ratbastid

Timothy McVeigh was no true Scotsman! Classic.

Willravel

You're moving the discussion away from the central point. No one in their right mind would call Bill Clinton a radical liberal. He wasn't even really a liberal, he was (and probably still is) farther right than Obama and even his wife. Ideologically he's center or center right.
Right, but the person issuing the orders was a republican. No matter who made the decisions along the chain of command, there sat a registered republican.
Not in the least. He strongly believed in the second amendment, he believed in radically small federal government, he believed that military expansionism was wrong, he believed in individual liberties, and was strongly against taxes. I can't imagine a better description of a libertarian. The fact that he became radical does not change his core political beliefs.
No. A left centrist is in control of the White House now, preceded by a far right chicken hawk neoconservative, preceded by another centrist, preceded by a right winger neoconservative, preceded by the first neoconservative. We've not had a "leftist" president for a very long time, and only someone off the deep end of the right could call President Obama a leftist with a straight face.

ratbastid

When will people get that "left" and "right" are RELATIVE TERMS, and EVERYONE thinks they're in the middle?

"A leftist in the White House" means "somebody whose politics are to the left of mine". That's ALL it means.

Also, when will people get that liberal/conservative is one spectrum, and libertarian/authoritarian is ENTIRELY another spectrum. NOT related. There are liberal libertarians. There are authoritarian liberals. One is the X axis and the other is the Y axis. To collapse them onto a single axis is inaccurate and probably comes from an attempt to invest the political opposition with dangers Otherness.

Baraka_Guru

How can one whose nation borders with both Canada and Mexico not see the relative absence of left politics in one's own government?

I can only assume the answer to that involves some kind of metaphor about blinders.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Willravel

Can we borrow some of your liberals? I think we could use some of them to illustrate to the right that President Obama is only left be comparison. I swear we'll have them back in a few months.

BTW, what do you think would have been the response had this kind of idea been proposed on Canadian TV?

Baraka_Guru

Our liberals aren't that much different from your liberals. (Social progress AND balanced budgets....WOW!) If you want, you can borrow some of our elected social democrats. We have a lot of French ones too.

A bit of outrage, a lot of mockery—on the air and in print. But I have no idea who in their right mind would say such a thing on Canadian TV.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

The_Dunedan

To paraphrase Londo Mollari: Ignorance and smugness in one package, how efficient of you.

Again with the ignorance. You are clearly totally unfamiliar with the philosophical underpinnings of libertarianism, preferring to fill in the gaps in your knowledge with sound-bites and prejudices. Not very liberal-minded or well-informed of you, is it? A typical Collectivist, you see everything on group-vs-group terms, never bothering to descend to the level of the Individual.

After you've read up on libertarianism and what it means, I recommend you read a bit on the Fabian Socialists of England. Then compare this to what libertarians believe. At this point, you might meditate upon what a libertarian might think of "right" and "left." Here's a hint; RoachBoy is partially correct.

Correct, and thank you.

And again, thank you. However, if I were you I'd expand this realm of inquiry. You might be surprised by what you find: L. Neil Smith is a good place to start.

Willravel

Spice your words well lest you be forced to eat them.
Show me a libertarian that believes in a large federal government propped up by a lot of taxes where collective rights are protected and the military is expanding and I'll gladly admit I was wrong. Until then, I invite you to read the issues pages of the Libertarian Party:
Issues | Libertarian Party
After I've read that, will you actually respond to what I posted or will you go off on another tangent?

The_Dunedan

You've made it clear that you are either ignorant of the basic philosophical workings of libertarianism (ie the Non-Aggression Principle, Individualism vs Collectivism, etc), and are therefore talking out of your hat, or you are aware of them and are choosing to ignore them, and are therefore talking out of your ass. Spicy enough for you?

None of which has jackshit to do with Timothy McVeigh's ignorance of, and non-adherance to, the Non-Aggression Principle. Whatever someone -calls- themselves is of no matter when they not only don't fit the label but act in ways which are diametrically opposed to that label. The Non-Aggression Principle defines what it means to be libertarian, not the issues page of the Libertarian Party, and until you're aware of what it says and means on a philosophical level this discussion is fairly pointless.

If you're both able and willing to debate honestly, rather than using convenient strawmen unrelated to the facts of the philosophical debate at hand, yes. If you are unwilling or unable to do so, then I see no reason to engage you any further.

ratbastid

There's more than one kind of libertarian, Dunedan. You're obviously a Rights-Theorist Libertarian. There's also Consequentialist Libertarianism, and other kinds. Sadly, you don't have sole claim to True Libertarianism, as there is no such thing. As you and I have already agreed on this thread, libertarian/authoritarian is a spectrum entirely separate from liberal/conservative. Which means a person can be 100% libertarian, and fall ANYWHERE on the liberal/conservative spectrum. Which means there's an infinite range of possible political and philosophical views that are ENTIRELY CONSISTENT with Libertarianism. Including Timothy McVeigh, Idaho militia crazies, etc, etc, etc. Including you.

I know it's unpleasant to be lumped with the biggest domestic terrorist in US history, but there it is. You're both Libertarians. You don't get to fiat him out of the tent because you disagree with his particular flavor of libertarianism.

---------- Post added at 10:00 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:59 AM ----------

This is inaccurate. You should do some more reading about the varieties of libertarians out there. You'd be surprised.

Baraka_Guru

---

-+-{Important TFP Staff Message}-+- Can we get back on track please? This isn't about what is or isn't a libertarian, or who is or isn't a libertarian. This is about the view of certain conservatives who think a crisis might be necessary to stop the liberals' destruction of the United States. If you wish to discuss the fundamentals of libertarianism, please start a new thread or find an existing one that is more appropriate. Otherwise, get to the point. Thank you.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Cynthetiq

This isn't much different than democrats and republicans, there's plenty of variety, but lots of people like to use labels to help parse and farce.

As a conservative, I don't want the US to be attacked in any shape or form.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Willravel

Sorry about that. Moved here:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/tilted-...tarianism.html