Liberals Want a World With all Good Things Except Freedom

Isn't it really that you'd rather everyone else be hungry, sick, poor and homeless so you can keep your freedom? I don't think I believe you, that you would suffer poverty to keep your freedom. Unless you're suffering poverty right now, that is. Are you an ascetic monk? Do you like in a cave? Do you eat moss?

So you've never had kids, then.

But they're not material things. They're the well-being of others.

Your premise is wrong. Liberals want a world where everyone is free, not just a small group of wealthy people. Personally, I'm not willing to trade much for freedom, either. I can think of only three things that are more important to me.

Here's the practical issue: I will pay taxes, and I think everyone should pay taxes, if it means that we can have a civilization. I like things to work out so that kids are safe and women can walk down the street without bodyguards. That's not anti-freedom, that's pro-freedom. Practically speaking.

 

Because most of those things are not naturally occuring phenomena. They have never existed at any point in human history and they will never exist. Because they do not factor human nature into the equation. Which is why they are oppressive. Because they operate on the faulty logic that you can legislate people into being nice.

 

Did he ever say that? No.

Do conservatives say that they only want wealthy people to be free?

 

Bend over!

 

Inevitability eventually wins?

That means liberalism, communism, and socialism will eventually fade away.

 

They don't have to, the only time they even mention anyone else is to levy more from them, while skating free themselves.

 

The inspiration for this thread is Firefly. The main character fought a war against the Alliance but his side lost. Now he wanders spaceship in a derilict merchant ship trying to make a profit despite the efforts of the all-powerful Alliance to make all business unprofitable.

 

1. - The environment was despoiled on account of people - not at their detriment; thus it only makes sense that laws be drafted to prevent further damage. A sensible use of the law, one would assume, so that we all might profit through a little environmental Stoicism.

2. - With reasonable adjustments to economic theory, such a world is entirely possible. "Free" markets aren't Free; they operate at the expense of other people; usually exploiting those they claim to help.

3. - In what way, exactly, does a world where adults treat each other as equals threaten anyone's freedom? Before Modern multi-culturalism those seen as beneath equality were often prejudiced against and their own Freedoms infringed upon. Your statement is puzzling, if not ''equally'' misguided.

4. - Supposedly Economy exists to support people. We have money so that we might have possessions and the ''Freedom'' to live in whatever style we might choose. Since Corporations are created specifically on the premise they that are a superior Economic vessel than the previous breed of Trading Company I see no sense in your critique of that facet of Liberalism (or, on the other hand, Social Democracy - the two are not the same).

5. ''I will not sell myself into slavery for these material things.'' IF you derive no pleasure at the notion of being a slave to materialism - why defend it?

 

Doubtful.

People are willing to sacrifice a portion of freedom for security.

That's the way everyone lives today, just that some people haven't realized it yet. You can only be free in an anarchy, with no law whatsoever.

 

I doubt anyone can be 'free' amidst anarchy. They can't be freed from worry; from harm to their person; from harm to their property. Society exist to protect those who can't protect themselves; it's a good deal. You act according to the standards of society, and you are protected by society. The more active you are in the society, using politics as a vehicle, the more influence you have to ensure the saftey of yourself and those like you. Only those unwilling to participate in a society can be blamed when those who would poison society come to power in a society.
Now, societies themselves can become despotic, but it's still worth it to fight to maintain a good thing. A road might become worn, but it can always be repaved. The things people do upon the road, however, only become irrelevant when no one is willing to maintain a road.
That said, I do admire certain anarchists like Tolstoy and Goldman, both of whom were gilded by genius.

 

Do you feel your freedom will be restricted if you cannot abuse people or wreck the environment as you please?

 

So basically you are deriving your politics from a fantastical narrative? I understand people already do that (i.e. religous paraphernalia). But the idea that one personally might promote crossdressing and trans-dimensional relationships because they happened to enjoy a book by Jacques Cazotte is unsound; however enjoyable the fantasies may be.

 

The liberal world is pure fantasy land.

 

I want freedom from balling out failed bankers, from funding perpetual wars in the middle east, from being labeled "something" for opposing something, from international bankers controlling the economy, from planting and selling RAW FOODS and whatever other plant I please.

For disagreements on the last point, we're paying troops to help grow poppies in Afghanistan. Who is crazy? You are.

 

Blackrook,,,, you can always pack up and move to North Korea!!

 

1. - Nope. It's actually well planned and secure. The problem is keep conservatives from spoiling it. Social programs, state infrastructure, economic Liberalism, the Welfare state, inter-governmental bodies and world diplomacy (the U.N.).

2. - The only conservative ''ideas'' or ''theories'' about society that I have ever heard or read, are usually re-prints from fascist manifestos translated into English. Or, end up sounding oddly like a gleeful regression of a milleniums worth of progress in the First World.

 

That's ridiculous. It's unfortunate that the fascists take over your perfect plans for governance. It always happens. The more power you hand over to the lawmakers, the more power they take from the individuals. Collectivists should have been left in the dust decades ago.

 

The USA is broke. The EU is broke. Japan is broke. Your best social experiment was the USSR. It went broke and crashed into chaos and corruption. Then you have Cuba, another social experiment. They have no internal economy, they drive 57 Chevy's with Russian 2 cylinder farm tractor engines in them. But they have Universal Health Care and more doctors, hospitals and nurses per capita than any other nation. That gives them a life expectancy, something proponents of UHC love to point out, exactly the same as the USA.

Your living in an impossible dream world. Liberal Utopian ideas are beautiful and compassionate. OBVIOUSLY only unaffordable, unsustainable dreams but beautiful none the less/

 

Hey, that sounds fun!

It's too bad that the global policing, imperialist dreams of the neocons is unsustainable and a detriment to their citizens. Now that you know that from historical fact of the past decade+, it's time to understand that Republicans need to stop supporting imperialism.

 

Yes, great fun. Liberals would get their rocks off breathing in that black diesel stink. But they have a terrific highway safety program. Its called, "no existen carreteras," [No Highways]

 

1. - You seem to have a problem differentiating between Collectevists and Conservatives. Collectevists seek to spread power between as individuals as possible; conservatives seek to take power from the many and give to the few. We have so perverted terms and terminology in contemporary politics that I've lost track of what I am even supposed to call myself other than a ''Human''.

2. - Collectivists have been lefts in the dust for decades, unfortunatly. There is no such thing as a ''left-wing'' in American politics. At this point there is only the Far-Right (fascist) Republican Party, and the Centre-Right Democratic Party. Were living in a healthy democracy there would be no need for these terms. None of us would be bickering like children in place of serious discussion. People always sound like survivors of a plane crash every time they discuss politics. ''How did it happen; whom do we blame?'' rather than ''How do we fix it?''

3. I perhaps exagerated, and was being partially sarcastic when I used the term ''Utopia'', anyone familiar with Moore would chuckle at the mere mention. However, I do defend the fact that Liberals are the ones evermore concerned with theory and planning and adjusting for the future, while Conservatives only offer ''has been'' solutions to ''will be'' problems. I could be biased in this, and am to a degree, but I am more than willing to be corrected, or at least discuss this bias and consider your opinions.

 

1. - The EU is not broke; it is having a debt payment crisis due to internal uncertainties about the security of it's currency, and the rates at which the debt is supposed to be managed to maintain the economic union. Were the countries with weaker currencies not entered in so quickly things would be fine in Europe. Europe *has* money, it is the way that money is being mis-managed that is the problem. Now, the opposite is true here in the USA, where we have truly entered into a near pauper status to our acreditors.

2. - I know little about Japan, and thus will say little other than the fact that Japan's major problem seems to be an isolationistic policy regarding their work force and their external exchange, which is now in competition with the PRC. However, they have a strong export industry, a well-regulated market, and a ''closed'' tax system that can support itself and isn't overly bloated. Japan can look after itself.

3. - I am not living in an impossible dream world. I happen to share a planet with you; drink the same water; breathe the same air. I reflect on politics as I do on art; what isn't there will be if only the work ethic exists. Like art, theory is beautiful, and as you said, quite compassionate. Things only become ''unaffordable'' when not properly managed. We can afford a petite-welfare, so long as people do not abuse it. We can afford a sophisticated military force unlike any other in this country, if only it does not become reckless and fickle, as it has. We can afford to subsidize businesses, so long as we choose carefully. With proper management, anything can be done.

It is a pity we do not have better guardians of our trust in this country.

 

Not really as conservatives (not applying to federal Nazis) seek to uphold the laws of this nation. When companies, government, or a combination of the two (fascists as we have been for a while now) commit fraud, they are held accountable for their fraud and jailed.

That is why this is not a "free market" system. The politicians pick the winners and losers and dump their failures on the public. A nasty form of reverse-socialism. Then you have the globalist BS going on in Europe where the failure of irresponsible countries (or nations ruined by adopting the Euro) are being dumped on the citizens of the prosperous nations.

There is no party for the commoners in America. Just look at Obama and all of his fascist healthcare waivers and selective bailouts. Obama is a fascist and supports no kind of free market or "fair" liberal market. No Wall St bankers sit in jail or have their assets confiscated. Both them and the politicians should be held accountable.

 

No they don't. Liberals act like their ideas are new, but they're not. They are 20th century policies from 19th century philosophers and thinkers. And they have all failed, every single one of them. Meanwhile, conservatives offer solutions that have been used before and have worked. Keep reading up on your theories and ideas, maybe one might have a chance of working somewhere down the road.

 

2 things that cause you to live in a dream world.
1. "so long as people do not abuse it." You want a world where people ARE something they are not. People WILL abuse, it is the nature of jungle animals. People are jungle animals, me included and you too.

2. " With proper management, anything can be done." Government is the worst form of 'management.' They cannot manage the internal business of government. Government is a burden on society, not an asset to society.

That's not how you liberals want things to be but that is how they are and will remain. Government is a necessary evil that must be closely watched and tolerated. Not a source of plenty.

And Europe IS broke. You neglected to argue about Russia. Study Russia. That chaos and corruption is Europe's destination. Those not lost in the world of dreams can see that.