Debate: Libertarianism

Is the libertarian principle of smaller government and more private property 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

• People should be able to own what they wish. People should not be restricted in owning the property they wish as it is not the governments right to decide what they wish to do as they are in a better position to help their own situation.

No

• Society must collectively own many form of property through government Benjamin Franklin - "All property, indeed, except the savage's temporary cabin, his bow, his matchcoat and other little Acquisitions absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, seems to me to be the creature of public Convention. Hence, the public has the rights of regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the quantity and uses of it. All the property that is necessary to a man is his natural Right, which none may justly deprive him of, but all Property superfluous to such Purposes is the property of the Public who, by their Laws have created it and who may, by other Laws dispose of it."[1]

• Libertarianism does not allow for essential public services (i.e. roads)

Rights: Is the Libertarian perspective on individual rights appropriate?

Yes

• People can be trusted to make the right choices. When people are given the choice of what they want to do, they are likely to choose the one that is best for themselves and society.

No

• Individuals must cede some rights to collective power in government l John Jay, FEDERALIST No. 2 - "Nothing is more certain than the indispensable necessity of government, and it is equally undeniable, that whenever and however it is instituted, the people must cede to it some of their natural rights in order to vest it with requisite powers."[2]

• Libertarianism is contradicted by the mere existence of vast bodies of law Nevada Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa (replying to county-rights advocates), 1993 - "There has been little or no mention of the vast body of law which contradicts your position. I think you owe it to the people whom you address to explain its existence."[3]

Is the libertarian idea of smaller government a good idea?

Yes

• People should be able to choose. By having government people are restricted in their freedom of choice as the government restricts what people are able to do. Having more private property will mean that the general public will not have to pay for property that they have never used.

No

• People need government to prevent them from making mistakes. The laws enacted by the government are there to protect people and prevent them from making mistakes. They are needed for a fully functioning society.
• 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.

Would people unable to work survive in a libertarian society?

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.

No

• 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.

• 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.

Economics: Is Libertarianism economically beneficial?

Yes

• Free-market economics are ideal forms of (non)governance

No

• Laissez faire capitalism is sub-optimal for society... David Shea - "I'm skeptical of claims based solely on logical deduction, especially in the social sciences. This is especially true in economics where many have pointed out the incredible premises that are required to show that laissez-faire achieves even a minimal sort of optimum."[4]

Should all interaction with government be voluntary?

Yes

• People should not be forced to interact with any organization on a non voluntary basis. Even when people do not want to interact with the government, they are currently forced to do so. By making things voluntary this would remove this problem.
• People can be trusted to make the right choices. When people are given the choice of whether they want to enroll in a system of government, they are likely to choose the one that is best for themselves and society, whether government or no government is a better choice.

No

• Making all government interaction voluntary would cause a huge increase in crime. All criminals would choose not to interact with government, and, as a result, no one is preventing them from committing crimes.
• People can not always be trusted to make the right choices. Without compulsory 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.

Does the Libertarian party follow the principles of Libertarianism?

Yes

• The Libertarian Party only exists to promote libertarianism. People joining the Libertarian Party only join because they want to promote libertarianism. As a result, the Libertarian party follows libertarian principles.

• All people joining the Libertarian party a required to confirm they are Libertarian. When you join the Libertarian, you a required to see that you believe in smaller government and the non initiation of force. These are key Libertarian principles.

No

• By being involved in government, the Libertarian Party has stopped being Libertarian. Libertarians do not promote any interaction with government. As a result, people fro the Libertarian Party, who interact with government, are not true Libertarians.

• Some Libertarian party members are not Libertarians. Some members of the Libertarian Party believe in government restrictions on issues like drugs and immigration. This stance is not the traditional Libertarian stance.

Would crime increase in a Libertarian society?

Yes

• People need government to prevent them from making mistakes. The laws enacted by the government are there to protect people and prevent them from making mistakes. They are needed for a society that is not overrun with crime.

No

• In a libertarian society people would feel more responsible for their actions. Due to the emphasis libertarians place on personal responsibility by Libertarians, people would feel guilty about committing crimes. As a result, less crimes would be commited

Is the Libertarian viewpoint right wing?

Yes

• Libertarianism promotes many right wing view points. Libertarians believe in several view points that are often considered right wing. For example, Libertarians believe in the relaxation of gun laws.

No

• Libertarians cooperate with many non right wing organizations. For example, Jim Babka, from Libertarian organization Downsize DC said they they have "had some very successful alliances with groups who would never describe themselves as conservative. "

Is the Libertarian viewpoint left wing?

Yes

• Libertarians cooperate with many left wing organizations. For example, Jim Babka, from Libertarian organization Downsize DC said they they have "had some very successful alliances with groups who would never describe themselves as conservative. "

No

• Libertarianism promotes many right wing view points, not just left wing points. Libertarians believe in several view points that are often considered right wing. For example, Libertarians believe in the relaxation of gun laws. This position is hardly ever taken by left wing politicians, and, as a result Libertarians can not be considered left wing.

Pro/con resources

Yes

• Brian Micklethwatt. "How to win the libertarian argument". Libertarian Alliance (UK). Retrieved May 15th, 2008]
• Glen Raphael. "A Non-Non-Libertarian FAQ: Responses to Mike Huben"
• Sam Wells. "What a Libertarian Is - and Is Not"

No

• Non-Libertarian FAQ
• "Why I am not a libertarian"
• Robert Locke. "Marxism of the Right". The American Conservative. March 14, 2005
• Hugh LaFollette. "Justice and Economic Distribution". John Arthur and William Shaw (eds). 1979, 194-206.
• "Why is libertarianism wrong?"
• Wikipedia: Criticism of Libertarianism
• Roderick T. Long1. "Libertarian Anarchism: Responses to Ten Objections"

See also

External links

• Libertarian Party home page
• Free State Project, a Libertarian organization
• Wikipedia article on Libertarianism