Your thoughts on the Libertarian party
"... Libertarians would phase out the current government-sponsored Social Security system, and transition to a private voluntary system."
Yes, because that always works. :smirk:
Know several of them locally or from correspondence with other groups. Like many movements people are drawn to this one for legitimate reasons. At least one novel that could serve as a primer on libertarianism was written by Robert Heinlein ( The Moon is a Harsh Mistress). Heinlein had a way of examining social ideas by allowing them to develop into future societies - in this case, a lunar colony about to go independent later this century.
Particular issues that my libertarian friends pick up on are "progressivism", the nanny state and the abuse of rights by police in their search and seizures or treatment of suspects.
But more to the point this year. Governors Johnson ( Interviewed recently in the NYer) and Weld served New Mexico and Massachusetts without scandal, controversy or partisan rancor. This is something that makes them very attractive to me this election year. I don't see them with much likelihood of winning, but if a 3rd or 4th party attracted enough votes, the likelihood of the two principal candidates sailing through the electoral process would be diminished.
Donald Trump's shortcomings - one distasteful anecdote after another. His persona: like Berlusconi in Italy, Peron in Argentina or Hugo Chavez in Venezuela or the Presidential winner of the '36 election in Sinclair Lewis's "It Can't Happen Here." (This deserves an asterisk. He wrote it in response to his wife Dorothy Thompson's impressions of HItler in '33 or '34, something to which Rutherford was completely tone deaf to or accepting. He would have fit nicely though in the "Elmer Gantry" cast though.)
So then what do we have in contrast to Mr Trump from the other side? Ms Clinton has her good sides and bad. And were there a decent Republican candidate other than Trump, she would probably be defeated now that all sides of what she offers have been examined. But in this case of "trumping", it's like the "Game of Scissors, Paper and "Stones". As recently reported, HRC's basic Methodist do-gooding beliefs are credible, but on the other hand we have someone who with her husband has amassed enormous wealth for this 3rd run on the presidency. For veterans such as myself, I take the e-mail server issue seriously - and her denials - and the likelihood that many secrets that would be on them were compromised. That Mr & Ms Clinton did not separate and divorce might be good in one context, but it also reflects an inability to face real problems. Bill's endorsement of her at the Convention is an emotional moment - but such references ( also with the Trumps) are not the sort you put on any job application - why for the Presidency. What were convention goers smoking. As a "Democrat", the Clintons seem to be of the machine variety. There were over a dozen heavy hitting Republicans in contention and they all shot themselves off. Clinton ran against nobody with the DNC backing.
It all kind of hurts. Hence you can why I am considering the same alternative. Not because I anticipate liberarianism's post apocalyptic joys.
I think quite a lot of folks "feeling the Bern" are very disappointed with the Dem. Party.
There's no way I can give my support to Trumpolini or Hillarious, there's just no way.
It may be throwing away my vote, but going the alternative and voting Libertarian may just be a way to voice my disgust with the primaries' process and their establishmentarian machinations.
My thought is that the number one priority in this election is to avoid Trump and potential nuclear apocalypse. Save your protest for an election when the future of the planet isn't at stake.
Trump has lost considerable ground in the polls in the last week. There is a great danger of complacency in this situation if people think he can't bounce back and don't see any risk in a protest vote.
I don't like Clinton but I like prospect of nuclear war much less.
It's time to revive the French campaign slogan during the Chirac/Le Pen election of 2002:
Vote for the crook not the fascist!
I understand the fear of Trump in the white house. I don't think it will happen! It's sort of a Judas priest feeling... But eve if he won I think the governmental machine will prevent him from acting on his crazy ideas.
Well, no, I think you're right, looking at how the two Bushes accomplished to get us in wars in the Middle East, I think I'm getting a bit worried at seen Trump in the Whitehouse.
Imagine if Putin and Trump have a falling out because Putin said something unfair about "The Donald" and it could lead to more than angry rhetoric once Trumpolini gets his short little fingers on U.S. military tech!
Sbf I totally agree. Tho I am actually liking Hillary now. Something happened at the DNC for me. Maybe it was the look she gave her daughter. Funny how in one moment I changed my mind about her.
Kepler, I came to a realization during your post. Trump equals Rutherford! (Except with less hypocritical religiosity.)
If everyone worked for the greater good, the Libertarian platform of reduced government and personal freedoms (liberty) from oppressive government would be great. But greedy rich people will continue to poison us or pollute some way without government watching them. People will continue to be destitute in need of handouts or committing crimes without social security nets to catch them. We don't need the massive military spending we have, but we do need something more than the Libertarians would want.
Even though Libertarians are not generally anarchists, their anti-socialist government thoughts would probably lead to anarchy. I like some programs run as socialist programs- schools, libraries, roads, etc. Things that benefit the greater number of people being run by government with all contributing taxes toward them. Many Libertarians are Marxist socialists to a large degree. Again, I can agree in principle with them if I thought people were all working toward the greater good. But it never happened in China or the Soviet Union or Cuba or anywhere.
As far as civil liberties go, I tend to fully agree with Libertarians. Free thought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds opinions should be formed on the basis of science, logic, and reason, in contrast with authority, tradition, or other dogmas. They basically are for the rights of women, minorities, any sexual orientation, and any spiritual or non-spiritual practicing people.
I am way more in line with the Green Party that knows that any real change for the good involves a radical transformation of society for the benefits of all people on the planet, and wants to focus on social and environmental justice. They recognize that many people are more "empowered" than others and would work toward compelling such people to do what is best for the earth and all life upon it. They know there are no easy answers, but strive for non-violent solutions that democratically get everyone involved.
If the Green Party were empowered, it would not put all of it's focus on electoral politics as a way to bring change, but would be a bit harsh for awhile as it tried to bring about life-style changes so that more people (and the planet) would benefit more equally.
At least they seem to recognize that not all would work for the greater good and they would be better at dealing with that then the Libertarians.
Thanks all for your input, a lot to think about. No one mention the JW party to
solve our problems. LOL
if the JW party were elected, living in the U.S. would soon be like living in North Korea.
I like Libertarian party because they believe in social liberalism and fiscal conservatism.
They give the most freedom.
The Republicans are social conservative and fiscal conservative. they give the least freedom.
The democrats are for social liberal and fiscal liberalism. Also less freedom.