What is your alternative to abortion?

[Silver]

You need to get out of Britain more. Over here, Libertarians are cocksuckers like the Koch Brothers.

Until recently, I identified as a die hard liberal, way left, all the way left, as far left as you one could possibly go.

I spent some time on a particular forum, and my political stance changed. I identify as Libertarian now, and I perceive it as more akin to anarchy. I am still socially liberal, believe in as little government as possible, but I am not economically conservative.

From what I can understand, there is more than one distinct way to identify as Libertarian.

[The Grand Nudger]

Ok, well then I'm glad you clarified that this was American Libertarianism you were talking about, and not Libertarianism in general.

That said, I can't find anything in the American Libertarian party manifesto concerning forced labor camps. Perhaps you could link me to a source?

Yeah, don't expect to see it there do you? Neither do I. It's actually pretty amusing, because our libertarian parties are constantly pleading with people not to lump them in with our "libertarian" politicians.

Rand Paul, for example. A senator here in my state. Our libertarian party has thoroughly denied that he is any such thing. I don't think he cares.

(libertarian was just a word that became good marketing in campaigns tibs - after all, it sounds like liberty..and at least it isn't republican or democrat...amiright? - anything like that on your end of the pond?)

[Tiberius]

Rand Paul is a Republican. He has some Libertarian tendencies (for example, he has most recently spoken out against the use of drones in the U.S.), but he is for the most part, very unlike his father and more in-line with his Republican colleagues.

I'm not denying that you can be Libertarian leaning in some areas, but my point is, there are some people who call themselves Libertarian and do not in any way act like one.

[Minimalist]

From what I can understand, there is more than one distinct way to identify as Libertarian.

Libertarians used to be republicunts who wanted to get stoned. Since Bush and his neo-con pals they have become a bunch of aristocratic cocksuckers who think the government's sole job is to leave them alone to steal whatever isn't nailed down while maintaining a police force to oppress the lower classes.

[Tiberius]

Libertarians used to be republicunts who wanted to get stoned.

That is a bold faced lie. Go read about the actual history of Libertarianism (or classical liberalism, which is used to be known as).

[The Grand Nudger]

He's a member of the republican party sure, just like his father was - but he describes himself as a libertarian. Amusingly, if you do a little google crawl for current reps that self identify as libertarians and you're actually going to end up staring at a list of republicans.
(I understand your position, but which libertarian - between, say, you and rand paul- actually means anything? Who's defining libertarianism here? Sorry, it's gonna be Rand. If we look back at a "libertarian movement" in our country and see a long list of rand pauls........well...I'm sorry your ideology got hijacked and fucked with -I truly am- but that's what libertarianism is here. Glenn fucking Beck tried to pull the libertarian card. Mull that over.)

[thesummerqueen]

there are some people who call themselves Libertarian and do not in any way act like one.

Interestingly enough, there are some people who identify as Christian and do not in any way act like one. Eventually we reach "no true scotsman".

[Tiberius]

He's a member of the republican party sure, just like his father was - but he describes himself as a libertarian. Amusingly, if you do a little google crawl for current reps that self identify as libertarians and you're actually going to end up staring at a list of republicans.

Describing yourself as a Libertarian does not make you a Libertarian. Sorry, but it just doesn't. Actions are far more important than words. People can call themselves whatever they like; it is what they do that ultimately defines them. This is especially true when there is an actual legitimate Libertarian party out there in America which actually holds to Libertarian values in their manifesto, and has candidates (and some elected officials) who vote how actual Libertarians should.

(I understand your position, but which libertarian - between, say, you and rand paul- actually means anything? Who's defining libertarianism here? Sorry, it's gonna be Rand.

Are you insane? Libertarianism is a clearly defined political theory. Rand Paul doesn't get to define it.

If we look back at a "libertarian movement" in our country and see a long list of rand pauls........well...I'm sorry your ideology got hijacked and fucked with -I truly am- but that's what libertarianism is here. Glenn fucking Beck tried to pull the libertarian card. Mull that over.)

You are missing the point entirely. You aren't looking at a libertarian movement. I've made that clear. Look at the actual Libertarian Party if you want to look at a libertarian movement. Come on, you're just moving the goalposts to support your own argument. If George Bush started going around calling himself a Democrat, and I pointed at him and said "look what the Democrats have become", you'd rightly shoot me down for being foolish.

Interestingly enough, there are some people who identify as Christian and do not in any way act like one. Eventually we reach "no true scotsman".

There is no way to "act" like a Christian. All you have to be to be a Christian is believe that Jesus was the son of God. That's it. That is the most simple definition of a Christian you can get. You can only use the "no true scotsman" in situations where someone is asserting a characteristic that has nothing to do with the subject's particular religious/political/whatever beliefs.

Likewise, there are simple definitions of what Libertarians are too. It is fully justified to say "No true Libertarian believes in government interference in the market", because guess what? Government interference in the market is something that Libertarians reject. It's not a no true scotsman fallacy to say that.

[The Grand Nudger]

Describing yourself as a Libertarian does not make you a Libertarian. Sorry, but it just doesn't. Actions are far more important than words. People can call themselves whatever they like; it is what they do that ultimately defines them. This is especially true when there is an actual legitimate Libertarian party out there in America which actually holds to Libertarian values in their manifesto, and has candidates (and some elected officials) who vote how actual Libertarians should.

While that may be important to you or I, these "libertarians" in office are currently in the process of defining (you and I would call that re-defining) what it means to be a libertarian - in our government.

Are you insane? Libertarianism is a clearly defined political theory. Rand Paul doesn't get to define it.

Last time I checked? No. Not insane. The trouble is, again Tibs, that "libertarians" like Rand Paul -are- defining it.

You are missing the point entirely. You aren't looking at a libertarian movement. I've made that clear. Look at the actual Libertarian Party if you want to look at a libertarian movement. Come on, you're just moving the goalposts to support your own argument. If George Bush started going around calling himself a Democrat, and I pointed at him and said "look what the Democrats have become", you'd rightly shoot me down for being foolish.

Right, the libertarian party which continues to disavow the politicians who continue to claim that they are libertarians. I'm not making an argument tibs, there are no goalposts to move (neither you nor I feel that their little title fits....but that's not really all that important - is it?) - Rand Paul is what americans are offered as a libertarian, he is currently in office, doing -important things-. People are buying this label, people (read neo-con shitwits) are starting to label themselves as libertarians (no change in principles or policy required). Here, "libertarian" is a re-branding of "republican". That's what Min is constantly giving you shit about amigo.

---

It's pleasant to imagine, btw, that across the pond the libertarians are actually libertarians. Is this the case?

[Tiberius]

While that may be important to you or I, these "libertarians" in office are currently in the process of defining (you and I would call that re-defining) what it means to be a libertarian - in our government.

No, they aren't. What Libertarianism is is clearly defined. I'm not sure how many times I can go over this point with you just standing there ignoring it. Look it up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism
http://www.libertarianism.com/

Libertarianism is pretty big; it's the third largest party in the US, and is a recognized movement which has existed for a long time.

Last time I checked? No. Not insane. The trouble is, again Tibs, that "libertarians" like Rand Paul -are- defining it.

Again, no they aren't. Claiming to be something does not magically redefine it. Has the definition of Libertarianism in the dictionary changed since Rand Paul and other Republican cronies started trying to attach themselves to it? No. Has the Libertarian Party updated it's manifesto to include Rand Paul's political beliefs? No.

Right, the libertarian party which continues to disavow the politicians who continue to claim that they are libertarians. I'm not making an argument tibs, there are no goalposts to move - Rand Paul is what americans are offered as a libertarian, he is currently in office, doing -important things-. People are buying this label, people (read neo-con shitwits) are starting to label themselves as libertarians. Here, "libertarian" is a re-branding of "republican". Why do you think Mins always giving you shit about this?

You miss the point so much I'm really wondering if I'm being trolled here. Read what you wrote in your first sentence. The Libertarian party is disavowing politicians who claim they are libertarians. Doesn't that say something to you? Doesn't that scream out loud to you that maybe, just fucking maybe, the politicians who are claiming to be Libertarians and yet are disavowed by the fucking Libertarian party, aren't actually Libertarians.

Oh, and quite coincidentally, I noticed this thread on reddit.com/r/libertarianism: http://np.reddit.com/r/Libertarianism/co...ndment_to/

Rand Paul is trying to inject a fetal person-hood amendment into a bill concerning flood insurance. Someone asked how that was Libertarian. The top answer? Rand Paul isn't a libertarian.