Libertarianism vs neoliberalism.

Discussion in 'Politics & The Economy' started by karkus30, Jul 27, 2012.

  1. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    Think it's high time this was discussed. I think it's important to distinguish between the two ideals.

    First off: libertarians are political and not financial ideals.

    Neo-liberals like thatcher, Reagan and Greenspan were expounding a financial policy.

    Libertarians believe in a real free market, not one dominated by world banks, Cartels, global corporations and the like, they believe that there must be a clear break between Governments and business.

    Neo-liberals believe in THEIR version of a free market and peddle the idea that a true free market cannot exist, instead they propose their ideals of a free market which is one in which, Governments, global banks and global corporations get together too fleece the population exactly like a dictatorship does.

    So. Central banks, banking Cartels, monopolies, are things that are supported by Neo liberals.

    There is an issue here which is unresolved. Neo liberals tell the population that they are free market believers when they are not, that plays to those who believe in the ideals of a free market. However, when pushed on true free markets they then refute the possibility as if it is some crazy space theory and then they play the socialists by telling how they will impose severe regulations etc etc.

    Because of this, true libertarianism and Austrian Economics has had almost zero influence on the world and has been carefully manicured by those who would twist the message to suit there own ends.

    Having watched a film about the Greek situation and also what happened in Ecuador I believe it's worth understanding how very different Libertarianism is and how it offers something different. Any time it is watered down it isn't libertarianism, that's what Neo liberalism achieved. Essentially the only thing in common is the letters 'liber' apart from that they are essentially poles apart.
     
  2. EarthRod

    EarthRod
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2008
    Messages:
    17,949
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    England
    Ratings:
    +8,071
    The word 'ideals' is the sticking point of any political ideas or system proposals.

    Politics is a human thing and ideals will therefore never reach perfection. An ideal can only be achieved on paper, never in reality.

    Compromise and watering-down and continual amendments and tweaking to the original well thought-out perfection has to take place for the 'ideal' to work in practice.
     
  3. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    That's not true at all, the ideal has already been reached by those powerful and wealthy enough to support it. The idea that nothing else could exist is a clever ploy to discourage anyone from trying. We can accomplish our own individual ideals based on values, we certainly can apply that to the wider community. I will go further, I think we must.

    libertarianism is very simple in concept so it should be difficult to water down or corrupt it. This isn't what happened with Neo liberalism, they didn't adopt or twist, instead they simply stole the name and fitted their own ideals underneath. They are like Chameleons......Socialists, yes that us Neo liberalists protecting your backs by regulating the banks and distributing the wealth, free market economics, yes that's us Neo liberalists ensuring there is just the 'right' amount of regulation. They are anything that the people want them to seem to be while ensuring any other ideals do not persist. It reminds me of the Borg. You will be assimilated and your uniqueness will be incorporated.
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2012
  4. EarthRod

    EarthRod
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2008
    Messages:
    17,949
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    England
    Ratings:
    +8,071
    OK.

    We live and prosper in a society which allows us (if we have the means) to prosper, or at least try.

    The very fact you are posting your ideas and thoughts in a forum, which other people in our society read, reflects this freedom.

    Your take of the prevalent political climate seems fixed in some agenda which appears in most of your posts. Laws, regulations, policing are in place and are continually monitored and amended to try and match the ever changing world we live in. That's the way it goes and I would not have it any other way.

    My uniqueness has been assimilated and I have been incorporated into our society. "They" have used my skills and "I" have been rewarded by "them" in return.
     
  5. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    Except that is also not true is it.

    You have accepted something for something else. The truth is that your ideology could be equally applied to a slave ship. The reality is apparent freedom within the parameters allocated to you, which in a slaves case is the highly visible ankle chains. The Police is the use of the whip and your reward being the food and water brought to you daily. That you can talk to the other slaves is not freedom of speech. Freedom of speech would include the power to break the bonds without application of the whip, or the removal of the food needed to sustain life.

    You would have it no other way because you know of no other way. You see anything different as being so far beyond your imagination that it cannot be based in reality. That is the lot of a slave, not to try and see beyond enslavement because it can never become real, to never have hope of it becoming real so that it is better not to resist.
     
  6. Trollslayer

    Trollslayer
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Messages:
    27,138
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Poole
    Ratings:
    +11,756
    Karkus - I suggest you look at where the real issue is.
    You.
    All these posts are making it someone else's fault. If you don't like the situation get involved in poilitics and CHANGE THINGS INSTEAD.
    I have written to my MP a couple of times and had replies, started a thread about the Fiji born soldier being denied citizenship because of a stupid admin rule, signed a petition against ACTA and many other things.
    Who constructive things have you done?
     
  7. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    No, I tried the political route, spent far too long wasting my time talking to politicians of both major parties over a period of four years. The reality is that Politicians are there to maintain the status Quo, that's why they are called politicians. Forums are the best way of prompting discussion and free thinking even if it might be hard going. Underneath, unless people have an Agenda bolted to the existing system they know when they are getting conned, they are just not too keen to explore it.

    In times past, great philosophers would debate these things in very heated discussion, that's how progress eventually came about, but in our modern world there seems to be have been a divisional creation ( I have been aware of it for some time and it's very obvious here. Instead of looking for a common way forward it becomes a game of team support and who can shout the loudest ).

    I have no interest in others accepting anything I write as been true, that's up to others to discover if they have a mind to look and it isn't my intention to force them either. It seems to me that this is a political debating floor on politics and the economy and that presents the opportunity for debate and education. It should be open minded. Nothing wrong with a daft idea.
     
  8. EarthRod

    EarthRod
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2008
    Messages:
    17,949
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    England
    Ratings:
    +8,071
    Thank you.

    Your excellent post has given much information and cleared a few things up.

    Information gathering is quite an art!

    :cool:
     
  9. Rasczak

    Rasczak
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Messages:
    23,112
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Warwick
    Ratings:
    +3,738
    So, in your analogy how would you describe a successful judicial review by an individual against a member of the Executive which is then upheld and enforced under the principles of Rule of Law?

    I fully concurr with Trollslayer - if you want to change the 'status quo' then debating on a forum is probably the least effective way to do it. You need to build a tangible body of opinion to support that change and market it to those who have the ability to realise that change.

    The reality is though that whether you politics is left, right or centre then most of us quite like the 'status quo' as the backbone of our lives as it leaves our spare capacity to focus on the important things in life.
     
  10. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    Well said. I see where you are going, but I think it's fairy land. We cannot use the rule of law because it is subverted by those in positions of power. Therefore a murder is a murder, but some deaths caused as a result of a chemical spillage from a large chemical company would be considered a matter for civil action and financial settlement, even when it might be proved that it would be possible that the risk was entirely predictable. We see the same in the current reviews over the finance houses, some are losing their jobs, but we don't see hundreds of people going to prison. We also have ' official secrets' and an underground of intelligence which prevents truth being discovered. These are the statist and capitalist mechanisms that protect those who run the slave ship. It has long been known that if you can afford an expensive lawyer then the chance of acquittal is much higher. Have influence over the legal system and Security systems and you become above the law.

    I disagree with you about debating on the forum. The way you suggest is via the front door. That's a similar analogy to a small army attacking a larger well equipped army head on. You will lose. If you don't have the fire power then it's not a good way of attacking. Playing by someone else's rules and tactics will always put you at a disadvantage. A tangible body of support can be created virally these days. However as I said before I don't have an agenda, except perhaps to awaken the dreamers to who they really are.

    Yes, you are right. Most people do not want to be woken and have busied themselves with things they believe they can control. That was the analogy with the slave ship, some get whittling pieces of wood, maybe manage to get a bit more food by being helpful to their overlords either amongst the other slaves or the ships crew and officers. Some do that by brute strength and violence. I don't seek to wake up those who are content with the situation they see around them. What would be the point.
     
  11. BISHI

    BISHI
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    9,753
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Leamington Spa
    Ratings:
    +1,190
    But the 'slaves' more often than not go off and do their own thing despite the whip crackers. All of the best in modern culture started at the bottom and moved up. Jazz , hip hop , dance not to mention fashion and the current trend in street art. Counter culture evolves as so alternative economies- the obvious one being the drug economy. Accepted the establishment control tobacco and alcohol and do their best to stamp out drugs- but it will never succeed.
     
  12. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    That's getting further and further off topic. The slaves amuse themselves that is true. Cause and effect. Drugs and Alcohol are not solutions and music is universal anyway as its just communication like painting or sculpture. Can I steer it gently back on topic and suggest that the discussion is around the differences or not between libertarian/Austrian economics and the hijacking by Neo liberalists.
     
  13. BISHI

    BISHI
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    9,753
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Leamington Spa
    Ratings:
    +1,190
    I'm not gonna pretend that I understand the finer points of these ideologies, I prefer to consider them as different reflections on how a civilisation evolves, the important thing is not the labels but the fact that it continues to evolve. To me the things you so eloquently discuss are simply attempts by elites to maintain the status quo and stop evolution of society from the top down. Unfortunately for them this can never be indefinitely maintained as the changes always begin at the bottom where the system is at its most volatile and complex
     
  14. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    That's precisely what libertarians advocate. It's a bottom up ideology. It says simply says that slavery or any coercion which tramples on basic laws of self ownership are neither good for slave or master, that they will forever create conflicts and prevent natural progress. What we have now is top down forced ideology supported by a myriad of complex laws and hierarchical structures which are impossible to penetrate. The basic tenant is the self right of people.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

    That anyone interfering with those basic rights will be held to account by common law. There isn't anything elitist there. Libertarians have tried to apply the principle of freedom and liberty to modern social structures in an effort to show how we might tackle things in a practical manner given that basic tenant.the proposals are not sacrosanct, they are discussion points.

    Also, speaking for myself. As I happen to be near the bottom, if not at the bottom of our current structure, then this is where change must begin.
     
  15. BISHI

    BISHI
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    9,753
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Leamington Spa
    Ratings:
    +1,190
    That is where change always begins and where it has done so since civilisation began. It's changing now and will do into the future, it's just at the moment the western technocratic grip on the global economy is slipping and they are going balls out to get it back.
     
  16. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    I believe that is true in more than one sense. For some reason I'm hearing stairway to heaven :)
     
  17. Pecker

    Pecker
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    22,495
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Huddersfield, People's Republic of Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +4,615
    I think it's important to distinguish both from true philosophical political liberalism.

    Both owe a debt to a brief period in liberal thinking to their existence, but neither kept up with where the debate went.

    The idea that what is currently thought of as 'economic liberalism', and the philosophy of 'western liberal democracy' have much in common in deeply flawed.

    Steve W
     
  18. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    Yes, very true. Liberalism was radical.
     
  19. Pecker

    Pecker
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    22,495
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Huddersfield, People's Republic of Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +4,615
    Was? Is. :thumbsup:

    In western liberal democracy there can be no concept that individuals or markets are completely 'free' as such.

    We are all bound by our covenant to the whole. If democratically elected bodies decide to control the markets in whatever way they see fit, and do not do so arbitrarily, then they can do so.

    No one can cry that their liberties have been infringed.

    So, for example, there can be no idea that 'tax is theft'. If we are part of a democracy, then our money is not entirely our own. If the government decides to levvy a tax, and does so within their legal and democratic framework, then they are allowed to do so.

    Ditto any form of regulation.

    Steve W
     
  20. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    Yes, I meant classically. We don't have a classical liberal democracy in the West as you pointed out, in fact we are now almost 180 degrees from that and our current liberal parties are strongly statist in the sense they are closer to the communist ideal. There has always been a lack of clear definition about classical liberal ideals, they are often quite whimsical where as libertarians are far more practical. I suppose a libertarian might be seen as a more radical classical liberal, but really classical liberals never defined how the social structure should work because it was its own antithesis. By giving the individual and liberty the most importance it leaves the question open as to if that would be achieved by big Government or no Government at all ( natural human society without rules ), so is unable to lay down anything but basic principles which can be interpreted several ways. Libertarians move towards a more practical proposition by moving towards the ideal of a minimum Government needed to uphold common laws, while retaining maximum liberty and self determination.

    We have a very strange political system in the West which is close to modern fascism or communism in its scope, that is why it is Neo liberal. Neo liberalists are really fascists. The economic plan adopted by the Nazi party was Keynesian ( big public spending programme which meant eventual expansionism ) but the modern west is Neo Keynesian which means expansionism by large corporations and banks. So, we have a strange hybrid of this show of prosperity which was common to communist and Facist statism such as city sky scrapers and events like the Olympics to create the illusion of high ideals of mind and body. It is a society of mock individualism and mock freedom. Soft faced Facism or Communism in which control is by the rich and powerful through corporate bodies and an amalgamation with Government.
     

Share This Page

Loading...