An Irish Libertarian Party

Endless Nameless

How do you guys feel about the establishment of a libertarian party in Ireland?

With the current climate and resentment towards most parties do you think it'd get much attention?

Ellis Dee

Define libertarian. Where do you stand on legalising the weed, porn, the right of all children to a secular education ---

And how would you counter this criticism?

Endless Nameless

Libertarianism:

Smaller Government and thus lower taxes and lower government expenditure, with less emphasis on borrowing money and more emphasis on balancing the books or even a surplus.

Decriminalisation and legalisation of anything anybody wanted to do as long as it didn't hurt other people directly (ie: marajuana, heroin, prostitution, gambling, you name it), but of course with murder, assault rape etc. still illegal.

A separation of Church and State for public school, but private school can do what they like (independant of government funding).

And yes I'd counter it on a basis of definition: libertarians generally want smaller and limited government, and anarchists want the elimination of a formal government.
And I'm not rich.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

BOHtox

Sounds like you'd like Ron Paul.

I'd be for it in theory but obviously there'd be a few policies or two that'd need to be explained

RichardAnd

I do love all the "isms"

karma_

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

This sums up the inherent selfishness that is endemic in libertarianism, it's not about freedom, don't pretend it is, you fool no one.

Endless Nameless

karma_ wrote: »

This sums up the inherent selfishness that is endemic in libertarianism, it's not about freedom, don't pretend it is, you fool no one.

...care to elaborate on that?

Gurgle

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Wow, you just don't get it.

Dirk Gently

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Or, imagine for a second that an electorate not blinded by ideology and insulated through wealth realised that society would degenerate fairly rapidly if such a party ever got a majority.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

_Gawd_

I'd streak down O'Connell Street in broad daylight for such an organisation to be politically active in Ireland.

We need some common sense in this country.

_Gawd_

Dirk Gently

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I do realise. A lot of my posts here are critical of our electorate, of cronyism, of parish pumping and of FF. That doesn't make me a libertarian, that makes me critical of weaknesses in our republic.

How did it work out for society, I'd wager still better than your libertarian utopia. I say wager, because it is just a theory dreamed up by wealthy folks which hasn't been put into practice anywhere.

_Gawd_

Dirk Gently wrote: »

I do realise. A lot of my posts here are critical of our electorate, of cronyism, of parish pumping and of FF. That doesn't make me a libertarian, that makes me critical of weaknesses in our republic.

How did it work out for society, I'd wager still better than your libertarian utopia. I say wager, because it is just a theory dreamed up by wealthy folks which hasn't been put into practice anywhere.

Dreamed up by wealthy folks?

You DO realise that the wealthy absolutely despise libertarianism, don't you????? Why would they vote for a party that would cut all ties to corporations and destroy all monopolies???

You haven't thought this through.

Endless Nameless

_Gawd_ wrote: »

I'd streak down O'Connell Street in broad daylight for such an organisation to be politically active in Ireland.

We need some common sense in this country.

It might be a nice project for a few people to try out during the summer or something.
Unemployment is about 12.4% at the moment, right? That's almost one in eight Irishmen, I'm sure there's a lot of that group with a lot of free time who are enthusiastic about genuinely improving their job opportunities.

If a party like that started small in socially liberal areas (like parts of Dublin where no single party has a stronghold) and tried to get at least one or two seats for the next election I think it'd be good for Irish politics in general, outside of libertarianism, for a ideologically-driven non-populist party to get their voice heard.

Dirk Gently

_Gawd_ wrote: »

Dreamed up by wealthy folks?

You DO realise that the wealthy absolutely despise libertarianism, don't you????? Why would they vote for a party that would cut all ties to corporations and destroy all monopolies???

You haven't thought this through.

thats the thing though, how are you going to destroy monopolies. Are you going to hit the reset button every 10 years after certain companies grow to big and eliminate the competition, or are you going to

regulate

them to safe guard competition?

FreudianSlippers

Since when is porn illegal?

RichieC

Dirk Gently wrote: »

thats the thing though, how are you going to destroy monopolies. Are you going to hit the reset button every 10 years after certain companies grow to big and eliminate the competition, or are you going to

regulate

them to safe guard competition?

Once all the "libertarians" gain control of the monopoly's they'd forget about their anti monopoly stance fast enough.


In reality, Libertarianism is simply a big money ploy to destroy democracy and replace it with an oligarchy. They aren't stupid, they know the power vacuum left after government will be filled by them and their big money backers.

Thankfully they haven't a hope. There's a scar left in the human psyche from the days when the biggest money made the biggest ruler.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

_Gawd_

Endless Nameless wrote: »

It might be a nice project for a few people to try out during the summer or something.
Unemployment is about 12.4% at the moment, right? That's almost one in eight Irishmen, I'm sure there's a lot of that group with a lot of free time who are enthusiastic about genuinely improving their job opportunities.

If a party like that started small in socially liberal areas (like parts of Dublin where no single party has a stronghold) and tried to get at least one or two seats for the next election I think it'd be good for Irish politics in general, outside of libertarianism, for a ideologically-driven non-populist party to get their voice heard.

It's no use.

There have been attempts to establish such a party but it's near impossible to bring it forward. Since 2010 in particular we have seen the ILP, IDP and others try to get off the ground but to do that you need money and money has to be brought into the party. When this occurs, the people that have paid bring their own collectivist policies into the programme book and so ends the libertarian party - a classic case of this were the Democrats were their new platform that was just released looks nothing like what their original platform was a few years back. But there are thousands of us out there...freedomireland have a website as well as the Irish Liberty Forum. I believe CSP have some libertarian views economically but they're very socially conservative.

I think libertarianism is a newly discovered worldview in this country so I'd suspect mostly young people describe themselves as libertarian or even know of austrian/chicago economics. Ireland in a way has no ideology per se (although no ideology can be described as an ideology?!)...all they care about is pleasing the parish community and getting re-elected. I've been to numerous political meetings over the years and in every single established party, it is quite literally zombie like follow the leader type stuff - nobody has an opinion. It's actually dangerous to have an opinion in FG for example, you just have to follow the whip and sure, what point is it to get involved if you've to shut your mouth and have no input. Your only worth to these people is to hand out drivel in fliers and canvass.

Ireland is not a libertarian country by and large - we're a reactionary island living on the periphery of a totalitarian authoritarian union that says how high when told to jump. The best we can do is support the big libertarian poster boys in the states and with a bit of luck, Ron Paul has awakened many people to continue the fight into the future.

RichieC

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

They were required because investment wasn't something private money would have anything to do with.

_Gawd_

Dirk Gently wrote: »

thats the thing though, how are you going to destroy monopolies. Are you going to hit the reset button every 10 years after certain companies grow to big and eliminate the competition, or are you going to

regulate

them to safe guard competition?

No, a libertarian would let them all fall and go out of business. Finally, putting the fear of God into these cretins. The government gives out monopolies to corporations and companies. If a company has a monopoly over a significant amount of time it's one of two reasons - 1) government has given it to them through legislation or 2) they're the best company out there and satisfy their consumers.

RichieC

_Gawd_ wrote: »

No, a libertarian would let them all fall and go out of business. Finally, putting the fear of God into these cretins. The government gives out monopolies to corporations and companies. If a company has a monopoly over a significant amount of time it's one of two reasons - 1) government has given it to them through legislation or 2) they're the best company out there and satisfy their consumers.

So without regulation, what's to stop the guy with the most money buying up all the small companies? they do that now, yes, but there is at least rules (which should be tightened)

Chuck Stone

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

That would be a tea party.

RichieC

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Imagine we were all like you. We'd be ferengis. :pac:

Jimoslimos

Endless Nameless wrote: »

A separation of Church and State for public school, but private school can do what they like (independant of government funding)

Not quite, a typical libertarian stance would be to remove public funding for ALL schools and leave it in the hands of private companies, religious organisations, parent groups.

_Gawd_

RichieC wrote: »

So without regulation, what's to stop the guy with the most money buying up all the small companies? they do that now, yes, but there is at least rules (which should be tightened)

Why should they be tightened? Can you not see how ridiculous you sound when you consider that you're willing to get involved in two businesses and say which one is not allowed to buy the other?? What planet are you living on?

In your bias you simply cannot contemplate the idea that there is no free market at work here. A company cannot just start up tomorrow. So how can these corporations be challenged? And you're worried about them buying out smaller businesses? Well, get yourself a free market and see a thousand businesses in the same industry rise in the morning.

What you're actually saying is (and it's quite illogical) that government should get involved in the market to make sure there are a catalogue f regulations. Then the big fish can really buy out the smaller one's with no future competition. How the hell does that even make sense - look, I'm on your side...I do not want to see Armageddon. I want a peaceful world with voluntary exchange - we differ as you don't see the government as the object in that road to peace.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

_Gawd_

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Not quite, a typical libertarian stance would be to remove public funding for ALL schools and leave it in the hands of private companies, religious organisations, parent groups.

Absolutely.

Zero public service in libertarianism. Of course for a country like Ireland with a massive PS, you'd be looking at a few years transition but ultimately all government departments would be abolished.

FreudianSlippers

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Not quite, a typical libertarian stance would be to remove public funding for ALL schools and leave it in the hands of private companies, religious organisations, parent groups.

I would disagree. Most libertarians usually favour some form of school voucher or education tax credit system. So, yes, you would have to pay for the school; however that money would still emanate from the government - thus keeping costs down and services up.

Dirk Gently

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Was it the state that turned 40 american banks into just 4 in under 20 years. Perhaps a little regulation to ensure there's no such thing as too big to fail? No?

By the way, criticising the Irish state doesn't there for prove libertarianism is a utopia. It's just a really obvious observation of a small corrupt crony system. We have a small population and a small elite who literally know, went to school and socialise with each other, be they politicians, corporate or media.

There's a dog lying at my feet at the moment, the dog is black, there for because I observed the dog is black Libertarianism is the answer?

_Gawd_

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I would disagree. Most libertarians usually favour some form of school voucher or education tax credit system. So, yes, you would have to pay for the school; however that money would still emanate from the government - thus keeping costs down and services up.

You're wrong there I'm afraid.

A minority of libertarians would see this system introduced. Libertarians want total freedom - supplying the government with a revenue stream i.e - taxation to pay for these schools is blasphemy!

_Gawd_

Dirk Gently wrote: »

Was it the state that turned 40 american banks into just 4 in under 20 years. Perhaps a little regulation to ensure there's no such thing as too big to fail? No?

If you think we have a free market banking system I want whatever you're smoking.

Jimoslimos

It's not an ideology I agree with, but a libertarian party would have a better chance at becoming established here than the UK or US for example, where the voting system is biased towards the two major parties.

_Gawd_

Canvasser wrote: »

Libertarians are just nutters who are too selfish and greedy to take part in society.

Why do you think collectivism is the only way by default. You are aware that all people don't view the world through your eyes. I'm not in the least bit patriotic for example - if an Irish person is killed overseas, my blood doesn't boil because I don't see it as a personal attack against me. I'm an individual and I see the world through those eyes. That's why I see no reason to pay into any ponzi scheme my "community" demands of me.

I just want to be left alone.

Blowfish

RichieC wrote: »

So without regulation, what's to stop the guy with the most money buying up all the small companies?

What's the problem if they do?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

K-9

Canvasser wrote: »

Libertarians are just nutters who are too selfish and greedy to take part in society.

Mod

Comments like that aren't acceptable on the Politics forum.
Please read the charter on the main page.

southsiderosie

Canvasser wrote: »

Libertarians are just nutters who are too selfish and greedy to take part in society.

Canvasser wrote: »

Well f*ck off and live in the woods then and spare the rest of us your sh1te.

MOD NOTE:

Canvasser, don't post in this thread again.

Channel Zero

_Gawd_ wrote: »

That's why I see no reason to pay into any ponzi scheme my "community" demands of me.

I just want to be left alone.

What if you become sick and cannot provide for yourself and your family?
Would you still want to be left alone? To be at the mercy of charity?

southsiderosie

Canvasser wrote: »

Actually it's "libertarianism" that shouldn't be acceptable in politics and the mods on here are just showing their outrageous right wing bias again.

MOD NOTE:

Banned.

As an aside to other posters, if someone has clearly been infracted, please do not engage with those posts on-thread. Flamewars are an annoying distraction for everyone.

RichieC

Blowfish wrote: »

What's the problem if they do?

So what happens when all the wealth concentrates and our entire lives are dictated by a single mega corporation, or two?

Endless Nameless

_Gawd_ wrote: »

It's no use.

There have been attempts to establish such a party but it's near impossible to bring it forward. Since 2010 in particular we have seen the ILP, IDP and others try to get off the ground but to do that you need money and money has to be brought into the party. When this occurs, the people that have paid bring their own collectivist policies into the programme book and so ends the libertarian party - a classic case of this were the Democrats were their new platform that was just released looks nothing like what their original platform was a few years back. But there are thousands of us out there...freedomireland have a website as well as the Irish Liberty Forum. I believe CSP have some libertarian views economically but they're very socially conservative.

I think libertarianism is a newly discovered worldview in this country so I'd suspect mostly young people describe themselves as libertarian or even know of austrian/chicago economics. Ireland in a way has no ideology per se (although no ideology can be described as an ideology?!)...all they care about is pleasing the parish community and getting re-elected. I've been to numerous political meetings over the years and in every single established party, it is quite literally zombie like follow the leader type stuff - nobody has an opinion. It's actually dangerous to have an opinion in FG for example, you just have to follow the whip and sure, what point is it to get involved if you've to shut your mouth and have no input. Your only worth to these people is to hand out drivel in fliers and canvass.

Ireland is not a libertarian country by and large - we're a reactionary island living on the periphery of a totalitarian authoritarian union that says how high when told to jump. The best we can do is support the big libertarian poster boys in the states and with a bit of luck, Ron Paul has awakened many people to continue the fight into the future.

How much money would actually be necessary? If a specific constituency was picked, with volunteers given quotas about going from door-to-door to tell people about a candidate, and with some money pooled together for flyers, pamphlets and election posters I'm sure getting one candidate elected would be viable.

At least for a first election to get the party off the ground.

_Gawd_

Channel Zero wrote: »

What if you become sick and cannot provide for yourself and your family?
Would you still want to be left alone? To be at the mercy of charity?

The free market doesn't exist. A lot of people disregard libertarianism because they think everything would continue the way they are today and that everything would remain expensive. If you couldn't work, you'd be foooked without government but that's not the case in the free market. Let me tell you why.

Firstly, I am on your side..I want lower prices in healthcare. I just differ that I think government cannot provide that. Now, if we had a free market, there would be no practitioner licenses - so instead of going to the GP and paying 50E standard, the doctors and individual health brands (like Spar) would be fighting for your service so they would cut a deal with you and charge you 10E.

Now, add in medicine. Most medicine is by prescription only (this is government intervention). You can't get medicine without paying the doctor (someone is paying him either you or the taxpayer). In a libertarian society, there would be no prescriptions because you could buy anything over the counter. So say I have the same complaint as you. I simply cut out all the GP expenses and go straight to buy the appropriate medicine for myself that will help me.

Now, with no government, doctors don't share the money...they fight each other driving down prices. REAL competition in healthcare. We are free to cut deals with doctors and even buy insurance from the deregulated market.

Jimoslimos

If libertarians want to argue that everybody should take personal responsibility for their own healthcare and the burden shouldn't be carried by the state - I disagree - but can understand the point.

If they want to make the case that universities shouldn't be funded out of the pulic purse - again I disagree - but can see the principle behind the argument.

However in order for any of these to make sense then surely you need to assume that everybody has had equal opportunities in life - not so if you remove free healthcare for children and privatise education fully.

It creates a class system whereby your education/healthcare from a young age is determined by that of your parents.

I say this as a healthy unmarried childless male

_Gawd_

Endless Nameless wrote: »

How much money would actually be necessary? If a specific constituency was picked, with volunteers given quotas about going from door-to-door to tell people about a candidate, and with some money pooled together for flyers, pamphlets and election posters I'm sure getting one candidate elected would be viable.

At least for a first election to get the party off the ground.

Well you'd have to pick certain talking points relevant to that particular community. While we could get a person elected in Dublin on marijuana legalisation, it would be difficult to convince farmers that their welfare money was going to dry up.

Blowfish

RichieC wrote: »

So what happens when all the wealth concentrates and our entire lives are dictated by a single mega corporation, or two?

In order to maintain their position, they'd have to produce the best quality goods/services at the lowest price points.

If they weren't and were attempting to buy out all of their competition, naturally enough they'd fail.

Jimoslimos wrote: »

It creates a class system whereby your education/healthcare from a young age is determined by that of your parents.

Only if you assume that everything needs to be paid for up front.

Dirk Gently

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Actually I want a state to regulate and actively break up monopolies, without that I think we end up with too much power and wealth concentrated in too few institutions. Concentrated wealth is bad for the economy.

Ironically I think I'm more libertarian than you and the other 5 internet libertarians, in that when I follow the logic through I can't help but come to the conclusion that your ideology will eventually create a super state to protect those with concentrated wealth from the rest of society which is now void of any safety nets to pacify them. Society exists whether libertarians chose to acknowledge it or not. I assume libertarians will maintain a police and legal system to protect private property rights? I don't see that police force being anything but colossal considering the entirely predictable trajectory of society v's those accumulating wealth unregulated.

Just as communism was suppose to wither away the state, libertarianism will also fail to whither the state as it will need it to impose the ideology.

_Gawd_

Dirk Gently wrote: »

Actually I want a state to regulate and actively break up monopolies, without that I think we end up with too much power and wealth concentrated in too few institutions. Concentrated wealth is bad for the economy.

Ironically I think I'm more libertarian than you and the other 5 internet libertarians, in that when I follow the logic through I can't help but come to the conclusion that your ideology will eventually create a super state to protect those with concentrated wealth from the rest of society which is now void of any safety nets to pacify them. Society exists whether libertarians chose to acknowledge it or not. I assume libertarians will maintain a police and legal system to protect private property rights? I don't see that police force being anything but colossal considering the entirely predictable trajectory of society v's those accumulating wealth unregulated.

Just as communism was suppose to wither away the state, libertarianism will also fail to whither the state as it will need it to impose the ideology.

Libertarians differ on how far it should be pushed.

Milton Friedman was a Libertarian but he argued the need for a state monopoly on money (I believe). The Libertarian Party advocates military, courts and police ONLY.

On the more consistent end of Libertarianism, you have Murray Rothbard that said the State is the State and that ALL should be abolished. I'm a Rothbardian in every sense. It's just taking libertarianism to it's logical conclusion. I do admire Friedman though - I loved his lectures.

Jimoslimos

_Gawd_ wrote: »

Now, add in medicine. Most medicine is by prescription only (this is government intervention). You can't get medicine without paying the doctor (someone is paying him either you or the taxpayer). In a libertarian society, there would be no prescriptions because you could buy anything over the counter. So say I have the same complaint as you. I simply cut out all the GP expenses and go straight to buy the appropriate medicine for myself that will help me.

Now, with no government, doctors don't share the money...they fight each other driving down prices. REAL competition in healthcare. We are free to cut deals with doctors and even buy insurance from the deregulated market.

Now I don't know about anyone else, but I'm happy enough with the current system of doctors/pharmacists taking responsibility for the well-being of their patients (not customers).