". Libertarians are fully supportive of a strong national defense; we merely oppose an empire.

[Lief 🗽]

Who cares if libertarians take over one tiny state? It would actually be interesting to see how they would run things and what the results would be. I understand that this legislator probably has deep ties to New Hampshire and isn't willing to give it up, but in the grand scheme of things, having libertarians control it would not transform the country.

^^^Give us a few states, give the liberals a few, the Santorums a few, and after 5-10 years we can meet, compare notes, and see what works. Worth a shot.

Of course that would be the best way to do things, but ...ahem.....certain groups don't want that.  You can guess why.

"Certain groups" don't want that because "certain groups" know the libertarian states would quickly kill off all their poors.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

And without right to work laws you are forced to join a union whether you want to or not, does that not violate libertarian principles?

No, because no one is forced to work for a particular employer so no they aren't forced to join a union if an employer agrees to having a closed shop.  You're exhibiting the sort of workplace entitlement I'd expect from a progressive rather than a libertarian.  No employee has any inherent natural rights to his current job.  Any that he has comes from either a contract he has entered into or those provided by government action.

[Donerail]

Who cares if libertarians take over one tiny state? It would actually be interesting to see how they would run things and what the results would be. I understand that this legislator probably has deep ties to New Hampshire and isn't willing to give it up, but in the grand scheme of things, having libertarians control it would not transform the country.

^^^Give us a few states, give the liberals a few, the Santorums a few, and after 5-10 years we can meet, compare notes, and see what works. Worth a shot.

Of course that would be the best way to do things, but ...ahem.....certain groups don't want that.  You can guess why.

"Certain groups" don't want that because "certain groups" know the libertarian states would quickly kill off all their poors.

Oh, absolutely. The new age of prosperity that would emerge in the libertarian states would soon lead to all the poor being "killed off", as it were.

[GMantis]

lol, good luck getting re-elected.

I doubt that this would prevent her get re-elected in a almost +40 D district.

[Donerail]

lol, good luck getting re-elected.

I doubt that this would prevent her get re-elected in a almost +40 D district.

She's representing Keene though.

[GMantis]

lol, good luck getting re-elected.

I doubt that this would prevent her get re-elected in a almost +40 D district.

She's representing Keene though.

And this is hardly a town that attracts many Free Staters.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Who cares if libertarians take over one tiny state? It would actually be interesting to see how they would run things and what the results would be. I understand that this legislator probably has deep ties to New Hampshire and isn't willing to give it up, but in the grand scheme of things, having libertarians control it would not transform the country.

^^^Give us a few states, give the liberals a few, the Santorums a few, and after 5-10 years we can meet, compare notes, and see what works. Worth a shot.

The problem with this idea is that it would sacrifice the well-being of millions of people in the name of "diversity".

The right solution is to implement the right policy everywhere.

[Donerail]

lol, good luck getting re-elected.

I doubt that this would prevent her get re-elected in a almost +40 D district.

She's representing Keene though.

And this is hardly a town that attracts many Free Staters.

Keene is possibly the epicenter of the Free State Project.

[Cory]

Libertarianism is foolish, backward thinking, and is a danger to progress and stability.

Libertarians are generally naive people who seem to think that if we just turn back the clock to the Gilded Age and get rid of all those pesky things like the social safety net and regulations on big businesses and child labor laws, all will be hunky dory.

They think that big business will act responsibly and only with the public's best interest in mind, if we just take the handcuffs off and allow them to do as they please, without restriction or regulation; That they'll respect the environment and not destroy it; that they'll be true and fair to their employees if only we eviscerate Labor Unions and gut the power of organized labor; That somehow, if we give every wealthy person a gigantic tax cut, they'll reinvest it here in America and make all Americans wealthy and prosperous in the process; That if we get rid of all of our military bases abroad and reduce our military to swords and bayonets, we'll be much more liked and much more safe.

Like I said, Libertarians are foolish, and dangerous. But that doesn't mean they should be treated like second class citizens, or be made to feel uncomfortable where they live. Libertarians and their ideas are just as welcome as any other ideology; this is America, a free nation. Make them feel uncomfortable and it'll only strengthen them in their cause and perhaps even gain some public sympathy for them.

If we have to bully our opposition out of the way by making them feel unwelcome and uncomfortable, we've already lost the war of ideas.

What we should do, rather than make Libertarians feel unwelcome, is let them speak, let them voice their ideas, but also have our people rebut them and refute their ideas and educate the American people, and let the American public know that while Libertarian ideals sound nice on paper, they'd destroy this nation and turn it into a third world country if put into practice.

10/10

[Tetro Kornbluth]

"Right-to-work" laws clearly violate libertarian principles.

Which ones?  We haven't had a "libertarianism explained by non-libertarians" thread in a couple of months, we are more than due!  And Gully is here, always a bonus on this topic.

I love you too, deadman, but really there is nothing to explain. I don't 'explain' libertarianism, I merely describe it.

[freefair]

Sometimes, I think, If I ever move to the US,I'd register as a Democrat. Libertarian Party- often too radical for me, GOP- often too SocioCon and Antiscience
It takes an uber partisan douchebagistan-ite like this woman to make me realize I'd have to be an Indipendent. Then again, being a in the party of Dixie and Jim Crow, she's used to the idea vindictively limiting individual liberty.
:-P

[BigSkyBob]

I doubt anyone will care outside of a few very overzealous libertarians on the internet. What is more disturbing is that this Free State group seems only to exist to encourage their members to move to New Hampshire just to influence elections. That sort of thing is more than a little creepy.

I have numerous problems with so-called "Libertarianism." That said, there simply is nothing "creepy" in moving to where you vote counts most.

[BigSkyBob]

Libertarianism is foolish, backward thinking, and is a danger to progress and stability.

Libertarians are generally naive people who seem to think that if we just turn back the clock to the Gilded Age and get rid of all those pesky things like the social safety net and regulations on big businesses and child labor laws, all will be hunky dory.

They think that big business will act responsibly and only with the public's best interest in mind, if we just take the handcuffs off and allow them to do as they please, without restriction or regulation; That they'll respect the environment and not destroy it; that they'll be true and fair to their employees if only we eviscerate Labor Unions and gut the power of organized labor; That somehow, if we give every wealthy person a gigantic tax cut, they'll reinvest it here in America and make all Americans wealthy and prosperous in the process; That if we get rid of all of our military bases abroad and reduce our military to swords and bayonets, we'll be much more liked and much more safe.

Like I said, Libertarians are foolish, and dangerous. But that doesn't mean they should be treated like second class citizens, or be made to feel uncomfortable where they live. Libertarians and their ideas are just as welcome as any other ideology; this is America, a free nation. Make them feel uncomfortable and it'll only strengthen them in their cause and perhaps even gain some public sympathy for them.

If we have to bully our opposition out of the way by making them feel unwelcome and uncomfortable, we've already lost the war of ideas.

What we should do, rather than make Libertarians feel unwelcome, is let them speak, let them voice their ideas, but also have our people rebut them and refute their ideas and educate the American people, and let the American public know that while Libertarian ideals sound nice on paper, they'd destroy this nation and turn it into a third world country if put into practice.

Any political philosophy that believes that HIV+ women have an absolute right to prostitute themselves is self-refuting.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Any political philosophy that believes that HIV+ women have an absolute right to prostitute themselves is self-refuting.

Only if they inform their customers about the potential risks.  Plus, what about HIV+ customers?  If prostitution is legal, would it not make sense to let them have access to HIV+ providers?

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Libertarians are generally naive people who seem to think that if we just turn back the clock to the Gilded Age and get rid of all those pesky things like the social safety net and regulations on big businesses and child labor laws, all will be hunky dory.

It is odd that Libertarians don't seem to realize that we've already tried (economic) libertarianism and it failed.  We've tried having a country without a social safety net.  We've tried having a country without civil rights laws.  We've tried having a country without a federal income tax.  We've tried having a country without public schools that are available to all citizens.  Libertarians are as bad as Russians who want to return to Communism.  It has been tried.  It was wrong.  It failed.

[Badger]

From what I've seen of the Free State Project, they are a bunch of unadulterated a-holes who give most libertarians a bad name. The types who so up en masse to support their one of their brethern who gets a ticket for dring 37 in a 20 school zone, plead 'freedom' (i.e. "I didn't actually wreck or hit anybody, so what's the problem?"), then bitch alike martyrs when the guilt gets found guilty and fined $80 plus court costs.

Total hps.