Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 49
Thanks Tree21Thanks

Thread: Can anyone point to a successful modern Libertarian nation-state?

  1. #1
    Veteran Member GordonGecko's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    29,973
    Thanks
    22628

    From
    VA

    Can anyone point to a successful modern Libertarian nation-state?

    Remember all criteria of the question must be met.


    1. a "nation-state".....not some city or county

    2. "modern".....not 100-200 years ago

    3. "Libertarian"....i.e. full implementation of the libertarian agenda, not "partial" or "some aspects" of libertarianism

    4. "successful"....not a failed state.

  2. #2
    Veteran Member DebateDrone's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    30,203
    Thanks
    25683

    From
    SWUSA
    I think I remember hearing of a new community in Florida that was going to set up as a Libertarian experiment.

    ...no not Mar-a-lago. A real community.

    I can't find any mention of the community now.
    Thanks from GordonGecko

  3. #3
    Anarquistador StanStill's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    8,713
    Thanks
    8606

    From
    Home
    It depends on what you mean by "libertarian".

    In the US it means "zealous supporter of capitalist authoritarianism".

    In most of the rest of the world, it means "anti-capitalist".
    Thanks from GordonGecko, Blueneck and splansing

  4. #4
    Southern Strategy Liberal OldGaffer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    35,802
    Thanks
    37887

    From
    Nashville, TN
    Libertarianism in this country is closely related to Ayn Randism, John Bircherism, and batshit crazyism, with a dollop of self-righteousism.
    Thanks from MaryAnne

  5. #5
    Veteran Member GordonGecko's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    29,973
    Thanks
    22628

    From
    VA
    Quote Originally Posted by StanStill View Post
    It depends on what you mean by "libertarian".

    In the US it means "zealous supporter of capitalist authoritarianism".

    In most of the rest of the world, it means "anti-capitalist".

    I mean it the way the Libertarians typically mean it....almost practically zero National Government....

    even many state and local services (police, fire, etc.) given over to private interests or "voluntary".

  6. #6
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    40,210
    Thanks
    23706

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by GordonGecko View Post
    I mean it the way the Libertarians typically mean it....almost practically zero National Government....

    even many state and local services (police, fire, etc.) given over to private interests or "voluntary".
    We have a bit of that here with the free state movement. A few in state govt. But NH has always had that since we do have a lot of voluntary police, fire etc.

    LNN Politics

  7. #7
    Veteran Member GordonGecko's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    29,973
    Thanks
    22628

    From
    VA
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    We have a bit of that here with the free state movement. A few in state govt. But NH has always had that since we do have a lot of voluntary police, fire etc.

    LNN Politics
    NH are you saying that New Hampshire is a "libertarian State"? There is no Medicaid in NH? No "welfare"? No gun laws? Private police and fire departments?

  8. #8
    Anarquistador StanStill's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    8,713
    Thanks
    8606

    From
    Home
    Quote Originally Posted by GordonGecko View Post
    I mean it the way the Libertarians typically mean it....almost practically zero National Government....

    even many state and local services (police, fire, etc.) given over to private interests or "voluntary".
    Well yeah, but that's the thing. In the US it means "privatized government" not "practically zero government". If capitalism is left in place, then a giant chunk of decisions which we must live with, which affect us to varying degrees, we will have little to no control over. Services currently run by government which we have some influence over through the political process would either be closed down completely, or in most cases, simply given to private companies to run without much danger of accountability or the public really having influence. All decisions emanate from the top-down authoritarian structure that is fundamental to capitalism. Capitalism is completely hostile to democracy, because the corporations within it are structured just like any totalitarian regime.

    But everywhere else, the term tends to refer to anti-capitalists who want to democratize industry. The terms socialism, communism, and anarchism all kind of overlap to varying degrees. All of them at least in theory aim to democratize industry and eliminate the authoritarian control of the ownership class through various means.

    But in answer to your question, I don't think anyone can point to a successful state of either kind, but I don't take that to mean one could never exist. Until England started having democratic elections and a parliament, no one could point to such a place. It was just understood that letting people vote would lead to mob rule and would be the ruination of law and order. Now democratic republics are everywhere. Personally, I don't think capitalism can survive long without the protection of the nanny state to keep it from collapsing the economy. That's why there are no successful capitalist countries without a strong central government—because when they do cause some kind of economic panic or depression, the state (namely, everyone) can bail them out and save the economy. Otherwise, Guatemala would be a booming success right now.
    Last edited by StanStill; 17th April 2017 at 09:06 AM.
    Thanks from labrea, bajisima and Ian Jeffrey

  9. #9
    Veteran Member DebateDrone's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    30,203
    Thanks
    25683

    From
    SWUSA
    The problem with Libertarianism is that it needs a fully formed community for the theory of Libertarianism to work.

    How are a bunch of me-first me-only assholes going to fund public works, streets, drainage, sewer, ...ect?
    Thanks from OldGaffer

  10. #10
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    29,041
    Thanks
    23120

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by DebateDrone View Post
    The problem with Libertarianism is that it needs a fully formed community for the theory of Libertarianism to work.

    How are a bunch of me-first me-only assholes going to fund public works, streets, drainage, sewer, ...ect?
    The same way anarchists would do it, consensus.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 15th August 2015, 11:18 AM
  2. Successful libertarian nations
    By Davocrat in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 187
    Last Post: 16th June 2012, 01:28 PM
  3. The State of the Nation
    By Burning Giraffe in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 26th July 2008, 01:37 PM
  4. The Nation, The State, and Tradition: Good or Bad?
    By The_Bear in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 27th February 2008, 07:25 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed