Shoutbox

Leave a comment. Log in to Last.fm or sign up (it’s free).
  • Tesla007

    Read Rothbard!

    June 2014
  • LegoLibertarian

    Just take it in stride. It's more important to convey principles and pro-liberty arguments versus trying to feel comfortable with a label, especially covering the anti-IP view here where it's most relevant. If you advocate libertarian philosophy, you might call yourself an ancap or a voluntaryist, but you're already there. If you're waking up to liberty it's fine, but get ready to have your premises challenged! :)

    February 2014
  • Siberiandreamer

    The word doesn't just appeal to your principles. Just because it works with a lot of true capitalist types, doesn't mean they aren't 'real' libertarians. Also, I was under the assumption most right libertarians were also against IP. There's a lot of misunderstanding from both sides, really.

    January 2014
  • Epigrammed

    Myself, I'm kind of torn on whether we should try to take back the libertarian label from these ridiculous pro-capitalists or just let it go. It's already pretty damn far gone.

    November 2013
  • LegoLibertarian

    A good number of libertarians are likely not offended by the word capitalism as it holds a different meaning for them, even if they prefer not to use it. I recognize that politicians butcher and twist language and the left has a negative reaction to 'capitalism'. I can more easily make my point with specific Austrian Economic arguments, OR I can go directly to voluntaryism to encompass all freedom of choice. Still, I find value in calling myself a libertarian even if I'm the post-anarchist variety.

    May 2013
  • LegoLibertarian

    You're not the first person to make a public statement about leaving the group because of a perception that the group was catering to 'capitalists' or 'conservatives'. A lot of people who come to libertarianism may come from a conservative background and there's going to be a lot of debate, but it's healthy debate and usually very civil here. Many of them are actually minarchists still clinging to the things they think the state is good for, but as they say the difference between a libertarian and an anarchist is about six months. :)

    May 2013
  • wargrave

    I'm not sure. I don't even remember writing that, but I guess I read people's shouts here and decided there were too many capitalists. That's good that you're against intellectual property! Then you're on the good side ;) Sorry about the rage!

    May 2013
  • LegoLibertarian

    On what basis did you come to that conclusion, wargrave? You said you 'get the feeling', but it doesn't really explain why. I, for example, don't believe in intellectual property, and that's saying a great deal as someone with a background in creating graphic art and design. Surely you're not disagreeing with me here, and I'm the current steward of this group. Who or what are you lashing out at??

    May 2013
  • wargrave

    Leaving this group because I get the feeling this is more about right wing-"libertarianism" than true libertarianism. Take your intellectual property and land ownership fascism and shove it up your asses

    April 2013
  • LegoLibertarian

    Welcome to the group, Ouroborosian. I think a good, honest libertarian would not only admit about themselves that they can make market mistakes or total blunders, but in fact recognize it as a fact of life. Not sure what 'market fundamentalism' means in that light, as failure should be the natural consequence of bad choices if you believe freedom of choice is the basis of an actual marketplace. Recognizing that there is no perfect system to eliminate mistakes, hazards, and tragedies from life is sobering but vital. I laugh inside when someone tries to discredit me wholesale for not providing them the blueprints for a perfect centrally imposed system for the rest of eternity as based on their prodding for answers to life's problems.

    April 2013
  • Ouroborosian

    So I think I've decided pretty definitely that I'm an economically pragmatic/centrist and capitalistic civil libertarian, as opposed to total market fundamentalism that admits no market failures.

    April 2013
  • khal_naqis

    http://www.last.fm/group/Capitalists

    December 2012
  • LegoLibertarian

    It's connected. :) Be sure to check to see all artists, and not just the few which rotate in this main page.

    November 2012
  • Martwy_Kogut

    http://www.lastfm.pl/music/Molotov+Solution should be connected artist.

    October 2012
  • LegoLibertarian

    Adding Tim Hawkins to connected artists. Can't get enough of his 'The Government Can' song.

    September 2012
  • LegoLibertarian

    This group is open to all liberty advocates, from the libertarian adept to the individual who is discovering the value of consistent ethics and a philosophy in search of truth. I'm disappointed that you perceive this as some sort of Tea Party group and that you've elected to leave the group on that premise. My last word on this subject is that libertarianism is open to self critique: Validating the principle of non-aggression is recursive and circular on account of the consistency of its principles. Put simply the ideology supports the freedom to dissent, and demonstrating free dissent validates the ideas behind the ideology.

    June 2012
  • LegoLibertarian

    There can be no effective discussion about the practice of applying the non-aggression principle without the inclusion of economic value theory. To the extent that you marginalize economics as separate from social interaction is where I believe you've gone astray. Value and preference applies to all actions, not just financial transactions.

    June 2012
  • LegoLibertarian

    I'm also among the voluntarist/agorists. As for the Tea Party comments, I just don't see it. The Tea party is a movement with people of varying beliefs, discontent with the system but mainly based on political action, and/or a movement appropriated by politicians who feed off of the discontent they have created. The Tea Party is not an ideology of internally consistent principles, so it is ineffective to try to generalize what all of those people believe and presume to call it their definition/take on libertarianism.

    June 2012
  • LegoLibertarian

    How is it implied that libertarians with a thorough understanding of economics are somehow unconcerned with social issues? Economics is more than finances. If anything, libertarians try to dispel the mythology that economics is inherently complex and synonymous with state central planning. Value theory strikes at the very core of volitional action and the ways in which our freedom is destroyed through political intervention. In any case, nobody is perfect, and some people need more time reading and discussing these ideas in order to figure out what it is they believe.. it makes no sense for me to ostracize people who are putting in an effort but have a few places where they dissent from the non aggression principle.

    April 2012
  • LegoLibertarian

    What gave you that impression, uvra? I wouldn't speak out so frequently and fervently against the US government as part of a general opposition to authoritarianism if I happened to think I was free. Borders do not confine my concern for the state of individual liberty. I certainly hope you didn't post just to be snarky or pessimistic.

    January 2012
  • uvra

    this fits very much to americans, who think they are so damn free.

    December 2011
  • Martwy_Kogut

    http://www.lastfm.pl/group/Capitalism everyone is welcome!

    November 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    Hope everybody is doing well. Let me know if there is anything I can do to improve the group.

    September 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    Did you read my post about property? The problem I have recognized is an urgency by some to argue for the labor theory of property to completely overrule other forms of property recognition. I suspect this is the main reason for the advent of "geo libertarianism".

    August 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    Even libertarians who believe in property disagree on solutions for the arrangement of property. But when it comes to ideological argument for property libertarianism argues for self ownership, which by extension implies the freedom to assign value, including declaring property, but there is no specific method within libertarianism to do that. That is what voluntary market conventions are for.

    August 2011
  • Aryo

    Oh, I see there is a serious schism between "right-wing fanatical propertarians" and the "true" libertarians. Guess what? Libertarianism is propertarianism, as there are no rights except property rights. If you dissent, you can transfer your self-ownership right to me.

    August 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    New connected artists! Take a look and let me know what you think!

    August 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    You could do worse than join a group where people want you to be free to do your own thing... interacting with people is only an option if one decides to become a hermit. The best way to sort out the property issue is to exchange ideas, so I'll start a discussion thread for that.

    August 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    I appreciate your concern, vaguelyhumanoid. I believe libertarianism is unique among ideologies to the extent that its core principles include individual liberty and the non-aggression principle, therefore it encourages criticism of anything that would try to masquerade under the name. Harliquensfly and I were able to agree on several aspects of value theory without having to advocate a single form of property recognition. Many minarchists believe that they must find a property solution within libertarianism, but that's not what libertarianism is about. It's not a solution for all things.

    August 2011
  • vaguelyhumanoid

    As a strong supporter of individual liberty, I would join this, however I don't want to be thrown in with right-wing propertarians & conservatives.

    August 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    Additionally, power is not inherently a vice either. When power is properly mated to accountability, it is a force for good. Competition keeps people honest on the whole and compels economic value for customers. When products and services are made better and more affordable it frees up capital and time for other activities.

    August 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    Acting in the service of one another is not a vice when we choose it,free from coercion or force of other individuals. It is a characteristic of a society. There is an inescapable cost of survival. While we may be born to different status or ability, we can apply our talents and perspective to problems and help one another through specialized trade, collaboration, and exchange. Exchange creates value, otherwise there would be no incentive to do it. This applies to all exchanges according to the nature of self interest as a validation of value theory.

    August 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    No surprise there. Government avoids accountability like a corporation can and enables monopoly privilege by granting corporate status.

    July 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    I believe that people can be assets: I value my family, even my pet dog over that of the stranger at my door, but not enough to initiate harm on the stranger for no apparent reason. An individual's labor is worth something, just as resources are, but Libertarianism and Austrian Economics do not assume to determine what that value is. Government, on the contrary, is pessimistic and treats people as liabilities (the opposite of assets), arguing that our liberty must be restricted because a few people could abuse theirs, yet real crime and violence still occurs, if not moreso under a system of monopolized violence. I think that generally explains how I think about value and property, and I didn't even have to advocate any specific form of property recognition/organization (which may be consistent with your beliefs I suggest)! :)

    July 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    People assign value to other people. This is naturally evident and recognized in austrian economic theory. Libertarianism however conditions that all individuals are free to assign or recognize value and act on one's values in accordance with the non-aggression principle. It should not be construed that libertarianism or austrian economics is of an intent to objectify people, as one is a philosophy for individual liberty and the other is a social science trying to explain the nature of value and economic activity. Recognizing why violence happens is not endorsing said violence.

    July 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    While Rand and Mises each have their own ideological flaws, some of their thinking actually supports one another. As an individual and mortal being, I do not have access to absolute truth (as implied by objectivism), but that does not discount the means to formulate principles of liberty and prosperity. In any case, perspective determines action: I don't believe libertarianism advocates a specific form of property organization other than to suggest a value in individual liberty and the freedom to express and assign value. To me, libertarianism is an ethical compass, but it is not the 'whole solution'. For that you need to interact with people and come up with market solutions. However imperfect they are, voluntary solutions are better than ones determined by force. Even voluntary socialism is acceptable on account of appreciating the non-aggression principle.

    July 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    Good points, Harliqensfly. Somalia's troubles come not only from the UN and US 'political' involvement, or as you suggested the dumping ground; for garbage and nuclear waste by various governments and associated corporations, as well as the overfishing issue, but from regional 'tribal' conflicts and transgression by neighboring militaries. It's mainly outside pressure though. It's quite the mess and an unfortunate situation for the innocents caught up in it. Every time I hear someone argue that I should move to Somalia, it infers they care more about putting me or my views down than they do about helping those people through voluntary exchange. The same logic can be used against the person to advocate moving to a totalitarian government.

    July 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    Greetings Harliquensfly and welcome! I think you will find a number of people informed in Austrian school economics if you're looking for such a discussion, though there is an austrian economics group, too. Speaking for myself, I support the Austrian school on the premise of value theory as a proper social science of economics, which incidentally refutes objectivism's absolutist approach to ethics. I can slow down and go into detail if you need more information. I'm pretty much an agorist-empiricist libertarian.

    July 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    I have updated the group image and description.

    July 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    Devo, continued... FTA: "You did play your hometown, Akron, in support of Obama in October 2008. Was it a bit weird for you to be so straightforwardly supporting something? I assume at one level you'd have to strip away the irony in order to do that. Casale: I suppose it's like scientists suddenly opening a bar. Once you roll in the mud by applying your theoretical deeds to reality, then you make enemies -- real specific ones. We found out a lot of our fans weren't Obama fans quickly that way. It's interesting, we never dealt head-on with politics. We were just for smart solutions no matter who came up with them, and logic and innovation over fear and superstition. As soon as we did that benefit [concert], we found out a lot of our fans who bought into that theoretical rap were in fact more to the right, the libertarian end."

    July 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    Something on Devo: http://www.spinner.com/2011/06/15/devo-interview-nxne/ FTA: "What do you make of Sarah Palin's bus tour across America to historic sites? Casale: Say no more. We rest our case. We've often said this, but if somebody in 1980 with a crystal ball had showed you the world in 2011, you would have thought it was a cheap, B-movie sci-fi dystopia that would in fact never happen, and dismissed it. Now it's here, in all of its horror. You talk about stupid, you can't beat Sarah Palin!"

    July 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    A great article about Joe Jackson: http://www.avclub.com/articles/joe-jackson,58735/ FTA: "There’s a libertarian skeptic strain running through several of your songs, as well as the manifesto you wrote opposing New York’s smoking ban, Smoke, Lies And The Nanny State. Is that hard to put into song without being heavy-handed? Joe Jackson: I guess it is, but I always try to put some humor in there. I think sometimes it’s a better way to make the point. Both those songs are ironic, but if you want to take them more seriously, you can certainly see them as protests against the nanny state, which is something I do feel strongly about. I think it’s getting worse and worse. A friend of mine said to me recently, “How did the No Fun people get in charge?” And I really think that’s becoming more and more true."

    July 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    This one caught my eye: http://www.examiner.com/rolling-stones-in-national/mick-jagger-says-to-former-editor-of-the-times-you-saved-my-career?fb_comment=34901421 FTA: "I remember being struck by the fact that Jagger used the classic John Stuart Mill On Liberty argument: that you are entitled to do anything which does not affect somebody else adversely. He argued that that is the test of the permissibility of human action. When Jagger made these remarks in 1967, the young were beginning to revolt against the limits put on liberty by Victorian tradition and wartime necessities and by socialist paternalism."

    July 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    The 'you'd love Somalia' or 'move to Somalia' meme is a self defeating logical construct because it can also be used to defend fascist regimes by assuming validity of state structures. Antagonizing me doesn't indicate you appreciate persuasion as a value to defending what you believe in. I don't appreciate you putting words in my mouth, btw. Your participation is not welcome if your goal is to play 'gotcha' with common rhetoric.

    July 2011
  • SeaSergeant

    What your telling me, is that you'd love to live in a place like Somalia, with no State and no Laws, just pure Anarchy and Chaos.

    June 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    The state has no money of it's own, so it must hustle the productive sector. Monopoly privilege isn't fabricated out of thin air for a corporation to enrich itself at the expense of others. It's called collusion. Market crashes are historically connected to manipulation of currency or commodities by banking cartels or governments. Individual actors in the marketplace can do far less damage on their own because they must self regulate to maintain a living via the creation of more value than is consumed. If you attack profit as an evil, then you should avoid making arguments to support your positions that rely on value judgments.

    June 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    Libertarianism implies nothing about age of consent, only that consent is better than force, therefore find ways to improve verification of consent and reduce coercion. It is one of many factors to be considered in any particular exchange or social situation.

    June 2011
  • LegoLibertarian

    No, libertarianism IS an individualist ideology THEREFORE it must be internalized and cannot be forced onto others. The non aggression principle says as much. Profit is a process of accumulating value. To say it is an enemy of quality is abstract and implies quality is never sought, but that isn't true. Do you only act in an ethical manner because a law tells you to?

    June 2011
  • SeaSergeant

    @Phlunked, the Wall Street Crash of 1929 is the fault of the Private Sector. So obviously, the private sector doesnt cares about You or Me or anyone else but the Profit till the whole Economy collapses on their exploring weight. Than when it collapses even the Privates claim the help of the State on their affairs.

    May 2011
  • SeaSergeant

    In your Libertarianism there is no "System". It implies that any Man has the "Right" to explore or enslave other Man, that's not freedom...it's the "freedom" of the few who were born with enought resources to control the whole Society. Profit is the enemy of Quality, of products or services, the goal is to make money, so why should you fucking care about Quality if you can actually cheat people? I dont Deify the Government...i believe the State its an important step for the complexification and development of our Civilization. Anarcho-Capitalism would just take us back to Pre-History.

    May 2011