Why Libertarians are Pinheads

I already know this thread will garner much criticism from the lefties as well as the libbies, but I never was much for being non-controversial, so here goes...

First, let me say, my personal views are very much in line with Libertarianism. On almost every issue, I personally share their viewpoint, and can see where they are coming from. This alone, distinguishes them from the left, whom I often can't even rationalize. With Libertarians, I can see a strong and principled conviction of belief, and I can understand and even relate to that belief on a personal level. If the entire country were comprised of people who thought like myself and behaved as I do, I would be a staunch Libertarian, because I believe Libertarianism would work in that environment.

This brings me to why I think Libertarians are Pinheads. We live in a diverse and complicated society, full of people who certainly don't think or behave like Libertarians. They lack the same conviction of principle, they can't behave in a responsible manner. The 'personal freedoms' aspect of Libertarianism, depends on individuals behaving responsibly, without the need of government intervention. For instance, we could legalize dope, and most Libertarian types would act responsibly and not abuse it, but many people simply wouldn't. We would be inundated with those who made the 'personal choice' to fuck up their lives, and like it or not, we would be left holding the bag for their care and treatment. Now, a Libertarian would say, we wouldn't be left holding the bag, we'd just let these people deal with the consequences, but unless there is a way to eradicate Liberalism, that is not going to happen in the real world. There will always be some bleeding heart Liberal out there, pulling at our heart strings and collective social conscience, to provide care for these poor unfortunate souls. The same is true with a host of Libertarian issues.

Libertarians are pinheads for much the same reason as many Liberals are pinheads, they believe in a Utopian ideology of how life should be. Reality is, life is nowhere near what they would hope, and it won't ever be. Granted, if we could magically make people behave responsibly, Libertarianism would be an acceptable ideology across the board. Indeed, we could live without government restrictions on personal freedoms, we could enact a smaller more efficient government infrastructure, because the people would take care of their own needs, deal with their own consequences, and not need or require the government as much.

I believe many Libertarians fail to have the perspective of reality in society, and tend to look at Libertarianism in strictly a personal light. I say this because, I find Libertarianism appealing from a personal perspective. However, I understand we live in a diverse society, and not everyone is ethical or sane, and not everyone would be able to function in a Libertarian society. My personal preference for government has to give way to my sense of practicality and pragmatism, and what I believe will work to provide a functional society for the majority. So I must abandon Libertarian ideals of personal freedoms, and accept some level of governmental control, so that the people in society who are not responsible and need rules, boundaries and limitations, will have them.

There are certain things I believe our government should have control over, even though I may personal wish they didn't. Even though I may believe I am a better steward of my own choices than government, I can understand that not everyone is like me, and some people require this limitation to some degree, without it, they simply go out of control and I am left with the aftermath. To me, it's the difference between dreaming a Utopian dream, and accepting reality of the world we live in. Pinheads are people who have read a book or studied the pontifications of others, and have developed a viewpoint based on an idealistic concept, without factoring in reality. I have my own views and beliefs on a personal level, but I am also a big believer in reality, and I don't put much stock in ideological concepts. What works on paper, often doesn't work in practicality, that's just the way life is in the real world.
 
This is almost like reading Midcan, except from the persepctive of a southern populist...

One point I want to make is that, we would have a serious difficulty paying for drug abuse victims, and the public would very quickly be faced with suffering financially (the public is largely narcissistic given the right set of circumstances) or being sensible. So I think the legalization of drugs would still work in a world of leftists. That, and we'd begin by saving a fortune by abolishing the DEA and war on drugs, and reducing costs in the courts and corrections departments.
 
This is almost like reading Midcan, except from the persepctive of a southern populist...

One point I want to make is that, we would have a serious difficulty paying for drug abuse victims, and the public would very quickly be faced with suffering financially (the public is largely narcissistic given the right set of circumstances) or being sensible. So I think the legalization of drugs would still work in a world of leftists. That, and we'd begin by saving a fortune by abolishing the DEA and war on drugs, and reducing costs in the courts and corrections departments.

What you are saying makes little sense. You think the cost of caring for thousands upon thousands of drug addicts is going to somehow be cheaper than running the DEA, courts, and Dept. of Corrections? And do you think that legalizing drugs would facilitate the complete abandonment of the DEA, courts, and prisons? I think you've smoked too much crack!

As for the "southern populist" slap... I don't know what label you want to tag me with, but I believe our society should be operated and controlled in accordance with the collective voice of the people through their elected officials. If you believe in some other form of government, you don't believe in Democracy as I know it.
 
What you are saying makes little sense. You think the cost of caring for thousands upon thousands of drug addicts is going to somehow be cheaper than running the DEA, courts, and Dept. of Corrections? And do you think that legalizing drugs would facilitate the complete abandonment of the DEA, courts, and prisons? I think you've smoked too much crack!

As for the "southern populist" slap... I don't know what label you want to tag me with, but I believe our society should be operated and controlled in accordance with the collective voice of the people through their elected officials. If you believe in some other form of government, you don't believe in Democracy as I know it.

You know democracy as most Americans know it - post Jackson. But I disgress, I pointed out that we would initially save a ton of money by ending the war on drugs. Eventually the economy would be threatened if we chose to finance care for addicts, and I'm confident our selfishness would save us from such a bust.
 
You know democracy as most Americans know it - post Jackson. But I disgress, I pointed out that we would initially save a ton of money by ending the war on drugs. Eventually the economy would be threatened if we chose to finance care for addicts, and I'm confident our selfishness would save us from such a bust.

So what is to become of the drug addicts? Are we going to return to a pre-1900 America, where Opium dens abound, and strung-out addicts roam the streets? My viewpoint is somewhere in the middle with regard to the "war on drugs." I believe we should reassess what we're doing, we should refocus on hard core drug trafficking and reduce restrictions and laws on minor drugs like pot. I still think we need a DEA and courts, as well as prisons. I don't believe I want to live in a society without them, I believe you would regret making the claims you would.

To honestly assess your viewpoint, you have to go back to before America had serious drug laws, and take a look at what prompted us to pass most of the laws against drugs in the early 1900's. We had a largely dysfunctional society of drug addicts, and it effected us economically, productively, and socially. It also raised crime levels and resulted in more violence. Society became sick of living like that, so they passed laws to prohibit certain narcotics and regulate others. What you are advocating is to ignore the problems we had in the past, because you apparently believe humans have evolved to the point they wouldn't have those same problems again.

As I said... you been hittin' the crack pipe too much!
 
This is good, legalize drugs and the libertarians would not become druggies?

Dixie I think you overly generallize in an incorrect manner.
 
This is good, legalize drugs and the libertarians would not become druggies?

Dixie I think you overly generallize in an incorrect manner.

Do you have some sort of "Retard" plug-in installed on your browser which causes you to read shit that isn't there? Looks to me like the only person to "generalize" in this thread so far, has been YOU!
 
the ever shrinking republican (nazi base) is shrinking because of narrow minded cons like Dixie doodle.
 
I already know this thread will garner much criticism from the lefties as well as the libbies, but I never was much for being non-controversial, so here goes...

First, let me say, my personal views are very much in line with Libertarianism. On almost every issue, I personally share their viewpoint, and can see where they are coming from. This alone, distinguishes them from the left, whom I often can't even rationalize. With Libertarians, I can see a strong and principled conviction of belief, and I can understand and even relate to that belief on a personal level. If the entire country were comprised of people who thought like myself and behaved as I do, I would be a staunch Libertarian, because I believe Libertarianism would work in that environment.

This brings me to why I think Libertarians are Pinheads. We live in a diverse and complicated society, full of people who certainly don't think or behave like Libertarians. They lack the same conviction of principle, they can't behave in a responsible manner. The 'personal freedoms' aspect of Libertarianism, depends on individuals behaving responsibly, without the need of government intervention. For instance, we could legalize dope, and most Libertarian types would act responsibly and not abuse it, but many people simply wouldn't. We would be inundated with those who made the 'personal choice' to fuck up their lives, and like it or not, we would be left holding the bag for their care and treatment. Now, a Libertarian would say, we wouldn't be left holding the bag, we'd just let these people deal with the consequences, but unless there is a way to eradicate Liberalism, that is not going to happen in the real world. There will always be some bleeding heart Liberal out there, pulling at our heart strings and collective social conscience, to provide care for these poor unfortunate souls. The same is true with a host of Libertarian issues.

Libertarians are pinheads for much the same reason as many Liberals are pinheads, they believe in a Utopian ideology of how life should be. Reality is, life is nowhere near what they would hope, and it won't ever be. Granted, if we could magically make people behave responsibly, Libertarianism would be an acceptable ideology across the board. Indeed, we could live without government restrictions on personal freedoms, we could enact a smaller more efficient government infrastructure, because the people would take care of their own needs, deal with their own consequences, and not need or require the government as much.

I believe many Libertarians fail to have the perspective of reality in society, and tend to look at Libertarianism in strictly a personal light. I say this because, I find Libertarianism appealing from a personal perspective. However, I understand we live in a diverse society, and not everyone is ethical or sane, and not everyone would be able to function in a Libertarian society. My personal preference for government has to give way to my sense of practicality and pragmatism, and what I believe will work to provide a functional society for the majority. So I must abandon Libertarian ideals of personal freedoms, and accept some level of governmental control, so that the people in society who are not responsible and need rules, boundaries and limitations, will have them.

There are certain things I believe our government should have control over, even though I may personal wish they didn't. Even though I may believe I am a better steward of my own choices than government, I can understand that not everyone is like me, and some people require this limitation to some degree, without it, they simply go out of control and I am left with the aftermath. To me, it's the difference between dreaming a Utopian dream, and accepting reality of the world we live in. Pinheads are people who have read a book or studied the pontifications of others, and have developed a viewpoint based on an idealistic concept, without factoring in reality. I have my own views and beliefs on a personal level, but I am also a big believer in reality, and I don't put much stock in ideological concepts. What works on paper, often doesn't work in practicality, that's just the way life is in the real world.

1/3
 
What you are saying makes little sense. You think the cost of caring for thousands upon thousands of drug addicts is going to somehow be cheaper than running the DEA, courts, and Dept. of Corrections?

Of course.

And do you think that legalizing drugs would facilitate the complete abandonment of the DEA, courts, and prisons?

No, getting rid of the drug addicts would make them run at capacity rather than double capacity. But it would be a good start to emptying them further.



As for the "southern populist" slap... I don't know what label you want to tag me with, but I believe our society should be operated and controlled in accordance with the collective voice of the people through their elected officials. If you believe in some other form of government, you don't believe in Democracy as I know it.

I think we should be controlled by liberty.
 
You know democracy as most Americans know it - post Jackson. But I disgress, I pointed out that we would initially save a ton of money by ending the war on drugs. Eventually the economy would be threatened if we chose to finance care for addicts, and I'm confident our selfishness would save us from such a bust.

Treatment would cost a substantial amount less than imprisonment.
 
Not to mention the costs in (money and lives(law enforcement as well as citizens)) in the ongoing... never ending war on drugs.

Immie
They complain about the relatively cheap (although more immediate) "War on Radical Islam" or whatever they are calling it nowadays.

We've spent Trillions since they've been made illegal just helping to drive the prices up to ensure added criminal activity associated with the use of the drugs.
 
So what is to become of the drug addicts? Are we going to return to a pre-1900 America, where Opium dens abound, and strung-out addicts roam the streets? My viewpoint is somewhere in the middle with regard to the "war on drugs." I believe we should reassess what we're doing, we should refocus on hard core drug trafficking and reduce restrictions and laws on minor drugs like pot. I still think we need a DEA and courts, as well as prisons. I don't believe I want to live in a society without them, I believe you would regret making the claims you would.

To honestly assess your viewpoint, you have to go back to before America had serious drug laws, and take a look at what prompted us to pass most of the laws against drugs in the early 1900's. We had a largely dysfunctional society of drug addicts, and it effected us economically, productively, and socially. It also raised crime levels and resulted in more violence. Society became sick of living like that, so they passed laws to prohibit certain narcotics and regulate others. What you are advocating is to ignore the problems we had in the past, because you apparently believe humans have evolved to the point they wouldn't have those same problems again.

As I said... you been hittin' the crack pipe too much!

Yes Dixie, I totally said we should get rid of courts and correctional facilities. Obviously, we still need them to address homicide, rape, traffic infractions, and other serious crimes. Dumbass. What is it with Southerners and the English language?

Anyway, I really don't give a shit what happens to druggies, but I'd rather not pay for them to be treated...
 
Yes Dixie, I totally said we should get rid of courts and correctional facilities. Obviously, we still need them to address homicide, rape, traffic infractions, and other serious crimes. Dumbass. What is it with Southerners and the English language?

Anyway, I really don't give a shit what happens to druggies, but I'd rather not pay for them to be treated...

Well, it is pretty obvious, if we still have them, we won't save much money. Staffs have to be paid, regardless of what kind of "criminals" we run through the system. Your argument was, we would "save a ton" by not having the DEA, courts, and prisons... or at least, that was what I presumed. Now, you seem to be recanting a bit. We are going to still have courts and prisons, so the "save a ton" part is no longer relevant. My guess is, we will also still need the DEA to monitor things like meth and crack, and god knows what else teens can make from drain cleaner.... so not much of a "savings" there either.

And if you aren't going to pay for treatment of drug addicts, what will become of them? Do you think some magic fairy is going to take them under their wing and care for them? I guess as long as you can get out of your driveway without running over a strung out junkie, it will all be okay with you, huh?
 
Well, it is pretty obvious, if we still have them, we won't save much money. Staffs have to be paid, regardless of what kind of "criminals" we run through the system. Your argument was, we would "save a ton" by not having the DEA, courts, and prisons... or at least, that was what I presumed. Now, you seem to be recanting a bit. We are going to still have courts and prisons, so the "save a ton" part is no longer relevant. My guess is, we will also still need the DEA to monitor things like meth and crack, and god knows what else teens can make from drain cleaner.... so not much of a "savings" there either.

And if you aren't going to pay for treatment of drug addicts, what will become of them? Do you think some magic fairy is going to take them under their wing and care for them? I guess as long as you can get out of your driveway without running over a strung out junkie, it will all be okay with you, huh?

Lets not harp on your reading incomprehension. You understand, unless you reside in a barn, that the overcrowding situation with prisons, to include the construction of many new ones, is entirely due to drug crime incarcerations. We would save a ton by shutting down all of the excess facilities and by needing far less personnel to staff the correctional systems.

In answer to your last question, they would fucking die!
 
Lets not harp on your reading incomprehension. You understand, unless you reside in a barn, that the overcrowding situation with prisons, to include the construction of many new ones, is entirely due to drug crime incarcerations. We would save a ton by shutting down all of the excess facilities and by needing far less personnel to staff the correctional systems.

In answer to your last question, they would fucking die!

I would venture to say, you would not be "shutting down" many prisons, because you would still have junkies capping old ladies, breaking into homes, stealing cars, robbing liquor stores, to obtain the cash to support their habit. Particularly if you aren't going to offer them any help to rehabilitate. I also don't think you will "just let them die" because it won't be up to you, it will be up to society as a whole, and unless you find a way to eliminate liberals, these people will be cared for at our expense.

As I said in my opening, Libertarians are pinheads because they believe in a Utopian ideology. You demonstrate that beautifully! From your perspective, all our problems would be solved! We would save all of this money and just let people die! In REALITY, that wouldn't be the case, but you can't see that because you believe in a Utopian DREAM! Why? Because you're a fucking PINHEAD!
 
I would venture to say, you would not be "shutting down" many prisons, because you would still have junkies capping old ladies, breaking into homes, stealing cars, robbing liquor stores, to obtain the cash to support their habit. Particularly if you aren't going to offer them any help to rehabilitate. I also don't think you will "just let them die" because it won't be up to you, it will be up to society as a whole, and unless you find a way to eliminate liberals, these people will be cared for at our expense.

As I said in my opening, Libertarians are pinheads because they believe in a Utopian ideology. You demonstrate that beautifully! From your perspective, all our problems would be solved! We would save all of this money and just let people die! In REALITY, that wouldn't be the case, but you can't see that because you believe in a Utopian DREAM! Why? Because you're a fucking PINHEAD!

They are pinheads for believing in liberty?
 
Back
Top