why don't Democrats understand libertarians?

If it wasn't for government from state to the federal level involved in marriage, there would have never been gay marriage bans in the first place.

 

Much of what we know about medicine and many other things comes from Nazi experimentation on their slaves, you cannot deny the research gained from these horrible practices have indeed created a revolution in medicine and saved millions of lives, that is a historical fact. So dont try to act like it only works for people who volunteer, thats a lie.

Also tell me, if your two choices are get shot in the head or become a slave doesnt that mean you have to "voluntarily" choose one? The point im making with that is "voluntarily" does not always imply that its something they actually wanted, because you claim the poor "voluntarily" were exploited by the rich which, aside from the fact its blatant propaganda, it implies a entirely false notion that the poor WANTED to be exploited by the rich.

 

Like all libertarians, this is just pure conjecture. What superior organization are you talking about? I can't think of a single advanced (for its time) society that succeeded without a strong government. Places where government isn't strong and organized usually are 3rd world countries dominated by militia groups and corruption. So not sure what superior organization you are referring to.

 

You're not making the case that capitalism is what caused poverty and misery are you? That was already present when capitalism came about, for it is the default state of man. Capitalism helped combat it.

I'm not really that knowledgeable when it comes to this land value rent talk, so I'll just take your word for it. I don't actually think we're necessarily disagreeing here. I was just saying that capitalism is a good system, and you were just talking of a small detail of it, of which I don't know much.

Yes, they're probably hold some very stereotypical views of others and most likely holier-than-thou, but they're still well-intentioned.

No it's not. I was using the free market as an example of a way of organising society, and allocating resources. It's a system which isn't centrally planned, and it is superior to, for example, the planned economy of the USSR. My point is that good systems, like the free market and language, doesn't need to be planned to be good, quite the opposite in fact. To allow these systems to function one just need to leave them alone, and hence, that's libertarian.

What do you mean by strong government? No one wants a weak government -except anarchists. A strong government isn't the same as a government with many responsibilities, nor is a weak government the same as a one with few. I simply want a strong government with fewer responsibilities.