Hello Guest

Politics - Where do you stand?

  • 6 Replies
  • 2492 Views
Politics - Where do you stand?
« on: April 13, 2011, 12:36:19 PM »
Just thought I'd start a thread about politics, being that it's my favourite subject... Boring I know lol!

Personally I'm a libertarian and admire such people as Ayn Rand, Freidrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises. For those of you who don't know, libertarianism is a belief that all economic activity should take place in the free market and that the government should be small and extremely limited in its powers. Libertarians also believe that all individuals should be free to live their lives as they see fit, as long as they're not harming other people.

In a truly libertarian society all drugs would be legal; firearms would be legal and completely deregulated (I live in the UK so it sucks!); all forms of expression would be completely legal; all economic activity would be bereft of taxation and regulation. Essentially, the government would only exist to fulfil extremely limited (but essential) roles: Keeping law and order (police + courts) and also an army to defend the borders of the country; nothing more than that! Also, the banking system would no longer be a state monopoly. People would be free to use whatever currency they wished, which would probably be gold and silver coinage, not the paper-money scam which we're presently forced to use.

I've just had a really bad experience with the state-owned NHS (national health service) which has reinforced my anti-statist views. The bastards turned me down 4 times in 10 years for the gyne op! Just had it done privately thanks to a loan from my father. :)

Private is definitely better than state IMHO, but it'd be nice to hear what you guys think.

Linkback: https://www.gynecomastia.org/smf/index.php?topic=22955.0

*

Offline headheldhigh01

  • *****
  • 4079
  • destined to stand on a beach shirtless
Re: Politics - Where do you stand?
« Reply #1 on: April 28, 2011, 02:50:06 AM »
not boring if you measure by the energy excesses people put into it.  admire the emanresu handle, btw ;)  

i share your libertarianism and austrian school leanings, though i'm not as libertarian on the subject of drugs, since they can (not always but often) subvert the rational decision process liberty needs to rest on.  i own firearms and oppose the creeping totalitarian statist restrictions on them here, agreeing with the us's founders that the people had to be always armed as the last, or even earlier, recourse against the subversion of the free state, which is always a threat since it grows out of the lust for power endemic to human nature, though i had to come to these views from the opposite perspective over two decades.  (is all non-hunting weapons ownership illegal there, or just heavily restricted?)  income tax over here became a "temporary wartime measure" early in this century as a means to enslave the public at large to the debt-based central banking system created shortly before with the federal reserve (to steal value through inflation), which as people note is neither federal nor a reserve, though the awakening to this (ron paul etc) seems to come and go in long historical cycles, as with the first bank of the united states, the jackson era, etc.  you can hope the pendulum will swing back.  the strange thing is i identify much more with the democrats here than the us republicans, i guess the social liberal side is more immediate the fiscal conservative side, though i've been screaming against the creation of the huge creeping national debt for years and few republicans paid any attention.  but the two party system is kind of a dialectic means of distracting the unwary anyway.  

state health care is difficult.  philosophically i agree that ideally, i.e. in reality, a free market system would work best.  in the us though that's been subverted by the growing corruption and power of the megacorporations, it's a state-protected oligarchy, very different from how it used to be even a half century ago.  so under those circumstances i could imagine favoring a state system as the lesser of the evils to undermine the corruption of large medical capital and at least be fairer.   it's not the best, i think it could just be better.  my thought on the nhs is, their rejection of gyne on its face makes sense as a cosmetic thing competing for finite resources, but the problem is people don't understand that gyne is an extremely psychologically insidious thing that goes far beyond trivial cosmetics.  i have said many times here it can be far more devastating to an individual than any treated cancer out there, and i stand by that.  

if people are slow in responding, tell me a little about the evolution of your libertarianism -- is it still a largely minority thing in the uk and/or on an uptick, were you raised with it?  did you evolve to it on your own, or with university influences?  and will antimonarchist/republican ideas there get any tiny boost at all on april 29?  ;)  
* a man is more than a body will ever tell
* if it screws up your life the same, is there really any such thing as "mild" gyne?

*

Offline Paa_Paw

  • *****
  • 4738
Re: Politics - Where do you stand?
« Reply #2 on: April 28, 2011, 09:34:40 PM »
The two of you have stated things so well that I'm left with almost nothing to say.

I am in the U S. California to be specific. At the age of 73, I seem to be the resident old man here.

I am a Libertarian in principle but actually I'm registered as a Republican. Simply put, the Libertarian party is not strong enough to elect a candidate so I try to support the republican candidates that lean to my liking. Many of the Republicans and virtually all of the Democrats are far to liberal and free spending.

We are rather stuck at the present with corporations trying to control the  price of medical care while the government is trying to control the availability of medical care. I have no idea where this is going to wind up. They both seem intent on furthering only their own power while the public is suffering.
Grandpa Dan

Re: Politics - Where do you stand?
« Reply #3 on: May 01, 2011, 02:48:47 PM »
Am I imagining things, or does it seem that males who use the internet are invariably libertarian?

Quote
though i'm not as libertarian on the subject of drugs, since they can (not always but often) subvert the rational decision process liberty needs to rest on.

There's a great clip on YouTube of Milton Friedman discussing why drugs should be legalized. He essentially makes the point that the prohibition of drugs is not successful for the same reason that the prohibition of alcohol was not. You'll have to goto YouTube and search for 'milton friedman drugs' because you can't post links anymore on this forum.

Quote
i own firearms and oppose the creeping totalitarian statist restrictions on them here, agreeing with the us's founders that the people had to be always armed as the last, or even earlier, recourse against the subversion of the free state, which is always a threat since it grows out of the lust for power endemic to human nature, though i had to come to these views from the opposite perspective over two decades.  (is all non-hunting weapons ownership illegal there, or just heavily restricted?)

I completely agree with your views on firearms; that they are essential for the maintenance of a free society. A disarmed population is basically defenceless against future dictatorships.

In Britain firearms were completely unregulated until the 1920s when a law was passed which required owners to register with the local police. Then in the 1960s, following a particularly nasty bank robbery in which several police were shot, automatic weapons were banned. In 1997, following the Dunblane school massacre, all handguns were banned. Presently it's only legal to own a shotgun, and only if you have a completely clean criminal record. Even so it's heavily regulated and your premises is subject to unannounced police inspections. It's even harder to gain a rifle license.

Yah, Britain sucks.

Quote
debt-based central banking system created shortly before with the federal reserve (to steal value through inflation), which as people note is neither federal nor a reserve, though the awakening to this (ron paul etc) seems to come and go in long historical cycles, as with the first bank of the united states, the jackson era, etc.  you can hope the pendulum will swing back.

... Not before the dollar loses its status as the reserve currency of the world. Unfortunately the *cough* 'European' *cough* bankers who own the Fed have no intention of allowing any politicians in Washington from raping the country. Incidentally, the whole Ron Paul phenomenon is very encouraging in the long term.

BTW, Andrew Jackson was a badass!

Quote
my thought on the nhs is, their rejection of gyne on its face makes sense as a cosmetic thing competing for finite resources, but the problem is people don't understand that gyne is an extremely psychologically insidious thing that goes far beyond trivial cosmetics.  i have said many times here it can be far more devastating to an individual than any treated cancer out there

For 14 years gynecomastia destroyed my life and brought me close to suicide several times. Not only that but it affected my family because they could see I was dysfunctional and unhappy. It's one of the worse conditions out there. The NHS are not in my good-books at the moment. The way I was treated by them was appalling. Break it up into tiny pieces and sell it to private enterprise I say! Let the market deal with their f*cking public-sector unions and lazy workers.

Quote
tell me a little about the evolution of your libertarianism -- is it still a largely minority thing in the uk and/or on an uptick, were you raised with it?  did you evolve to it on your own, or with university influences?  and will antimonarchist/republican ideas there get any tiny boost at all on april 29?

I used to be an ardent socialist, literally from my teens. As I came into contact with the internet about 10 years ago my political horizons began to expand, mainly through listening to American web talk-shows, such as Jeff Rense, which are perennially anti-establishment. Sorry Rush but you just don't cut it! Unfortunately libertarianism is largely unheard of over here, but is growing thanks to the net. Erm, I think April 29th probably gave a small boost to pro-monarchy sentiment.

Quote
I am a Libertarian in principle but actually I'm registered as a Republican. Simply put, the Libertarian party is not strong enough to elect a candidate so I try to support the republican candidates that lean to my liking. Many of the Republicans and virtually all of the Democrats are far to liberal and free spending.

I think that's a mistake TBH. If we all simply supported the parties who we truly want, rather than voting tactically, the political landscape would be completely different. The establishment relies on us being forced to support the main parties, even if we don't want to.

Tell me what you guys think about the tea party? I've heard that it started out as a genuine grass-roots organisation but has been taken over by the Republican party.

*

Offline Paa_Paw

  • *****
  • 4738
Re: Politics - Where do you stand?
« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2011, 01:03:38 AM »
The tea party seems to be doing a pretty good job of remaining non partisan. They have supported democrats who are fiscal conservatives and spoken out against republicans that they perceived to be fiscal liberals.

I don't think it is fair to say they are in danger of becoming absorbed withing the republican party.


Re: Politics - Where do you stand?
« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2011, 08:05:04 AM »
I don't think it is fair to say they are in danger of becoming absorbed withing the republican party.

I hope not. That would be a freaking tragedy.

Oh BTW, Ron Paul 2012!

*

Offline headheldhigh01

  • *****
  • 4079
  • destined to stand on a beach shirtless
Re: Politics - Where do you stand?
« Reply #6 on: May 09, 2011, 03:00:34 AM »
Quote
Am I imagining things, or does it seem that males who use the internet are invariably libertarian?
not quite invariably, but there sure does seem to be a touch of it.  i'll have to check out the friedman clips, i'm still kind of on the fence.  

Quote
A disarmed population is basically defenceless against future dictatorships
there are some very interesting observations by america's early founders on the subject.  with apology, not that there hasn't been erosion in some of the progress here, the modern bumper sticker is, an armed man is a citizen; an unarmed man is a subject.  and i admit my paranoia enough just to get a little suspicious every time an event feeds neatly into legislation.  few people know that the absolutely ridiculously named "usa patriot act" over here was not a reaction to 9-11, it was drafted and ready to go a little bit in advance of it.  but don't get me started ;)  

Quote
BTW, Andrew Jackson was a badass!
with respect to the banking interests he was pretty amazing.  with respect to the indigenous native population and a few other things, rather less so, politics is rarely a neat business of white hat black hat, but full marks, as you would say, where they're due.  

Quote
Break it up into tiny pieces and sell it to private enterprise I say!
i have to defer to your expertise and experience on the subject.  unfortunately as i mentioned, to a fair degree we have the appearance of a free market here without the true accountability that really makes it one.  there's another bumper sticker over here that reads something like i support separation of corporation and state.  

Quote
mainly through listening to American web talk-shows, such as Jeff Rense
now there's a badass.  and yeah i wince when i hear rush, besides being a pretty disingenuous panderer, his double standards extended to drugs too -- bust all those druggies and lock them away -- except me when i get caught   :-\  

Quote
Erm, I think April 29th probably gave a small boost to pro-monarchy sentiment
i was probably just hoping people might shake their heads at some of the excess, i guess not.  i certainly wish the pair of them well, but while they sound like good candidates for helping that entity endure, i think that's partly due to their helping put a small starter crack into the long outdated concept of superior class and hereditary nobility itself, you almost wondered if they were hoping it might forestall some future erosion of their institutional footing.  

Quote
If we all simply supported the parties who we truly want, rather than voting tactically, the political landscape would be completely different.
i've definitely swung more in this direction.   however i also become extremely suspicious about two elections ago (diebold president quote about delivering an election, princeton study of hackability, etc.) of the ease in subverting electronic balloting machines.  fwiw, while i like the idea of mitigating "mandates" by voting against winners, i believe the real power interests behind the scenes, like those reflected in the synarchist bilderberg lists and many others behind the scenes who don't dare attend, definitely dialectically game two party systems pretty effectively.  

Quote
Oh BTW, Ron Paul 2012!
that would be way cool, but the moneyed institutional republican party would fight it like heck.  he probably had technical victories in at least two state primaries if not more last time, and the party machinery shut his people out.  i withhold judgment on the son rand till i know him better, i hear his ideas are in the right place but he's still getting his bearings.  that said, i remain very wary of any kind of family dynastic effect, though since ron only got so far, little worry there ;)

Quote
Tell me what you guys think about the tea party? I've heard that it started out as a genuine grass-roots organisation but has been taken over by the Republican party.
i think that's essentially correct, i used to identify with it, but the way you can tell it got hijacked was the degree to which fundamentalist theocracy started to appear in it, which is completely alien to a religion-neutral libertarian outlook.  you could tell things were tanking when they solicited that pseudoconservative semiliterate beauty queen (clever/politically astute, but not even close to truly intelligent or principled) sarah palin, i think she tried to demand a half million us cash to speak at their last event.  i don't want to be unfair to the more honest elements in it, but any emerging third party entity has to carry the hopes of both the sane and the somewhat around-the-benders both, and any political force really has to watch against, for want of a better way to put it, infiltration and subversion of its core principles.  but that's always been the struggle and probably will remain so for a long time, you take the incremental progresses you can get.  i do think that for all our problems today, including being turned into a imperialist influence off and on over the years (in the ascendency again today it seems), the framers of the constitution would have been ecstatic that we (a) finally shook off slavery in the normal sense and (b) survived as well as we did for this long.  however, as they put it, eternal vigilance is still the price of liberty.  




xx
Politics in the UK

Started by Worrier on Lounge Area

6 Replies
2364 Views
Last post May 20, 2006, 09:59:16 AM
by markashleigh1979
xx
not sure where I stand in the forces??

Started by northern_sailor on U.K.

5 Replies
1815 Views
Last post November 16, 2010, 10:37:46 PM
by Darth Menace
xx
I cant stand this anymore!

Started by i_dont_like_this on Gynecomastia Talk

6 Replies
2167 Views
Last post July 14, 2005, 09:17:00 AM
by nukem2k5
xx
Stand up, be confident

Started by bobaduae on Acceptance

0 Replies
2760 Views
Last post January 22, 2007, 12:54:41 AM
by bobaduae