Quote:Because there is a completely absurd amount of false equivocation on these boards I thought it apt to state the position clearly and let it be contended for what it is, rather than through the typical straw men that are in equal parts the responsibility of those who claim to be of this position when they are not "The tea party" and those who care not for the differences because they find it easier to attack the straw man.
Classical Liberalism encompasses the basic ideals.
Quote:1. The freedom of the individual is paramount:
The main consideration for all actions, namely politically is this "Does the action promote or thwart the freedoms of the individual"? Classical liberalism states that the government should only act to ensure that the freedoms of consenting adults, making sure that they are free from force, fraud, coercion or negligence. We should not sacrifice the freedoms of individuals for any collective agenda, commonly called "the common good".
Any person should be free to do whatever they like so long as their actions do not involve using force, fraud, coercion of neglecting their responsibilities to others. People with power will often say "we are going to force you to do x because we believe it is in your own best interest to do x". Classical liberals maintain that individuals not only are generally the best at establishing what is in their own best interests, they should have complete responsibilities over their own interests.
1. The common good is good for the common. Sacrifice 1 to save 1,000,000. Not the other way around. It's reality that someone needs to suffer, might as well be a small amount of people that suffer so everyone else can feel better. 2. People do not always know what they need VOID. You think this of me, don't you? That's why we need to use mathematical calculations and rationality. For example: Socializing healthcare in the U.S. screws over a lot of insurance companies but a lot of poor people can get cared for and this would be less expensive than what our government is paying for citizen health needs already, actually.
Quote:2. Establishment of principles.
This is the idea that the principles of individualism should be established and maintained despite what any collective, namely the government, wants to do otherwise. The courts should have the power to strike down any piece of legislation that violates the established principles or rule in favor of the individual who has done what the collective otherwise deem illegal if it is supported by the fundamental principles.
This already exists here in the States. The only problem is these judges are bought out.
In a representative democracy... the collective government is elected to represent their people. If they abuse their power they will be replaced easily. Besides, what makes you think that the government will always abuse those that they govern simply because it's a government?
Quote:3. Bottom up organization
Structures in reality, from evolution to lives to languages to fashions to markets, are best organized spontaneously and from the bottom up based on the preferences of the individuals. There is no need for a top down approach to markets, no "hand of god/government" to tweak all the settings and rules.
When the rules are unfair the government
should create fair rules. In a democracy we elect people to do this. If rules are fine then the government has no right to change it.
Quote:4. Free Markets / Civil Charity.
All economic exchanges should be left to the voluntary actions of individuals, government should not be telling you where to work, how much to save, what needs produced, what companies need your money, who needs healthcare, where to give aid. It should be left entirely to individuals to allocate their productivity where they see fit or where they have agreed to trade.
I largely agree with you here but I subscribe to a different form of capitalism. Everything should exist in the free market (with regulation that benefits the common good) except human rights that people can not obtain on their own, such as poor people getting health care, food, H2O, police, firefighters, etc...
Quote:5. Private property.
Those things obtained by the individual through consensual means are entirely the property of the individual and nobody else. The individual has the full rights and responsibilities for where this property is used and nobody, other individuals or governments, may forcefully remove it.
I agree. My land is not your land, bitch!
Quote:6. Tolerance
You should not interfere with anyone else simply because you disagree with it. Because you think something is a good thing, the right thing, is no reason to interfere with the actions of others. Simply thinking that something is wrong is not a sufficient reason for action, it is immoral to force your opinions on others. Free speech is an example, we should tolerate speech of which we strongly disagree because it is not our business to tell them how to think and feel.
No. What the collective group (majority of citizens) sees as immoral, such as murder, should receive punishment.
