Republicans vs. Democrats

As a libertarian, which is just the contemporary word for "classical liberal", I'm not receptive to the the overall platform of either party because they both support heavily centralized forms of authoritarianism, however, I'm more averse to the Democratic Party than I am the Republican party, simply because I have almost nothing in common with the Democrats' rhetoric or general governmental philosophy.

At least I have some common economic ground with Republicans, but the Democrats offer me virtually nothing. They're economic platform is extremely authoritarian, and their social platform is almost equally so.

If you ignore or relegate the war on drug-users in your social agenda, as many so-called "liberals" do, then you cannot legitimately call yourself a "social liberal", as any true "social liberal" would be vehemently opposed to a monstrous war on drug-users, such that is is.

 

Liberals claim they're pro-choice, but I think that is only so with abortion; as for anything else, they are the anti-choice party.

Conservatives are, theoretically, economically excellent, but realistically, very few Republicans truly want to cut budget; that is, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, National Defense, War on Drugs, etc..

Bush spent a heck of a lot more than Clinton ever did, and so did Reagan.

Economically, both parties suck.

Socially, both parties suck.

It's time to elect some Libertarians.

 

Or the Greens

I have to agree with you that both parties suck, and are the same, but hey, without offense and for what I've seen the libertarians are very similar, and also a lot of times you don't understand the classical liberalism, ah, do you know that the anarchism that I defend is the evolution, the improving of that.

 

Libertarians haven't had a chance to prove themselves.

 

I don't care what political party they belong to, so long as they espouse libertarian principles and endeavor to apply them pragmatically. Ron and Rand Paul are both Republicans, but they're also good libertarians.

 

It depends on what form of anarchism you're advocating, and how you plan to get there.

 

Revolution Obvious xD From down to up, and it only can be done as a Revolution xD

My signature tells it clear

And the anarchism, the one defended by Bakunin, Kropotkin... is the natural evolution from the tesis of Ricardo and Adam Smith where they failed in their analysis.

 

But aren't the republicans the ones behind the War on Drugs(tm)?

 

Who are you revolting against, and what will you do to them if they resist?

I'm somewhat familiar with Kropotkin. An anarchocommunist, correct?

 

You are long of ambiguous terms like "Democrats' rhetoric or general governmental philosophy" yet fail to specify one example.

Then you claim their "economic platform is extremely authoritarian" but again, do not mention one specific item.

I doubt you are a "classic libertarian" and sound more like a Ron Paul "Paleolibertarian "which is "based on a combination of radical libertarianism in politics and cultural conservatism in social thought and opposes a libertarianism which advocates "freedom from cultural norms, religion, bourgeois morality, and social authority."

I know exactly what I dislike about about both parties and I can also specify why both parties are nothing more than different sides of the same coin.

Why don't you just say you are a Republican and be done with it?

 

The Dems have been taken over by the Socialist Party, the sooner they kick the liberal hippies out of their party the faster they will be back in power.

Liberals/Socialists are very unpopular in America.

 

We believe abortion should be legal.

We believe gays should be able to serve in the military, adopt, and get the same tax benefits as a straight couple.

We believe drugs should be legal.

We believe prostitution should be legal.

We believe in all freedom of speech, including profanity on TV.

We believe the porn industry should be completely legal for adults.

We believe in being more lenient on immigrants.

We believe in cutting national defense budget.

We believe no law should be made because of a religion.

We believe in no dress code, and the legalization of public nudity.

... Republican, my ass.

 

If I totally ignore economics (which you can't really do but roll with me here...), I'd vote libertarian (the real kind) in a second.

 

I'd say the same for Liberals.

 

They're both behind it.

 

I mentioned the Federal war on drug-users as an example. Not sure how you missed it.

The centralized redistribution of private wealth via a highly progressive income tax and entitlement programs.

The centralized management of the money supply.

Collective bargaining laws which force employees to "bargain in good faith" with "shops" that opt to unionize.

Federal minimum wage laws which restrict the ability of employers and employees alike to freely negotiate the terms of their association.

Is that specific enough for you?

Ron Paul does not support imposing norms and morals on others.

Good for you.

Because I eschew party allegiances and reject Republican political ideology.

 

That's the Libertarian Party platform, which should not be confused with libertarianism as a general political philosophy. Many libertarians eschew party allegiances altogether, which means the very idea of a "Libertarian Party" is antithetical to their beliefs.

There are many variants of libertarianism. The LP does not have a monopoly on the label.

 

Yea, no libertarian has ever studied economics. Good point.

 

You misread my post. Please make sure you read it correctly before trying sarcasm.

 

You said "real libertarians ignore economics", the implication being that they're ignorant of economics. If that's not what you meant, then feel free to clarify yourself.

And do tell. What is the extent of your economic education? Let me guess. You're taking an introductory economics course in college right now?

 

Don't you think that in America, Libertarianism is basically the Libertarian Party?

 

No. They are one aspect of libertarian political philosophy, albeit the largest, but they do not represent libertarianism in its entirety.

 

Maybe not on the current issues in particular, but they go by the same principle that everyone deserves life, liberty, and property.

 

I have never taken a class on economics, though that was never part of my point to begin with. Instead of trying to think of a sarcastic comment, you could have actually read the post again.

Reading is fundamental.

 

To give you a specific example of what I'm what I'm talking about...

You said the LP is for cutting the national defense budget and allowing public nudity. I would have some objections to that, but do not feel my objections make me any less "libertarian" than you.