Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › The Case for Nationalist Libertarianism
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 23 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) The Case for Nationalist Libertarianism (Read 2138 times)
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 7623
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: The Case for Nationalist Libertarianism
Reply #150 - Jul 31st, 2018 at 3:13pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jul 31st, 2018 at 9:09am:
Right, and the best way to put the citizens of any country first is to allow them to be free and protect their lives, liberty, property and rights.


And from a practical perspective, putting the nation and the citizen first is necessary to preserve those things in reality.

Otherwise, socialists flood in and vote for socialism.

Jeff wrote on Jul 31st, 2018 at 9:09am:
What do you think a Nationalist government does, besides start wars of conquest to give "The Nation" more territory and power? Or start trade wars that harm the people of the nation? Or impose extermination and breeding programs to make The Nation's People pure and strong?


The work programme in Nazi Germany Burnsy mentioned was a good example. The people who couldn't find jobs... the government found them some jobs.

China's population control keeps them from all starving.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 7644
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: The Case for Nationalist Libertarianism
Reply #151 - Jul 31st, 2018 at 4:24pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Jul 31st, 2018 at 3:13pm:
And from a practical perspective, putting the nation and the citizen first is necessary to preserve those things in reality.

Otherwise, socialists flood in and vote for socialism.

Your answer is better (and makes more sense) than mine.       Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 34253
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: The Case for Nationalist Libertarianism
Reply #152 - Jul 31st, 2018 at 4:55pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Jul 31st, 2018 at 3:13pm:
And from a practical perspective, putting the nation and the citizen first...
I would think that  a supergenius like you would know that two things can't both be first. Cheesy

Nationalism makes use of citizens to serve the state, because nationalism puts the nation first.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 7623
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: The Case for Nationalist Libertarianism
Reply #153 - Aug 1st, 2018 at 12:30am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jul 31st, 2018 at 4:55pm:
I would think that  a supergenius like you would know that two things can't both be first. Cheesy


Yes, they can. Both in computer language and in real life, two things can be equal priority. Do you know what a tie is? These meerkats do.



You fail at nitpicking, so I wish you'd give it up and have a conversation instead.

Jeff wrote on Jul 31st, 2018 at 4:55pm:
Nationalism makes use of citizens to serve the state, because nationalism puts the nation first.


You're confused about what nationalism is.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 34253
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: The Case for Nationalist Libertarianism
Reply #154 - Aug 1st, 2018 at 7:04am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Aug 1st, 2018 at 12:30am:
Yes, they can. Both in computer language and in real life, two things can be equal priority. Do you know what a tie is? These meerkats do.

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/b/two-funny-meercats-sharing-first-place-victory-po...

You fail at nitpicking, so I wish you'd give it up and have a conversation instead.


You're confused about what nationalism is.
I know what a tie is, thanks.

Perhaps you would explain what you think nationalism is.

I see it as government control aiming toward "national goals" set by the government (admittedly sometimes with "democratic" support) that requires people to do what the government tells them to do, or forbids them from doing things, so that the "national goals" can be met.

Trump's trade war is a perfect example. A "national goal" of reducing imports and increasing exports has been set by the President, with Congress complicit. This interferes with the trades (both buying and selling) that individuals and individual companies want to make, restricting individual liberty in the name of a "national goal" that has proven historically to be both unattainable and harmful when attempted.

LBJ's "War on Poverty" is another good example. The government set a "national goal" which required huge transfers of wealth and all sorts of restrictions on individual liberty to achieve a "national goal" of eliminating poverty. It has been a massively expensive and huge failure, unless you think replacing poverty by dependency is "success".

I hope that explains what I think nationalism is... And why it doesn't actually put the people first.

What's your idea?


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 7623
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: The Case for Nationalist Libertarianism
Reply #155 - Aug 1st, 2018 at 10:52pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Aug 1st, 2018 at 7:04am:
Perhaps you would explain what you think nationalism is.


I think Hitler can explain it better than I can.

There can be no such thing as state authority as an end in itself, for, if there were, every tyranny in this world would be unassailable and sacred.
If, by the instrument of governmental power, a nationality is led toward its destruction, then rebellion is not only the right of every member of such a people-it is his duty.

-Adolf Hitler

Government isn't gifted with obedience because that is what's right; that gift of obedience represents a sacred trust that the government is not leading its people to ruin.

It is because the government acts for the benefit of the people that it also must be protected by them and by itself. If it is a good government, their fates are intertwined. It's not only that a tie is possible - it is necessary.

Every People absolutely should have a government that protects them first.

Hitler was only wrong in that he thought it was okay for whites to do this. It obviously is not permissible on any level. Nationalism to protect a white population is evil incarnate and I admit that. We are, however, discussing the case for nationalism, which I would assume is an amoral discussion.

Jeff wrote on Aug 1st, 2018 at 7:04am:
I see it as government control aiming toward "national goals" set by the government (admittedly sometimes with "democratic" support) that requires people to do what the government tells them to do, or forbids them from doing things, so that the "national goals" can be met.

Trump's trade war is a perfect example. A "national goal" of reducing imports and increasing exports has been set by the President, with Congress complicit. This interferes with the trades (both buying and selling) that individuals and individual companies want to make, restricting individual liberty in the name of a "national goal" that has proven historically to be both unattainable and harmful when attempted.

LBJ's "War on Poverty" is another good example. The government set a "national goal" which required huge transfers of wealth and all sorts of restrictions on individual liberty to achieve a "national goal" of eliminating poverty. It has been a massively expensive and huge failure, unless you think replacing poverty by dependency is "success".

I hope that explains what I think nationalism is... And why it doesn't actually put the people first.


That's not a bad understanding of it at all. But if we look at it through Hitler's lens, some of those things actually do lead a People to ruin quite brazenly.

An example that doesn't would be punishing criminals. But it matches what you said in the first paragraph perfectly: A goal. Every society does this because everyone understands it benefits a population to work in an environment as crime-free as possible.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 34253
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: The Case for Nationalist Libertarianism
Reply #156 - Aug 2nd, 2018 at 8:37am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Aug 1st, 2018 at 10:52pm:
I think Hitler can explain it better than I can.

There can be no such thing as state authority as an end in itself, for, if there were, every tyranny in this world would be unassailable and sacred.
If, by the instrument of governmental power, a nationality is led toward its destruction, then rebellion is not only the right of every member of such a people-it is his duty.

-Adolf Hitler

Good choice lizard, the National Socialist Party and it's rule over Germany is a great example of a Nationalist government.

It perfectly exemplifies why "Nationalist Libertarianism" doesn't exist and won't ever.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 34253
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: The Case for Nationalist Libertarianism
Reply #157 - Aug 2nd, 2018 at 8:42am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Aug 1st, 2018 at 10:52pm:
An example that doesn't would be punishing criminals. But it matches what you said in the first paragraph perfectly: A goal. Every society does this because everyone understands it benefits a population to work in an environment as crime-free as possible.
Individual people in general have a desire not to be robbed or assaulted or murdered, so they create the means to arrest and punish criminals. It is, as you mention, a goal of a society that wants to become or remain civilized.

It is a goal that a Nationalist Government might or might not adopt.

A Nationalist Government is free to decide that letting criminals run free in society will perform a sort of evolutionary improvement of the people of the Nation, thus making the nation stronger for the benefit of the people.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 7623
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: The Case for Nationalist Libertarianism
Reply #158 - Aug 2nd, 2018 at 10:08pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Aug 2nd, 2018 at 8:37am:
Good choice lizard, the National Socialist Party and it's rule over Germany is a great example of a Nationalist government.

It perfectly exemplifies why "Nationalist Libertarianism" doesn't exist and won't ever.


Go back to where I explain at the very outset that every single one of you wants some exception to pure libertarian principle.

Some want taxes.

Some want cops instead of private security companies.

Some want Nationalism.

These are all anti-libertarian concepts. There are good arguments for why each of these things might be necessary, especially Nationalism.

Any country that is not Nationalist will simply have its population replaced until it is Nationalist.

Jeff wrote on Aug 2nd, 2018 at 8:42am:
Individual people in general have a desire not to be robbed or assaulted or murdered, so they create the means to arrest and punish criminals. It is, as you mention, a goal of a society that wants to become or remain civilized.

It is a goal that a Nationalist Government might or might not adopt.


A Nationalist government will always punish criminals. A libertarian government will decriminalise everything until they live in Somalia.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 7644
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: The Case for Nationalist Libertarianism
Reply #159 - Aug 2nd, 2018 at 10:48pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Aug 2nd, 2018 at 10:08pm:
Any country that is not Nationalist will simply have its population replaced until it is Nationalist.

In most cases, true.

The Opposition wrote on Aug 2nd, 2018 at 10:08pm:
A Nationalist government will always punish criminals. A libertarian government will decriminalise everything until they live in Somalia.

In an absolute libertarian government, yes.  But I think we've already stipulated there cannot be any "absolute" government.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 23
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › The Case for Nationalist Libertarianism
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy