Quantcast

What Do You Call A Republican Who Wants To Smoke Pot? A Libertarian.

luvguins 2012/06/11 19:09:35
By Cagle Post's Michael Kindt:


As far as I can make out, Libertarians are just basically Republicans who are really for smaller government—no, like, REALLY—and who are unencumbered by the self-righteousness, love of telling others how to behave, and cosmic levels of hypocrisy found among the Religious Wrong. Libertarians talk a great game about personal liberty, about freedom, but really advocate an increased empowering of business and corporate interests at the expense of everything else.




The Libertarian Party is the third largest and fastest growing political party in the U.S. Its platform favors minimally, very minimally, regulated, laissez-faire markets, while tacking on an addendum of increased civil liberties.


What’s funny about this to me is that they don’t seem to realize just how much personal and private liberty would diminish if the corporate powers-that-be are allowed to run unchecked. Why, it would be just like things are now, only worse. Essentially, the state’s power and ability to serve as a regulatory and protective agency would be greatly reduced or even eliminated. In favor of what, though? Well, of business and corporate interests, of course. A vacuum is always filled.


Admittedly, this is the trajectory we’re on now, but why speed it up with a pretend philosophy of ‘liberty’?


Under Libertarianism, minimum wages would vanish and child labor would return. Instead of playing in the yard, little Tommy would be down at the factory earning a fair wage as determined entirely by the company he works for and without any input or support from anyone else. In other words, he would be earning a few nickels above slavery.


Protections for the environment would also vanish because, you know, they stand in the way of ‘freedom’. But what about me as an individual? What about my freedom to drink water that doesn’t poison me or breathe air that doesn’t sicken me? Too bad, so sad.


Businesses and corporations are already extremely powerful in the U.S. In fact, I would argue that at this point they rival the state itself. Increasing their power through radical deregulation will result in sure-fire corporate feudalism where the government is as toothless and symbolic as a Medieval king.


Don’t get me wrong. I do support many Libertarian ideas regarding personal freedom. If I want to smoke some pot, I should be able to. After all, it’s my home, lighter, lungs, and bong. The fact that marijuana is still illegal in this country is ridiculous. Everyone knows it, even you reading this. You just won’t admit it. The federal government flushes 7.7 billion dollars down the toilet every year battling the dreaded and quite pretty-to-look-at weed, resulting in unquestionable and utter failure. As an aside, you didn’t hear a word about that 7.7 billion dollars during the recent debt fiasco, did you? Nor did you hear about all of the subsidies given to the astronomically profitable oil industry by the federal government. Nope. All you heard was “How much money can we take away from the poor and needy without causing a riot?”


I even respect a lot of the Libertarians I know. They seem like honest Republicans, which is rare. They blessedly lack the empty god-talk while still doing everything in their power to force those in need to fend for themselves.


The reality of Libertarianism in America is that it is diametrically opposed liberty. It is the opposite of what it claims to be. It wants to remove the tyranny of the state, which is at least mitigated somewhat by the elective process, and give it over to private organizations who would then be completely unaccountable.


Libertarianism is simply anarchy for rich people—and rich people alone. Nothing more.

Read More: http://www.cagle.com/2011/08/what-do-you-call-a-re...

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • Pat 2012/06/11 19:33:06
    Pat
    +5
    I say, legalize pot. You will eliminate untold millions spent on trying to catch people using it and you'll be able to tax it for added income. Regulate it like we do liquor. It's no worse than alcohol.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • ayn.marx 2013/05/01 21:43:30
    ayn.marx
    +3
    Well, many libertarians are more than that...but many of the ones who do best at politics aren't.

    Mote generally, they tend to ignore the fact that if things went completely laissez-faire, the gross inequities of the current system, whether they're the result of the Market or of the State, would propagate forward---I doubt even Coates really believes that initial conditions don't matter....

    And given current power imbalances, if we try to eliminate State favoritism toward the rich and the poor, the corporations and the employees...guess who will still get their goodies, and who the shaft?
  • William 2012/06/13 05:44:07
    William
    What a warped perception of freedom. Libertarians advocate a society absent violence. Those who oppose libertarianism advocate violence on some level for some special group.

    All of the inequities that have been described above have been that of either government greed or corporatism--which has been in play as long as the Leviathan state, itself. Big government and big business go hand in hand. While Democrats vie for bigger government to oppose Wall Street, Wall Street uses the expanding power of bigger government to squeeze their competition out of the market with the regulations that were supposed to limit the power of big business.

    "Anarchy" is the same smear word Edmond Burke used to characterize libertarians (then called "liberals" or "radical-republicans") of the 18th century. But the very same principles of the Declaration of Independence are the ones that classical liberals (libertarians) still stand for today. Self-ownership and freedom of choice.

    I've seen the people that show up at LP conventions. They're self-employed and small, small business owners that are tired of jumping through hoops while their big competition waltzes through the bureaucracy like princes at a royal ball. They're mostly lower middle class business people and college students, with...

    What a warped perception of freedom. Libertarians advocate a society absent violence. Those who oppose libertarianism advocate violence on some level for some special group.

    All of the inequities that have been described above have been that of either government greed or corporatism--which has been in play as long as the Leviathan state, itself. Big government and big business go hand in hand. While Democrats vie for bigger government to oppose Wall Street, Wall Street uses the expanding power of bigger government to squeeze their competition out of the market with the regulations that were supposed to limit the power of big business.

    "Anarchy" is the same smear word Edmond Burke used to characterize libertarians (then called "liberals" or "radical-republicans") of the 18th century. But the very same principles of the Declaration of Independence are the ones that classical liberals (libertarians) still stand for today. Self-ownership and freedom of choice.

    I've seen the people that show up at LP conventions. They're self-employed and small, small business owners that are tired of jumping through hoops while their big competition waltzes through the bureaucracy like princes at a royal ball. They're mostly lower middle class business people and college students, with an occasional rich guy like Kurt Russel.

    If libertarians are so hot for big business, why doesn't the Libertarian party get the support of the Rand Corp, GE, Time/Warner, ADM and Microsoft like the Democrats and Republicans???
    (more)
  • aneed2know 2012/06/12 06:18:06
    aneed2know
    +1
    "Libertarianism is simply anarchy for rich people—and rich people alone. Nothing more."

    This is what i have been saying since i researched the Libertarian platform, i like the fact that they stand up for legalization, but the rest is just what was said in the last line.
  • Tinka123 2012/06/12 01:40:58
    Tinka123
    +2
    Libertarianism is so much more than a desire to smoke pot. I'm a Libertarian, I don't smoke pot. I don't want to force people into my ideology either. I just don't want them forcing me into theirs. Is that really too much to ask?
  • Matt 2012/06/12 01:30:04
    Matt
    +2
    Q: What do you call a Democrat who smokes marijuana ?

    A: A welfare recipient in a rapidly shrinking group of states.
  • aneed2know Matt 2012/06/12 06:19:04
    aneed2know
    +1
    really how so, i smoke and i am at work now, and when i get off work i will go home and change and start my second job. So where does the welfare come in?
  • Matt aneed2know 2012/06/12 08:52:35
    Matt
    You are fortunate to have job(s) that don't require random blood testing. Like any other intoxicant, there are people who know when to say "when" and there are abusers. I have personally seen some horrendous industrial accidents, caused by people who were under some kind of influence.

    Personally, I would be very careful about admitting to it in a public forum.
  • aneed2know Matt 2012/06/13 06:50:27
    aneed2know
    +1
    personally its my own business as to what i do when i am on my own time, my company does not control what i do. I hold down to jobs, i am college educated, my children are at to of the top Universities in this country, so yeah i say i turned out pretty good. In addition to this i know for a fact that my project manager drinks at least three Vodka Gimlets at lunch every day,and this is allowed. So you tell me why is his drug of choice any better than mine, especially since i only smoke on my days off?
  • Matt aneed2know 2012/06/13 15:23:27
    Matt
    One time, I was working with a man who was drinking on the job. We went together to fix an overhead crane. He ended up breaking six fingers and amputating two. Another time, I had to answer a repair call where an operator ran his locomotive off of its tracks and across a roadway. If any cars had been on the road, they would have been destroyed. The "smoke" was so thick in the cab that you could cut it with a knife.

    These two instances alone cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost production and medical bills. Had blood testing been in place, at that time, Those two people would have been immediately terminated. I know that now workman's comp. is considering dropping coverage, when safety rules are violated.

    At that company, blood testing is now standard procedure for all industrial accidents and for all people who miss 3 or more consecutive days of work.

    In either case, evidence of marijuana use would be in the bloodstream, long after its effects were gone. In some union companies, their medical insurance would pay for one "rehab". After that, the offender would be subject to frequent, random, testing.
  • apachehellfire65 2012/06/12 00:47:36
    apachehellfire65
    i would call him a republican that wants to smoke pot! how does that change anything?
  • ☠ Live Free Or Die ☠ 2012/06/11 21:08:56
    ☠ Live Free Or Die ☠
    +3
    What do you call an internet troll who doesn't know the first thing about Libertarian philosophy?

    Luvguins.
  • luvguins ☠ Live ... 2012/06/11 21:13:43
    luvguins
    +3
    Libertarianism = Social Darwinism. Keep insulting though. Using a users name in a reply is a violation of TOS.
  • ☠ Live ... luvguins 2012/06/11 21:19:59 (edited)
    ☠ Live Free Or Die ☠
    +3
    Just as I suspected; you don't know the first thing about libertarian philosophy. It's been proven time and time again that the private sector preforms services more efficiently than the public sector. Competition fosters low prices.
  • luvguins ☠ Live ... 2012/06/11 21:49:10
    luvguins
    +2
    Two privates? lol. The private sector is corrupt. You can see that with them running the prisons. They would loot anything given to them.
  • ☠ Live ... luvguins 2012/06/11 21:55:25
    ☠ Live Free Or Die ☠
    +1
    Mother of Christ, I made a typo! Call the Navy! -____-
    Maybe if the Federal Government didn't pay private companies to run prisons....
  • luvguins ☠ Live ... 2012/06/11 22:00:00
    luvguins
    +3
    The states like AZ are paying some of them.
  • ☠ Live ... luvguins 2012/06/12 03:31:29
    ☠ Live Free Or Die ☠
    Ah, so you admit that the government is at the root of the problem. They cannot efficiently run prisons, and so have private businesses do the job for them.
  • luvguins ☠ Live ... 2012/06/12 04:15:41 (edited)
    luvguins
    +2
    No, the private prisons bribe governors to give them the prisons to manage charging the state per head they keep. They cost the taxpayers more.
    http://montanacorruption.org/...
  • aneed2know ☠ Live ... 2012/06/12 06:21:40
    aneed2know
    and how would that work, if the government does not pay them who will, and what laws will they write to make their money. Will we have them working in private industry for the corporations? Now i know why you dont defend your ideology, you cant.
  • ☠ Live ... aneed2know 2012/06/12 19:16:57
    ☠ Live Free Or Die ☠
    Erm, actually, it was 3 in the morning, so....
  • Jakedog ☠ Live ... 2012/06/12 00:34:12
    Jakedog
    +1
    I think you have stepped into an argument here you can't win. First your statement is pretty bold with out any evidence,No links no data just a bold out of the blue statement.
    Second contracting to the lowest bidder is a sure way to run up costs, prolong the job and realize inferior products.
    Your statement to Privatize only makes greed people rich and in the long run hurts the taxpayer with shoddy and inferior products.
  • aneed2know Jakedog 2012/06/12 06:32:47
    aneed2know
    actually she did provide a link, you just did not read it.

  • aneed2know ☠ Live ... 2012/06/12 06:20:05
    aneed2know
    Tell her where she is wrong instead of insults, defend your ideology.
  • Næthan ... luvguins 2012/06/11 22:35:56
    Næthan Æterna
    +2
    I don't see how it is Social Darwinism. There'd be more emphasis on Civil Liberties than either Republican or Democrat. We'd have more freedom of choice as well as more equality. It's Government that is corrupt. Government decides how to regulate business and business gives Government money to turn the other cheek, we need to end Gov and Business relationships if we want to have less corruption; what lies at the heart of this abusive relationship? Why, it' the Federal Reserve.
  • luvguins Næthan ... 2012/06/11 22:49:51
    luvguins
    +3
    If you give all to private corporations or privatize everything then the elderly, disabled, and working poor suffer. Severe libertarians like the Koch brothers wish that.
  • aneed2know ☠ Live ... 2012/06/12 06:19:35
    aneed2know
    Cant refute what the blogger said so just insult is that it?
  • PEEPL 2012/06/11 21:03:13 (edited)
    PEEPL
    +2
    That is the dumbest thing that I have heard this week. No proof statements may work on the simple minded,. but not on educated people. Libertarians want an end to the drug war because the want an end to monetary waste and excess and failed social systems. Ask a junkie on the street smoking drugs what their political and governmental position on drug use is,. see if they give a businessman's response..

    smoking drugs high
  • luvguins PEEPL 2012/06/11 21:09:06
    luvguins
    +3
    No, they want to give it to cigarette corporations losing nicotine smoking.
  • PEEPL luvguins 2012/06/11 21:31:54
    PEEPL
    +2
    If you understand what Libertarian actually is in the least little bit then,. simply put,.. NO.
  • luvguins PEEPL 2012/06/11 21:50:44
    luvguins
    +3
    They are Ayn Rand social Darwins.
  • PEEPL luvguins 2012/06/11 21:59:48
    PEEPL
    +2
    Your Biased. Your religious Freudian Slip is showing.
    popes gown
  • luvguins PEEPL 2012/06/11 22:04:15
    luvguins
    +3
    Sorry, not religious.
    You fail
  • PEEPL luvguins 2012/06/11 22:12:23
    PEEPL
    +1
    then what is your problem with Darwinism, be it Evolutionary Darwinism or Social Darwinism ?
  • luvguins PEEPL 2012/06/11 22:22:07
    luvguins
    +3
    Survival of the fittest is not an American value.
  • PEEPL luvguins 2012/06/11 22:40:34 (edited)
    PEEPL
    +2
    Survival of the fittest means survival of the strongest. A sense of self, jealousy, respect, a sense of belonging and what belongs to you all proceed social evolution in primates that leads to society.
    I don't know what cards your hiding or the actual "Real" reason that you hate Libertarians. And you should hate them more honestly and intelligently.
  • luvguins PEEPL 2012/06/11 22:51:57
    luvguins
    +4
    Severe libertarians like the Koch brothers want all in the hands of corrupt private corporations like they are. Those would further loot the country.
  • trentin... luvguins 2012/06/12 03:06:10
    trentinafur
    +1
    Loot and pollute. The Koch's are among the country's biggest polluters.

    I'm not sure Darwinism is even the right term. More like dog-eat-dog - with the limits of corruption and ethical behavior getting tested every day.
  • luvguins trentin... 2012/06/12 03:13:54
    luvguins
    +3
    Tested and violated daily by the now extreme GOP.
  • aneed2know luvguins 2012/06/12 06:36:20
    aneed2know
    +1
    i wonder if Peel actually agrees with that statement " Survival of the fittest means survival of the strongest."

    I wonder if he really would want a country where only the strong survives? I really dont think he wants that, or anyone else. In fact i have not seen any refute what the blogger has said about Libertarian-ism, without using that tired old line of Civil Liberties, at least i have not seen it yet. I will keep looking.
  • luvguins aneed2know 2012/06/13 02:43:44
    luvguins
    +1
    More for the rich who are stronger with money.

News & Politics

2013/05/21 09:31:58

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals