Libertarians in Argentina?

steveinbsas said:
These radicals don't think in terms of fixing or paying for anything.

They're just gonna "share the land they'll be giving away when we all live together" (The Guess Who).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLQJ4toj-JY

The destruction of the capitalist system was the goal of the student "radicals" in the late '60s and early 70's. That's exactly what many of the OWS "protesters" desire today. Francis Fox Piven (a "radical" from the 60's) has been with them and gave them a voice (hers) from the start:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBbnnqlX9Jw
Click to expand...

Yup. So instead of being screwed by neoliberals let's get screwed by bolsheviks. They just wanna change the positions and ride in the saddle
 
It looks like everyone here is as confused as I feel about this word 'Libertarian'. It seems to have been co-opted by conservatives when it started out as a description of traditional anarchists - who are generally considered to be well left of liberals! I think Norman Mailer was the first - I remember he ran for Mayor of New York (or something like that) as a self-described 'right-wing anarchist'.
By any traditional meaning the last thing a libertarian could or would be is a capitalist of any colour. Anarchists don't believe in the state, but they don't believe in private property either and often not money, so I can't understand why a bunch of gun-wielding land holders who consider taxation theft by closet-socialists want to use this term, but they have definitely taken it over.
On second thoughts, maybe the poster was using it as code for 'swinger'?!
 
botanico said:
It looks like everyone here is as confused as I feel about this word 'Libertarian'. It seems to have been co-opted by conservatives when it started out as a description of traditional anarchists - who are generally considered to be well left of liberals! I think Norman Mailer was the first - I remember he ran for Mayor of New York (or something like that) as a self-described 'right-wing anarchist'.
By any traditional meaning the last thing a libertarian could or would be is a capitalist of any colour. Anarchists don't believe in the state, but they don't believe in private property either and often not money, so I can't understand why a bunch of gun-wielding land holders who consider taxation theft by closet-socialists want to use this term, but they have definitely taken it over.
On second thoughts, maybe the poster was using it as code for 'swinger'?!
Click to expand...

The term Libertarian was certianly in use prior to the founding of the Libertarian Party.

Perhaps these links will help clear up (at least some of) the confusion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lew_Rockwell

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/liberal-post-interview.html

http://www.lp.org/our-history
 
Philosopher Roderick T. Long defines libertarianism as "any political position that advocates a radical redistribution of power from the coercive state to voluntary associations of free individuals", whether "voluntary association" takes the form of the free market or of communal co-operatives.[2] According to the U.S. Libertarian Party, libertarianism is the advocacy of a government that is funded voluntarily and limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence.

It is problematic that in the past century the terms of libertarian, progressive, and liberal have almost taken over each other's lables. In the past century the idea of anarchy has been replaced by limiting the scope of government.
 
I'm surprised to see several people know of Von Mises and Murray Rothbard. It looks as if there are libertarians there after all!

Can't wait to be there!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top