libertarian

@sonhouse said
@Wajoma
That is exactly what I spoke about, libertarians don't want to make foreign government policy decisions, so if Putin destroys Ukraine, then attacks NATO nations and WW3 is officially on and your own citizens are maybe called up to serve in your military because Putin decides to attack NZ and Australia, don't blame us for libertarian inaction.

There's great deal of disagreement among libertarians over a great many things but that there can never be a compulsory draft is pretty much universal.

@wajoma said
There's great deal of disagreement among libertarians over a great many things but that there can never be a compulsory draft is pretty much universal.

So you can, as an option, refuse to help defend the rights of others.

See THIS is the problem with libertarianism! It's the second obligation. "I'll be a good boy, but DON'T ask me to help defend anyone else's rights! I will if I want... but I might not want."

@wajoma said
"Putting a hand out is not peaceful?"

You want to play the semantics game, I get it. You know what it means, but to dumb it all the way down for you, knowingly receiving stolen property is not peaceful.

"Regardless, none of that free stuff exists in libertarian society."

Correct, it exists in a social welfare society and that's why free and open immigrat ...[text shortened]... those that wish to get their hands on someone elses property through force, people such as yourself.

There is no coherent way to fund a standing police presence in a libertarian government.

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/l-p-d-libertarian-police-department

@wildgrass said
There is no coherent way to fund a standing police presence in a libertarian government.

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/l-p-d-libertarian-police-department

"newyorker' 'humor'

=

Don't bother.

@wildgrass said
There is no coherent way to fund a standing police presence in a libertarian government.

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/l-p-d-libertarian-police-department

It is very predictable what you get under a libertarian administration: local warlords.

People need protection, so they turn to whomever is closest and strongest. That person demands support and allegiance in return, and voila! You have the Hatfields and the McCoys.

It's absolutely inevitable, but David Friedman will write long books about why it will all be JUST FINE. Again - beautiful theory. Sounds great! Fails in practice.

What the theorists won't admit is an underlying assumption they make: humans have to be ~100% moral and ~100% reasonable for an anarchic system to be stable in the long term. Probably there also have to be no natural disasters or significant outside threats.

It's not a robust solution.

@spruce112358 said
It is very predictable what you get under a libertarian administration: local warlords.

People need protection, so they turn to whomever is closest and strongest. That person demands support and allegiance in return, and voila! You have the Hatfields and the McCoys.

It's absolutely inevitable, but David Friedman will write long books about why it will all be JUST F ...[text shortened]... also have to be no natural disasters or significant outside threats.

It's not a robust solution.

The only way to maintain the type of order that wajoma is dreaming about would require a government police force more powerful than the warlords but that's not possible since it requires taxes and what not.

The answer is minarchy, as you already laid out.

Libertarians I think eventually admit they're Anarchists. Sometimes that realization takes time.

I'll take fiscal conservatism for a start. The only problem is I can't find one.

@wajoma said
"newyorker' 'humor'

=

Don't bother.

Sorry but I took your suggestion, Googled "libertarian police" and that was the first article that came up.

How silly it sounds to have a libertarian police force.

@wildgrass said
Sorry but I took your suggestion, Googled "libertarian police" and that was the first article that came up.

How silly it sounds to have a libertarian police force.

I suggested you should go to the New Yorker in search of humor?

I'd never do that.

@wajoma said
I suggested you should go to the New Yorker in search of humor?

I'd never do that.

You asked me to Google what a libertarian police department is.

I did.

It's satirical.

@wildgrass said
You asked me to Google what a libertarian police department is.

I did.

It's satirical.

wildgarss sdaid:

"You asked me to Google what a libertarian police department is."

You're probably just making stuff up. If you can't quote me saying 'google what a libertarian police department is' or even words to that effect can you show some integrity, apologise and retract.

TIA.

@wajoma said
wildgarss sdaid:

"You asked me to Google what a libertarian police department is."

You're probably just making stuff up. If you can't quote me saying 'google what a libertarian police department is' or even words to that effect can you show some integrity, apologise and retract.

TIA.

Read the second post in this thread.

If you can explain it better than the new Yorker article, please do.

@wildgrass said
Read the second post in this thread.

If you can explain it better than the new Yorker article, please do.

"No one is saying 'libertarian utopia' except the boot lickers putting up their stupid tired strawman to burn down, weeee, weeee.

Libertarian military policy is non-interventionist, defense only. What's called supposed defense now equals hundreds of bases all over the world. Like spruce I don't think you want to discuss the issue seriously. A quick google would have rendered your bait OP redundant.

I read it, nothing about police, even went back to the OP, nothing about the police, it was a joke saying you might show some integrity, already knew the answer.

Twist and squirm, so embarrassing.

The funny thing is, there was no reason for you to lie other than to try to save face, then the opposite happens.

@wajoma said
"[i]No one is saying 'libertarian utopia' except the boot lickers putting up their stupid tired strawman to burn down, weeee, weeee.

Libertarian military policy is non-interventionist, defense only. What's called supposed defense now equals hundreds of bases all over the world. Like spruce I don't think you want to discuss the issue seriously. A quick google would have rend ...[text shortened]... saying you might show some integrity, already knew the answer.

Twist and squirm, so embarrassing.

Twist and squirm lol. You're the one who can't explain what you're thinking about.

@wildgrass said
Twist and squirm lol. You're the one who can't explain what you're thinking about.

And now the frantic diversion.

wildgrass:

"You asked me to Google what a libertarian police department is."

could have just said 'oops, got a bit carried away, made a mistake" but instead she has to lie and dig deeper.

@wajoma said
And now the frantic diversion.

wildgrass:

"You asked me to Google what a libertarian police department is."

could have just said 'oops, got a bit carried away, made a mistake" but instead she has to lie and dig deeper.

You could have explained what you meant by libertarian police force when I asked. I am actually interested in your answer which you don't seem able to provide.