Your thoughts on the Libertarian Party's platform?
- Thread starter Machjo
- Start date
At the risk of being tautological, they're nuts because they're libertarians. Libertarianism is bonkers. You can believe in a crazy ideology without being crazy yourself. Neo-liberalism takes a lot of the premise behind libertarianism and applies to various economy sectors, but to be a libertarian you have to consciously believe that selfishness and the commercialization of everything will solve every problem.
On the flip side, we can't assume that all who might vote Libertarian ate necessarily ideologically libertarian
Libertarian a few percentile points of the voting population spread across the country- they are just ffn weird in my opinion.
The weak suffer like hell and would be left to die according to some in the Libertarian movements.
I agree Libertarians are a little extreme, but like any party, they would certainly moderate their position as they grow.
They'll never hold together, that long. The idea of turning any kind of personal authority over to a central entity like a party organization is an athema. Libertarion Party is an oxymoron and one by one, they will get pissed off, 'cause they know what's best and the Libertarian Party ends up as a bunch of grumpy curmudgeons who won't talk to one another, anymore.
Don't forget that tjeu'd become more big tent as they grow, thus attracting non-libertarians like me.
I'very actually noticed their policies moderated significantly in the last few years.
Like the Reform party?
True. Some people might vote strategically libertarian or in protest. I've voted Liberal because I liked the Liberal MP in a riding I lived in briefly (he lost), and I'm not a liberal.
Then you are familiar with what many Libertarians would do with medicare- homeless, those that are ill.
A little extreme does not cover it.
I've known about the Libertarian Party for a few years now, and I can say that its platform had moderated significantly over the years. The Libertarian Party's policy on heath care is simply that it's a provincial matter and that the Federal Government should play no role in it, so it would repeal the Canada Health Act, but leave the rest to the provinces.
As for the homeless, social assistance is mostly a provincial matter already anyway. In principle, a person could vote Libertarian federally and NDP provincially for example.
Looking at it that way, I'm surprised Quebec sovereignists don't vote Libertarian so as to limit Federal involvement in Quebec.
You also mentioned "many Libertarians". Many New Democrats, Liberals, Conservatives, Greens, and Libertarians are ethnicist. Many Conservatives are militaristic hawks. Some Libertarians might be too pacifist. Some Greens want to ban cars, and some New Democrats want to nationalize candy shops and some Libertarians want to privatize our sidewalks.
All that matters in the end is what my local candidate intends to do.
Still can't libertarians seriously if they propose liberty with conditions.
This is why the other platforms appear more practical to me. They acknowledge that the nature of their existence can change over time.
The impression I get from libertarianism, however, is that it is supposed to be based on some concrete philosophy but in practice, many libertarians disagree on what it is that deserves liberty and as I mentioned before, that conditions should exist (which makes it appear like they are contradicting themselves).
The term 'Liberal' seems like it was invented for this very reason. Basically to say that it's good to care about rights and freedoms and that our opinions on what those rights and freedoms are can change over time. It's a gray term that can be used to bring in people from the other camps.
Anyway, I think Utilitarianism would make more sense as some kind of wacky, alternative party which I could sign up for.
This is why the other platforms appear more practical to me. They acknowledge that the nature of their existence can change over time.
The impression I get from libertarianism, however, is that it is supposed to be based on some concrete philosophy but in practice, many libertarians disagree on what it is that deserves liberty and as I mentioned before, that conditions should exist (which makes it appear like they are contradicting themselves).
The term 'Liberal' seems like it was invented for this very reason. Basically to say that it's good to care about rights and freedoms and that our opinions on what those rights and freedoms are can change over time. It's a gray term that can be used to bring in people from the other camps.
Anyway, I think Utilitarianism would make more sense as some kind of wacky, alternative party which I could sign up for.
Last edited:
Some Libertarians might be too liberal, but others aren't libéral enough? Is one really better than the other?
Ironically enough, the present somewhat moderated Libertarian Party might come closer to what John Stuart Mill writes in his essay titled "On Liberty". In some respects, present Libertarians might be more utilitarian than their other counterparts.
Some of them may have figured out that they are people-hating miserable gits, then.
Who knows.
All I know is that you are trying really hard to sell them.
Not exactly sell them, but more make people aware of them as an alternative. I'm not yet sure that even I will vote for them, but I'm leaning in that direction potentially if they offer me a competent candidate with good ideas.
Some of them have been, and some of them probably still are, but ou have that in every party.
Ontario
I think you should familiarize yourself with what a Libertarian is.
Statement of Ultimate Goals and Principles | Ontario Libertarian Party
National Party
https://www.libertarian.ca/platform/
Sorry, I should have specified the Federal party since it's a Federal election coming up. One could easily vote Libertarian Federally and NDP provincially if his goal were maximum provincial autonomy for example.