slug.com slug.com

5 15

Note the last sentence. Libertarian excesses weakens the moral fiber of any society, and there's no going around it.

eschatologyguy 9 Dec 27
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

5 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

Often the line between libertarian and libertine is thin to the point of non-existence. It is only a moral and ethical people who can survive freedom to do whatever they desire, because they desire what is good for their community and wholesome for themselves. This is why the enemy of our freedom is adamant that we eradicate faith from the public life, because it is through faith that we obtain morals and ethics.

Right, thus the need to really focus on education and what is being taught. Also, in the context of the bigger classroom of society, where, for example, historical revisionism that maligns the nation should not be given a pass. The "freedom" to burn the flag is not freedom but the first step to sedition. These "freedoms" are actually license to insult the American people and a slap in all your faces.
Both acts deserve punitive action.

1

You are confusing “liberalism”, “libertarianism” and what we broadly call “leftism.
They are all different things.
There is a big difference between “classical liberalism” of the the early 20th century and liberalism today.
Libertarianism is not necessarily “left” at all.
And “leftism” and “left” is now up to everyone’s own interpretation.

I'm not confusing one for the other. Actually Liberalism and Libertarianism are so similarly defined that they're virtually fraternal twins. What I'm opining is that the current too open an atmosphere is, well, opening opportunities for the Left. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight for your right to say it" is what the Marxists in academia are banking on to allow them to brainwash your youth. Everybody knows what SPLC really does, yet are being allowed to operate anyway.

1

The left like to exploit any 'weaknesses' or 'injustices', and make the rift grow wider while proclaiming that they are just trying to help. They exploit good morals and good intent, inverting it to actually have the opposite of the stated outcome. Remember, the goal of marxism is the absolute destruction and over throw of ALL societal norms, right down to core human relations. A good example is how they claim to champion women's rights to obtain gender equality, whilst simultaneously pitting the sexes against each other in a perverse power struggle. And how did Marx want women to end up? As an object anyone could rent and share, with no connection to her children. It's all in their manifesto.

The Left has figured liberal democracies out. They thrive because they are able to.

1

Respectfully, the only reference I could find to this quote is from the IDW community, where you yourself made it. Is this your opinion or are you citing someone else?

I also make my own, albeit crude, memes.

3

Aren't you confusing libaciousness with libertarian?

The only "excesses" that can exist philosophically in Libertarianism, is from the perspective of UNLIMITED government.

Limited government, as in Constitutional government, was actually inspired by Libertarianism, and when that proved too unworkable in the Articles of Confederation, a limited amount of government power was restored to the Federal government.

The "excesses" since then have been accrued by the government under the Democrats, not the people.

Wouldn't libaciousness be part of the spectrum of libertarianism? Leftism would not flourish as well in countries like Singapore as it is doing in yours and mine.

I'm sure it's not a coincidence that most hedonists are anarchists.

@eschatologyguy Respectfully no. Libertarians recognize both rights and responsibilities on an individual level, while calling for limited government in the sense that government follow its purpose—to protect and defend those rights—and not wander away from that purpose. Licentiousness seeks only to abolish restraint—even self-restraint—which is not the same as protecting and defending individual rights. You can see the difference when libertarians speak of the non-aggression principle. Your rights end where another’s begin.

@GaryWitt you know what they say about the proof of the pudding, and, quite frankly, it's not looking too "appetising" at this point in time. I'll give you a hint: Marxists in academia have been wreaking havoc on American society for decades. Don't parents and their children have rights too? Yet they (the Marxists) are left alone to prosper and do more harm. How the American Bill of Rights is being interpreted today needs serious review.

@rightalign Agree. But not all hedonists are equal. Some are more hedonistic than others, and the "others" have grown quite respectable, too. If it weren't for Trump at the helm, Epstein would still be alive and a free man.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:165990
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.