Miles Dyson Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 (edited) A few years back, Ralph Nader and Ron Paul did interviews on Faux News and CNN calling for what they referred to as a "Libertarian-Progressive Alliance"; which was a proposed alliance of classical liberals and social democrats united in the aim of combating corporatism in American politics and economics. The two also found common ground in their advocacy of civil liberties and non-interventionism, as well as a shared disdain for the Federal Reserve; and later Nader published a book entitled Unstoppable: The Emerging Left-Right Alliance To Dismantle the Corporate State. This has recently created a small new wave of political libertarianism as well; referred to by it's few proponents as libertarian progressivism or social libertarianism (not to be confused with libertarian socialism). Although I am not personally involved in party politics whatsoever, I can't help thinking that this is exactly the type of coalition we need in the political arena presently. Finding common ground amongst these two groups might also act as a way of combining the better qualities of each, to create what MLK Jr. referred to as a "higher synthesis"; and introduce a wider audience to left and centre libertarian ideas. Thoughts? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTCr3dtDv1o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QVAUFnckTU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLdcB0ln9t8 Edited February 24, 2016 by Miles Dyson 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franz Von Dietrich Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 Anarchist in denial. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Dyson Posted February 24, 2016 Author Share Posted February 24, 2016 (edited) Anarchist in denial. Because I want to see likeminded groups, who happen to be in the majority, united against a common foe? I'm pretty open about being an anarchist, actually. I'd just rather find practical solutions to our problems instead of debating over which post-corporate-world ideology is the better choice. Classic libs, social dems, marxists and anarchists of all varieties, share a common distain for our current political and economic system. Its kind of a popular front idea, but its different from the marxist-leninist approach, in that, this would to include both the left and right sides of the American spectrum in the anti-corporate revolution. Really, its all left by French Revolution standards anyway. We all oppose oligarchy; so we're really no different than the left opposition, which stood against the Ancient Regime, and included classical liberals, social democrats, socialists and anarchists in the Estates-General. United against the Corporate Aristocracy! Edited February 24, 2016 by Miles Dyson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Fire Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 A few years back, Ralph Nader and Ron Paul did interviews on Faux News and CNN calling for what they referred to as a "Libertarian-Progressive Alliance"; which was a proposed alliance of classical liberals and social democrats united in the aim of combating corporatism in American politics and economics. The two also found common ground in their advocacy of civil liberties and non-interventionism, as well as a shared disdain for the Federal Reserve; and later Nader published a book entitled Unstoppable: The Emerging Left-Right Alliance To Dismantle the Corporate State. This has recently created a small new wave of political libertarianism as well; referred to by it's few proponents as libertarian progressivism or social libertarianism (not to be confused with libertarian socialism). Although I am not personally involved in party politics whatsoever, I can't help thinking that this is exactly the type of coalition we need in the political arena presently. Finding common ground amongst these two groups might also act as a way of combining the better qualities of each, to create what MLK Jr. referred to as a "higher synthesis"; and introduce a wider audience to left and centre libertarian ideas. Thoughts? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTCr3dtDv1o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QVAUFnckTU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLdcB0ln9t8 Libertarian Socialism for everyone! \o/ 1 Quote _________________________________________________________________ <Jroc> I heard \ is an anagram of cocaine<\> I can't be rearranged into a line, I already am a line. --Foxburo Wiki-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Dyson Posted February 25, 2016 Author Share Posted February 25, 2016 Libertarian Socialism for everyone! \o/ Indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redael Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 As a libertarian myself, I don't think the two groups could get along economically, while we agree on social issues, progressives are usually socialists. Amd libertian socialism doesn't exist, beacuse that goes from Libertian right wing economics and left wing socail, to both left wing. So Libertian socialists are just democrats. Quote Gary Johnson 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamadruu Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 A lot of the so-called "libertarians" today are basically the normal Republicans with a slightly greater lean towards hating all things government, but few of the tendencies towards social liberty that classical liberals would support. True Libertarians, however, could cooperate with Social Democrats (who don't really exist as a coherent force yet in America) on social policies and some economic policies. Unfortunately, social democrats and libertarians would be diametrically opposed on many economic issues, such as regulation and welfare. While there may be some cooperation on even those issues, such an alliance could be quite fragile. All depends on the specific ideology of the libertarians in question, really. Libertarianism isn't remotely monolithic any more, since the name of the ideology is so often misapplied in modern politics. Social Democrats, though, are pretty distinct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamadruu Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 As a libertarian myself, I don't think the two groups could get along economically, while we agree on social issues, progressives are usually socialists. Amd libertian socialism doesn't exist, beacuse that goes from Libertian right wing economics and left wing socail, to both left wing. So Libertian socialists are just democrats. Most progressives today - presuming that you mean the majority of the Democratic party - are more center/center-left economically - that is, they are neoliberal or only slightly "socialistic". Social Democracy has only recently started gaining steam within the party. Hell, one common criticism of Bernie Sanders among Hillary Clinton's supporters is that he's a "socialist". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Dyson Posted February 26, 2016 Author Share Posted February 26, 2016 (edited) As a libertarian myself, I don't think the two groups could get along economically, while we agree on social issues, progressives are usually socialists. Amd libertian socialism doesn't exist, beacuse that goes from Libertian right wing economics and left wing socail, to both left wing. So Libertian socialists are just democrats. Democrats and American progressives are not socialist. They support New Deal style social reform; not public ownership of, and democratic control over, the means of production. They are, at best, social democrats; not socialists. The term 'libertarian' was first used, in political context, by the French anarcho-communist Joseph Dejacque, in a letter written to the first self-proclaimed anarchist Pierre Proudhon in 1857; wherein Dejacque criticized Proudhon's individualism, and used 'libertarian' to distinguish himself from mutualists. It then became a synonym for social anarchism all throughout Europe, and even spread to the U.S., long before classical liberals adopted the term with the founding of the Libertarian Party in 1971. To early anarchists who popularized the term, libertarianism and socialism were inseparable. The terms 'left' and 'right' derive from the French Revolution; wherein those who supported the old aristocracy sat to the right of the Estates-General, while those who represented the republic (classical liberals, social democrats, socialists, and even some anarchists) sat to the left. So, technically speaking, just about every liberal-minded person is 'left' by French Revolution standards, including paleoconservatives. Edited February 26, 2016 by Miles Dyson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redael Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 I copy and pasted this for everyone who thinks bernie sanders isnt a socailsit, if you beilve berine sanders is a socail democrat and not a socailist, tell me he wouldnt like this to be how america is governed so·cial·ism ˈsÅSHəˌlizÉ™m/ noun a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. Quote Gary Johnson 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Avalanche Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 ...It then became a synonym for social anarchism all throughout Europe, and even spread to the U.S., long before classical liberals adopted the term with the founding of the Libertarian Party in 1971... Hayek applied the term Libertarian, as did Rand in explaining Rothbard, who also used the term in describing his socio-economic views. In many circles/writings throughout the late 19th-20th Century the word Libertarian virtually became synonymous with Anarchism, and we all know how many different Anarcho-Fill-In-The-Blanks there are in the Universe. Today most Big-L/Little l Libertarians I associate with are all virtually Voluntaryists/An-Caps. Classical Liberalism is almost never used except in social history lessons. Quote Beer. Damn Good Beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Fire Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 (edited) I copy and pasted this for everyone who thinks bernie sanders isnt a socailsit, if you beilve berine sanders is a socail democrat and not a socailist, tell me he wouldnt like this to be how america is governed so·cial·ism ˈsÅSHəˌlizÉ™m/ noun a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. Obama is a socialist. America remains capitalist. So what if Bernie is a socialist? As a libertarian myself, I don't think the two groups could get along economically, while we agree on social issues, progressives are usually socialists. Amd libertian socialism doesn't exist, beacuse that goes from Libertian right wing economics and left wing socail, to both left wing. So Libertian socialists are just democrats. I'm a libertarian socialist and this comment doesn't even make sense. Democrats are for large government, just like Republicans. They are the same party who's only disagreements tend to be minor social issues. Edited February 28, 2016 by Fox Fire Quote _________________________________________________________________ <Jroc> I heard \ is an anagram of cocaine<\> I can't be rearranged into a line, I already am a line. --Foxburo Wiki-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Quill Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Libertarian Socialism for everyone! \o/ Obama is a socialist. America remains capitalist. So what if Bernie is a socialist? I'm a libertarian socialist and this comment doesn't even make sense. Democrats are for large government, just like Republicans. They are the same party who's only disagreements tend to be minor social issues. I'm just going to quote these because I've run out of likes. Quote <&Partisan> EAT THE SHIT <blacklabel> lol @ ever caring about how much you matter in some dumbass nation simulation browser game. what a !@#$in pathetic waste of life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Quill Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 I copy and pasted this for everyone who thinks bernie sanders isnt a socailsit, if you beilve berine sanders is a socail democrat and not a socailist, tell me he wouldnt like this to be how america is governed so·cial·ism ˈsÅSHəˌlizÉ™m/ noun a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. My God, the grammar..... the spelling... I can't even... 1 Quote <&Partisan> EAT THE SHIT <blacklabel> lol @ ever caring about how much you matter in some dumbass nation simulation browser game. what a !@#$in pathetic waste of life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redael Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 My God, the grammar..... the spelling... I can't even... Mi grammr nd speelin r prfect 1 Quote Gary Johnson 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Dyson Posted February 29, 2016 Author Share Posted February 29, 2016 Classical Liberalism is almost never used except in social history lessons. Sometimes you gotta drop some history lessons on these fools that don't know the difference. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.