Debate Digest: Teacher-student friendships on Facebook, Law school, Balanced budget amendment, US debt ceiling deal.
Debate: Libertarianism
From Debatepedia
Revision as of 17:42, 16 May 2008 (edit) Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 17:43, 16 May 2008 (edit) Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs) Next diff → |
||
Line 82: | Line 82: | ||
*'''People can not always be trusted to make the right choices'''. With smaller government, it would be down to individuals to make the right choices. As some people do not make the right choices, this would result in a crises. | *'''People can not always be trusted to make the right choices'''. With smaller government, it would be down to individuals to make the right choices. As some people do not make the right choices, this would result in a crises. | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "NO" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"| | ||
+ | ===Would people unable to work survive in a libertarian society?=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | BCKINFO Many people have claimed that the government is the only way of helping people who can't work. In this section this is debated. BCKINFOEND | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |WRITE SUBQUESTION BETWEEN "=== ===" width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | ||
+ | |||
+ | ====Yes==== | ||
+ | *'''People will receive money from charities.''' If, for some reason, people are unable to work and they are not able to make money they would still survive as they would receive money from charities. | ||
+ | *'''People will receive money from families.''' If, for some reason, people are unable to work and they are not able to make money they would still survive as they would receive money from there families, who would clearly want them to survive. | ||
+ | |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "YES" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"| | ||
+ | ====No==== | ||
+ | *'''[[Argument: The disadvantaged would be unable to survive w/o government support| The disadvantaged would be unable to survive w/o government support]]''' Without receiving any government support, many disadvantaged would have no means of survival. Sometimes people who are unable to work may receive no income other than that from the government. If the income from the government is removed, they will receive no income. | ||
+ | |||
+ | *'''[[Argument: Libertarianism is self-centered, allowing the disadvantaged to suffer| Libertarianism is self-centered, allowing the disadvantaged to suffer]]'''. It is completely unethical to allow people to suffer because of some form of disability. Government is an important way of helping disabled people. | ||
|- | |- | ||
|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "NO" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"| | |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "NO" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"| | ||
Line 103: | Line 119: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | ||
- | ===Would people unable to work survive in a libertarian society?=== | ||
- | |||
- | BCKINFO Many people have claimed that the government is the only way of helping people who can't work. In this section this is debated. BCKINFOEND | ||
- | |- | ||
- | |WRITE SUBQUESTION BETWEEN "=== ===" width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | ||
- | |||
- | ====Yes==== | ||
- | *'''People will receive money from charities.''' If, for some reason, people are unable to work and they are not able to make money they would still survive as they would receive money from charities. | ||
- | *'''People will receive money from families.''' If, for some reason, people are unable to work and they are not able to make money they would still survive as they would receive money from there families, who would clearly want them to survive. | ||
- | |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "YES" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"| | ||
- | ====No==== | ||
- | *'''[[Argument: The disadvantaged would be unable to survive w/o government support| The disadvantaged would be unable to survive w/o government support]]''' Without receiving any government support, many disadvantaged would have no means of survival. Sometimes people who are unable to work may receive no income other than that from the government. If the income from the government is removed, they will receive no income. | ||
- | |||
- | *'''[[Argument: Libertarianism is self-centered, allowing the disadvantaged to suffer| Libertarianism is self-centered, allowing the disadvantaged to suffer]]'''. It is completely unethical to allow people to suffer because of some form of disability. Government is an important way of helping disabled people. | ||
- | |- | ||
- | |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "NO" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"| | ||
===Should all interaction with government be voluntary?=== | ===Should all interaction with government be voluntary?=== | ||
Revision as of 17:43, 16 May 2008
Is the libertarian principle of smaller government and more private property a good idea? |
This debate is asking whether the libertarian principle of smaller government and more private property is a good idea.
Background and Context of Debate:Libertarianism is a broad spectrum of political philosophies, each sharing the common overall priority of maximum limitation of government combined with optimum possible individual liberty. Its goals, though often varied in detail, prioritize freedom of speech and assembly, freedom of association, freedom to bear arms, freedom of and from religion, Press freedom, economic freedom, and freedom of ownership. It rejects the compulsions of socialism and communism so far as to uphold, at one end of the spectrum, private property, whether held on an individual or group basis. It promotes personal responsibility and self-organized charity, as opposed to welfare statism. There are, broadly speaking, two types of libertarian: rights theorists (also called libertarian moralists) and libertarian consequentialists. Rights theorists, which include noted deontologists, assert that all persons are the absolute owners of their lives, and should be free to do whatever they wish with their own bodies or property, provided they do not infringe on the rights of another to engage in that same freedom. They maintain that the initiation of force, defined by physical violence against another or non-physical acts such as fraud or threat, is a violation of that central principle; however, they hold that protective violence, such as self defense, does not constitute an initiation of force since they hold that such actions necessarily reflect an individual's reaction to a danger initiated by another individual. Many philosophers proclaiming this theory recognize the necessity of a limited role of government to protect individuals from any violation of their rights, and to prosecute those who initiate force against others. Some other rights theorists claim to oppose the existence of government altogether, perceiving taxation, among some other usual basic government actions, to be initiation of force (these include anarcho-capitalists). Consequentialist libertarians, on the other hand, do not speak against "initiation of force," but instead highlight the notion of a society that allows individuals to enjoy political and economic liberty. They believe these cornerstones set the foundation for human happiness and prosperity. Therefore, instead of adhering to the Right Theorist viewpoint, Consequentialists rather focus primarily on the belief that liberty is conducive to good consequences rather than being concerned whether provision of liberty includes or requires initiation of force. This particular branch is associated with Milton Friedman, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, and James M. Buchanan. This debate discusses the issue of Libertarianism. Some content for the introduction was retrieved from Wikipedia:Libertarianism, which allows reuse under the terms of the GFDL, which Debatepedia is licensed under. |
Property: Is the libertarian perspective on property appropriate? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Rights: Is the Libertarian perspective on individual rights appropriate? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Is the libertarian idea of smaller government a good idea? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Would people unable to work survive in a libertarian society? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Economics: Is Libertarianism economically beneficial? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Should all interaction with government be voluntary? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Does the Libertarian party follow the principles of Libertarianism? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Would crime increase in a Libertarian society? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Is the Libertarian viewpoint right wing? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Is the Libertarian viewpoint left wing? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Pro/con resources | |
Yes
|
No
|
See alsoExternal links |