MY SUBJURIES  -  HOME  -  Hot or Not  -  Rate Your Games  -  Funny Or Not  -  Panjury's Number One News Source  -  Moral Compass  -  Movie Review  -  Overwatch Fan Review  -  Smartest people on earth.  -  Love Of Food  -  NBA Greatest of All Time  - 
More

Libertarianism

"hypocrites"

58

Overlooked

by 10 Jurors

Libertarianism is a classification of political philosophies that uphold liberty as their principal focus and objective. They seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, emphasizing political freedom, voluntary association and the primacy of individual judgment. While libertarians share a skepticism of authority, they diverge on the scope of their opposition to existing political and economic systems. Various schools of libertarian thought offer a range of views regarding the legitimate functions of state and private power, often calling to restrict or even to wholly dissolve pervasive social institutions. Rather than embodying a singular, rigid systematic theory or ideology, libertarianism has been applied as an umbrella term to a wide range of sometimes discordant political ideas through modern history.

Although some present-day libertarians advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights, such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources, others, notably libertarian socialists, seek to abolish capitalism and private ownership of the means of production in favor of their common or cooperative ownership and management. While minarchists believe a limited centralized government is necessary to protect individuals and their property from certain transgressions, anarchists propose to completely eliminate the state as an illegitimate political system.

The term libertarianism originally referred to a philosophical belief in free will but later became associated with anti-state socialism and Enlightenment-influenced political movements critical of institutional authority believed to serve forms of social domination and injustice. While it has generally retained its earlier political usage as a synonym for either social or individualist anarchism through much of the world, in the United States it has since come to describe pro-capitalist economic liberalism more so than radical, anti-capitalist egalitarianism. In the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, libertarianism is defined as the moral view that agents initially fully own themselves and have certain moral powers to acquire property rights in external things. As individualist opponents of social liberalism embraced the label and distanced themselves from the word liberal, American writers, political parties and think tanks adopted the word libertarian to describe advocacy of capitalist free market economics and a night-watchman state.

Slide me!

150 characters remaining.

(?)
OR

 

img Mark Henry posted a review

Libertarians trying to say that Hillary should've gone to prison for having classified information on an unsecured private server but also believe that Chelsea Manning is a hero for releasing 700,000 classified documents intentionally.

15 hours ago
img

img Ian Da Silva posted a review

While all a leftist has to do is put faith in politicians to centrally plan society and confiscate wealth from others.

1 week ago
img

img Mark Henry posted a review

I mean Milo ain't perfect but..... cmon people

on February 20, 2017

Je$$e Radin Poorly written and wrong.

img

img Ian Da Silva posted a review

The person on the left is the one who supports tyranny. The helicopter is just acting defensively when threatened with violence. (satire)

2 weeks ago
img

img Mark Henry posted a review

The two main arguments for having an open immigration policy are generally the following: it's healthy for the free market/consumers to have access to a wide variety of labour, especially when it's cheaper. The other being that people have a natural right to move to where they feel necessary.

I understand and agree with both of these concepts.

However in our private lives, we all have standards of who is welcome onto our property. This concept can also apply to a society. There is nothing wrong with having standards of who is welcome.

Libertarians and their party were supportive in wanting the U.S. and E.U to welcome in potentially unlimited amounts of refugees/migrants from the Middle East. Even despite hostile terror groups using this to carry out gruesome terrorist attacks in revenge for the destabilization of their homeland. And despite the fact that Islam has a hard time assimilating into western culture.

On top of this, Libertarians advocate for potentially unlimited amounts of people to migrate into a society while a massive wellfare state is in place. This seems counter-intuitive and even self-destructive.

Libertarians choosing not to compromise and be practical with immigration in our political reality hurt them in 2016. They should have put more emphasis on eliminating the welfare state instead of open-immigration.

on April 19, 2017
img

img Mark Henry posted a review

It's no wonder few people identify as such when any deviation from the 'non-aggression principle' or Austrian economics gets someone derided as "not a real libertarian."

Lots of would-be libertarians just don't want to deal with, or be associated with, the purist nonsense.

on April 14, 2017
img

img Sid Poduval posted a review

The best strategy right now is to work on helping a new generation of thinkers grow up resisting more government overreach. We can't talk about shrinking the government until it stops growing, and eliminating it might be centuries away or even impossible.

But principles are guiding lights, not necessarily achievable. We strive for a better world, and that's what matters.

on March 21, 2017
img

img Mark Henry posted a review

I really wish the libertarians freaking out that Milo Yiannopoulos will be speaking at CPAC could spend as much time figuring out how to run a Presidential candidate capable of garnering >1% of the vote.

on February 20, 2017
img

img Sohail Ahmed posted a review

The White House has riled the country's civil libertarian wing after President Trump enthusiastically voiced support for a controversial law enforcement tool that allows an individual’s property or assets to be seized without a guilty verdict. 

The president weighed in on what's known as "civil asset forfeiture" during an Oval Office meeting last week with sheriffs. The president, who ran on a law-and-order message, said he shared their desire to strengthen the practice and even said he would “destroy” the career of a Texas politician trying to end it.

The comments revived tensions with libertarians who have been fighting the practice under both Democratic and Republican administrations. Already piqued by the selection of former Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, a vocal supporter of asset forfeiture, to lead the Justice Department, the Libertarian Party itself condemned the comments. 

“It was really disappointing to hear those words. He campaigned on the idea of helping people who are on the low end of the economic spectrum and this [law] disproportionately affects minorities and those who do not have the means to hire an attorney,” Libertarian National Committee Chair Nicholas Sarwark told Fox News. 

Sarwark called the practice "immoral," adding that it is simply “government theft of individual property that flips the nation’s legal system on its head.”

While laws differ across the country, most states allow law enforcement to seize an individual’s assets or property on the suspicion they have been involved in criminal activity. Even if a person is found to be not guilty, some jurisdictions allow the government to keep their property.  

Sheriff John Aubrey of Louisville, Ky., said he was heartened by his meeting with Trump because he, unlike the last administration, will give them a "fair hearing" on asset forfeiture.

He also believes there is a misconception that police just take property but stressed that they cannot do so before getting a court order.

Trump signaled he would fight reform efforts in Congress, saying politicians could “get beat up really badly by the voters” if they pursue laws to limit police authority.

The comments could signal an abrupt halt to efforts to curb the practice under the Obama administration, which also had faced heavy criticism from civil libertarians and criminal justice reform advocates.

Brittany Hunter of the free-market Foundation for Economic Education wrote that the president’s “egregious comments” effectively destroy “any hope that his administration will be better on this issue than President Obama. In fact, the situation may very well become worse.”

According to the Institute for Justice, a civil liberties law firm, the Department of Justice’s Assets Forfeiture Fund generated $93.7 million in revenue in 1986. By 2014, the annual figure had reached $4.5 billion -- a 4,667 percent increase. The practice surged for years under the Obama administration. 

While critics believe the policy creates a profit incentive for law enforcement, police organizations say it is an important tool and charges of abuse have been blown out of proportion.

“There are those who see an incident of one and want to apply the rule of many, but we have found the annual number of incidents [of abuse] is miniscule,” Jonathan Thompson of the National Sheriffs Association told Fox News.

Thompson said the issue was addressed in a conversation with Sessions, who views it as a priority, and he believes the Trump administration will be more supportive than the Obama administration in lifting “the burden on local law enforcement.”

He added that law enforcement are not opposed to reforms and that he plans to keep his focus on increasing independent judicial review and transparency.

Candidates running on the Libertarian ticket in the midterm elections are likely to make Trump’s record on criminal justice reform and the Sessions selection an issue, in a bid to peel off voters from across the political spectrum.

“Our candidates will make [asset forfeiture] an issue for Republicans and Democrats on the state and federal level in 2018. We will make them answer to voters on these issues,” Sarwark warned.

Many of the states key to Trump’s victory have passed reforms.

Last year, Ohio passed a law that prohibits taking assets valued at less than $15,000 without a criminal conviction. Other states also passed differing degrees of reform, including New Hampshire, Florida, Montana, Nebraska, Minnesota, Maryland and New Mexico.

Largely an uncontroversial issue for decades, the government’s war on drugs in the 1980s led to its rapid expansion, but media coverage of abuses has led to a public blowback.

A 2015 report by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), found that of those Philadelphia residents who had their assets taken, nearly one-third were never convicted of a crime and that almost 60 percent of cash seizures were for amounts less than $250. 

“Civil asset forfeiture reform is an area where you cannot ignore the public demand,” said Kanya Bennett, legislative counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union.

on February 15, 2017
img
Show more

Want more opinions on Libertarianism? Request a verdict!

You can optionally ask questions in your request for the community to answer.
This entry currently has: 0 request.

 

Rating Trend

 
 

You may also be interested in

Connected Subjects

Tags

Add tags

Libertarianism

hypocrites
Book rating: 58.1 out of 100 with 10 ratings