Dear Liberal, here's why I'm so hostile to you

Debate opinion topics of original content.

Re: Dear Liberal, here's why I'm so hostile to you

Postby Dylan » Mon Feb 01, 2016 1:19 pm

phosphide wrote:
exploited wrote:I also don't agree that it is "axiomatic" that more government equals less liberty. Government is a tool, and sometimes that means it does awful work, but other times it means it does great work...

Of course it's axiomatic. You have to give up liberty when you give power to a government/social compact, even if the benefit of said power is greater than the cost of what you are giving up. Seesaw effect.

Government is also not a tool. Tools have utility. If you break down the powers that govern human relationships as beneficial, useful, or profitable then you are ignoring liberty entirely.

No. You have to give up a certain degree of liberty, but that doesn't mean you don't get more "liberty" in return for these original powers you grant to the government. So ex's statement (more government does not inherently mean less liberty) is quite accurate.
Image
User avatar
Dylan
Vice President
 
Posts: 10741
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 1:34 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 1038 times
Been thanked: 916 times
Political Leaning: Middle of the Road

Re: Dear Liberal, here's why I'm so hostile to you

Postby exploited » Mon Feb 01, 2016 1:45 pm

I also want to say that I think there is a vast gulf between "liberty" as an ideological term, and "liberty" as in a condition of being that actually exists in the real world, has an impact on your behaviour, etc.

For instance, I could live in some sort of libertarian autocracy, where decisions are made by land-owners, and people have only certain negative rights, and no positive rights. I would have more "ideological" liberty, in that I could contract freely, I could do whatever I wanted to the land I have legal title to, etc. But in terms of actual, real-life liberty, such a system would most certainly result in less liberty. You would be more free in one sense (you can do certain things otherwise not possible in a social democracy), but drastically less free in another sense (the average person would absolutely struggle to maintain a good quality of life, as wealth and power would be concentrated into big landowners, the legal system would be privatized, etc).

All of which points to the idea that more government = less liberty is not axiomatic, but is instead an ideological argument that attempts to ignore the externalizations of a particular ideology.
User avatar
exploited
Vice President
 
Posts: 21134
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:32 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 2242 times
Been thanked: 1707 times

Re: Dear Liberal, here's why I'm so hostile to you

Postby phosphide » Mon Feb 01, 2016 8:26 pm

Dylan wrote:No. You have to give up a certain degree of liberty, but that doesn't mean you don't get more "liberty" in return for these original powers you grant to the government. So ex's statement (more government does not inherently mean less liberty) is quite accurate.

That doesn't make sense. You can't give up liberty to get liberty. If you are getting liberty in return, it means you didn't have it in the first place. There are benefits to giving up certain liberties, such as security but that's not a liberty.
We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory will yet swell the chorus when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.
- Abraham Lincoln
phosphide
Senator
 
Posts: 1359
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:37 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 60 times
Political Leaning: Libertarian

Re: Dear Liberal, here's why I'm so hostile to you

Postby fstarcstar » Mon Feb 01, 2016 8:32 pm

Dylan wrote:
phosphide wrote:
exploited wrote:I also don't agree that it is "axiomatic" that more government equals less liberty. Government is a tool, and sometimes that means it does awful work, but other times it means it does great work...

Of course it's axiomatic. You have to give up liberty when you give power to a government/social compact, even if the benefit of said power is greater than the cost of what you are giving up. Seesaw effect.

Government is also not a tool. Tools have utility. If you break down the powers that govern human relationships as beneficial, useful, or profitable then you are ignoring liberty entirely.

No. You have to give up a certain degree of liberty, but that doesn't mean you don't get more "liberty" in return for these original powers you grant to the government. So ex's statement (more government does not inherently mean less liberty) is quite accurate.



"The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom. For in all the states of created beings capable of law, where there is no law, there is no freedom."

-John Locke
Image

These users thanked the author fstarcstar for the post:
Dylan
User avatar
fstarcstar
Governor
 
Posts: 2453
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 4:47 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 147 times

Re: Dear Liberal, here's why I'm so hostile to you

Postby exploited » Mon Feb 01, 2016 8:41 pm

fstarcstar wrote:
Dylan wrote:
phosphide wrote:
exploited wrote:I also don't agree that it is "axiomatic" that more government equals less liberty. Government is a tool, and sometimes that means it does awful work, but other times it means it does great work...

Of course it's axiomatic. You have to give up liberty when you give power to a government/social compact, even if the benefit of said power is greater than the cost of what you are giving up. Seesaw effect.

Government is also not a tool. Tools have utility. If you break down the powers that govern human relationships as beneficial, useful, or profitable then you are ignoring liberty entirely.

No. You have to give up a certain degree of liberty, but that doesn't mean you don't get more "liberty" in return for these original powers you grant to the government. So ex's statement (more government does not inherently mean less liberty) is quite accurate.



"The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom. For in all the states of created beings capable of law, where there is no law, there is no freedom."

-John Locke


He was a smart man a couple centuries ago.
User avatar
exploited
Vice President
 
Posts: 21134
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:32 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 2242 times
Been thanked: 1707 times

Re: Dear Liberal, here's why I'm so hostile to you

Postby Dylan » Mon Feb 01, 2016 8:59 pm

fstarcstar wrote:
Dylan wrote:
phosphide wrote:
exploited wrote:I also don't agree that it is "axiomatic" that more government equals less liberty. Government is a tool, and sometimes that means it does awful work, but other times it means it does great work...

Of course it's axiomatic. You have to give up liberty when you give power to a government/social compact, even if the benefit of said power is greater than the cost of what you are giving up. Seesaw effect.

Government is also not a tool. Tools have utility. If you break down the powers that govern human relationships as beneficial, useful, or profitable then you are ignoring liberty entirely.

No. You have to give up a certain degree of liberty, but that doesn't mean you don't get more "liberty" in return for these original powers you grant to the government. So ex's statement (more government does not inherently mean less liberty) is quite accurate.



"The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom. For in all the states of created beings capable of law, where there is no law, there is no freedom."

-John Locke

My thoughts exactly.
Image
User avatar
Dylan
Vice President
 
Posts: 10741
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 1:34 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 1038 times
Been thanked: 916 times
Political Leaning: Middle of the Road

Re: Dear Liberal, here's why I'm so hostile to you

Postby Dylan » Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:00 pm

phosphide wrote:
Dylan wrote:No. You have to give up a certain degree of liberty, but that doesn't mean you don't get more "liberty" in return for these original powers you grant to the government. So ex's statement (more government does not inherently mean less liberty) is quite accurate.

That doesn't make sense. You can't give up liberty to get liberty. If you are getting liberty in return, it means you didn't have it in the first place. There are benefits to giving up certain liberties, such as security but that's not a liberty.

Depends. It gives you the space and freedom in which to live your life largely unmolested. That's a liberty I would trade for many, many other rights.

You absolutely can give up liberty to get liberty. It's an investment on a better future. Just like you can give up money to get more money.
Image
User avatar
Dylan
Vice President
 
Posts: 10741
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 1:34 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 1038 times
Been thanked: 916 times
Political Leaning: Middle of the Road

Re: Dear Liberal, here's why I'm so hostile to you

Postby phosphide » Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:52 pm

Dylan wrote:Depends. It gives you the space and freedom in which to live your life largely unmolested. That's a liberty I would trade for many, many other rights.

You absolutely can give up liberty to get liberty. It's an investment on a better future. Just like you can give up money to get more money.

But you are not getting rights/liberties, you are getting security. There is a fundamental difference between the two.

That said, yes I agree with you that I too would give up certain liberties for security. Which is the point of why I mentioned the seesaw effect earlier. It's a constant struggle between which liberties we forfeit and those we don't. If we forfeit too much, it's tyranny. If we forfeit too little, it's also tyranny.
We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory will yet swell the chorus when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.
- Abraham Lincoln
phosphide
Senator
 
Posts: 1359
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:37 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 60 times
Political Leaning: Libertarian

Previous

Return to The Soapbox

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest