Father Heathen
Veteran Member
So, in what way are the Libertarians authoritarian?
Umm.. they're not?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
So, in what way are the Libertarians authoritarian?
Well....we do have our own political party.
A reason that small "l" libertarians might prefer Republicans is that they're less authoritarian economically, & that the Dems
are more authoritarian socially than they care to admit, eg, speech regulation, pro-military draft, pro-foreign adventurism.
But I can only speculate, since I've no desire to change either party from within. Dems are also less libertarian-friendly....
...their "big tent" ain't that big.
I remember back when the 2 mid-east wars of ours started, & the calls by Dems for the draft were based upon fairness to groups.Wait, could you give a source for democrats supporting a military draft?
Your question suggests that I must have been unclear.So, in what way are the Libertarians authoritarian?
I remember back when the 2 mid-east wars of ours started, & the calls by Dems for the draft were based upon fairness to groups.
I heard lefty talk show guests & saw editorials which were pro-draft....they claimed that more poor & minorities enlisted, so white
& rich guys should be forced to make the military look more diverse. (Women were still too dainty to draft though.) Charles Rangel
was one of'm. Now it's obvious that not all Dems favor a draft, & even though the Pubs ended it (Nixon), not all Pubs oppose the draft.
My point is that Dems aren't as socially liberal as they pretend.
In the USA, it's generally recognized that the Dems are more socially liberal than the Pubs.I don't think the Dems do pretend to be socially liberal. Didn't seem that way from up in gay marrying, universal health care enjoying Canada anyway.
In the USA, it's generally recognized that the Dems are more socially liberal than the Pubs.
But I just don't find them socially liberal enuf for me.
You're becoming increasingly inscrutable.Maybe, in the sense that bacon is less fattening than donuts...
You're becoming increasingly inscrutable.
Have you had no wine yet this morning?
I suggest a little hair of the dog.
I'm pretty happy with it. Although, really, we Canadians tend to envy the Scandinavians, on account of their free university educations. Maybe people tend to want a system that's just a little more socialist than the one they already have, but nothing too "extreme".
Harumph! I'm unimpressed. Univ of Mich spent a quarter of a billion dollars just in the latest renovation....my school built a huge football stadium (I think it was 70 million dollars worth). It was insanse...
Harumph! I'm unimpressed. Univ of Mich spent a quarter of a billion dollars just in the latest renovation
of its stadium....for perhaps a dozen games a year. The scoreboards alone were $10,000,000 each.
I really question whether Canuckistan is more socialist than the US these days.Well we're mroe socialist than you guys...so it's govt subsidized!
I think free education is important. But I think free dental is more important. I would rather the govt spend less on subsidizing education and more on dental and optometry, necessities for health. Especially dental!
Many universities in Canada are cash cows which act sort of like corporations, spending money on useless things. For example when I went to undergrad and my major was in science, I minored in English. Every single semester in every single english class, the profs would complain about how the school was not funding the arts enough and the school would state that it was low on funds. And yet my school built a huge football stadium (I think it was 70 million dollars worth). It was insanse, I had put my money into a school which brought me a huge stadium which I would never use, rather than invest in a program whose classes I attended. :thud:
I also feel that the scandanavian countries are too socialist. Free markets and capitalism are excellent in moderation, and Canada combines the two systems pretty well.
Why do schools place more importance on something as meaningless as sports than they do actual education and development? For physical fitness, just have the little turds do some sit ups, push ups, and jumping jacks and then get them right back into the classrooms to learn and study something useful.
This stadium had nothing to even do with physical fitness, it was basically there for our schools football team, which was mediocre at best.
But isn't that how they justify sports program in schools? I don't see how chasing balls around helps prepare them for the world.