David Hamilton


This conversation is closed.

When Libertarians and Hippies realize they are the exact same group, who want the exact same thing, the world will change for the better.

I am talking of course, about a voluntary society. A naive, but beautiful concept that almost every intellectual on earth has tried to encourage us to imagine.

Hippies, are, generally, naive, and stupid enough to believe, "That's what democracy is"... Libertarians are often cynical, and emotionless enough to suggest, "That is what democracy could never be".

Why is this so important? I don't think there is anyone in America who truly believe the republican, or democratic parties can actually solve any of our problems... I think half of us, are secretly hippies, who hate libertarians, so we vote democrat. The other half, are secretly libertarians, and they hate hippies, so they vote republican.

I know this is a broad over generalization, and there are still quite a few hard line party hacks out there... but, mostly, I think those are just the people on TV. I think our politicians, are republicans and democrats, but our people are pretty sick of both of them... They just hate hippies, or libertarians.

What do hippies want? A voluntary society, where we all chip in to help the less fortunate, and encourage the growth of non profits, and for profit corporations at the local level. One in which we don't use force to punish non violent crimes. One in which we don't torture. One in which we don't declare war without reason. One in which police don't beat people for exercising freedom of speech... or religion.

Isn't this what libertarians want? The only real difference, is that they want it to all be non profit, and for profit corporations, no tax by force, no actual government. This infuriates hippies because they love space... That's it, hippies love NASA, and to be fair public education, for creating NASA engineers. When you remind them it's taxed for at the point of a gun however, they start to favor non profit NASA.

We all want our government, to be our countries largest not for profit corporation. We can get there if we stop hating each other.

  • Jul 18 2012: I agree, David. I have friends and family members who align themselves with the either group.

    They're are both saying the same things in large measure. But when I point this out to either group, they balk. They revert to tribalism and revert back to stereotypical insults of the other group. Even though both groups when asked, see themselves way outside of the mainstream of Dem/GOP politics, when I point out that they have much in common, they revert to the propaganda spread by the respective mainstream parties in order to describe each other. Very unproductive. Or, they are so dogmatic about micro issues that they don't want to find common ground on macro issues. One the posters on this thread fits this description.
    • thumb
      Jul 19 2012: It really feels like if the two groups reallized their common ground they could make a real splash. I mean it's really crazy how much they have in common, and can't see.

      What's the quintessential hippie? A commune. Someone who goes off into the woods to do everything for themselves, without the influence of evil governments or corporations.

      What's the quintessential libertarian? A compound. Friends and family are protected from an unstable and evil government.

      "Turn on, tune in, drop out" Timothy Leary

      "We are on strike, we, the men of the mind" Ayn Rand
  • Jul 19 2012: I'd say there are a lot of misconceptions here, but the point is essentially correct. The great thing about liberals (or the subsection, hippies) is that they want to help people. I think there is agreement that society is probably not worth living in if we can't agree to help each other. The difference comes about in HOW to help each other.

    It all comes down to two points:
    - Property rights. Either you believe in them or you don't (or you don't understand). Watch youtube's
    The Philosophy of Liberty: Property and ...:Plunder. If those don't make sense you, you are unreachable because you believe that the government partially owns you. That's enslavement and should make the hairs bristle on the back of the neck of any hippie (or TED viewer).
    - Secondly, the question is whether government is the best, most effective means of executing help (or any other service). Think Amtrak. Think FEMA. Think the USPS. Is this really even debatable?

    So, if you really want to help people, seek support voluntarily (don't extract the money by force - it's a rights violation), and keep the government out of it.

    - Hippies viewed as stoners? No. A libertarian doesn't even care if a hippie is a stoner. We waste too much money as a society treating a public health problem (drugs) as a crime.
    - The Tea Party started as a Classical Liberalism. If you count yourself a liberal, I'd encourage you to investigate what Classical Liberalism is, and why/how that Liberalism has come to be redefined (hint: you are being manipulated). The Tea Party was hijacked by RINOs. It's now dead, but never had anything to do with militarism or crony capitalism.
    - I fail to see the point in not voting. Then the one guy who wants to control you can vote himself into office.
    - Libertarians don't want government to be the largest non-profit. We would hope it would be smaller than some.
    - Libertarians know big government is essential for big business/corporatism.
    - Take the smallest political quiz
    • thumb
      Jul 22 2012: I would only add, that the main misconception, I think about hippies... Is that many people think hippies are against property rights. Most potheads might be... but 1960's aging hippies who got their lives together, not so much. Every hippy commune, becomes a nightmare because of property rights. I think most libertarians don't give hippies enough credit though for why so many of them try communism.

      Most hardcore hippies that act as communists... just want out of crony capitalism, and they'll try anything at this point. It's not a smart philosophy, but it is rooted, in the same frustrations libertarians have. It's an over reaction. I think libertarians who are dead set on completetly ending public education have a similar problem. What we have is bad, but can't we make something better than rampant illiteracy, especially since we've already let this experiment take so much money for so long... To me that's a tangential issue that distracts us though.

      The big problem I have with hardcore libertarians, would be that I believe in what I call "rational collective investment". I think if we voted on where our tax dollars went, NASA would be huge, and we'd have the supercollider in Texas... but I think we'd do it without forcing people who don't like Nasa to contribute. I know a lot of nerds down to put 2 cents of their paycheck into space... Right now we put half of one.

      Totally agree with your view of The Tea Party, there was a fantastic episode of The Newsroom about it... but it's gone religious and neocon.

      I vote but I try to raise the percentage of third party candidates in my district, unless someone in the traditional parties is actually putting out a new and interesting platform. I really can't stand either of them now, but i think voting is important, and I try to do enough research not to vote for total nutjobs.

      A series of nonprofits that perform for the public good... That's what I meant, not 1 huge one.
  • Jul 19 2012: Just a point of terminology. I think, in the USA, our current government is a form of plutocracy. This is not an argument. I am essentially agreeing with the comments that our big corporations and their rich owners are the true powers in the USA.

    I hope one day the hippies and libertarians, and all of the other folks whose pockets are getting picked, can get together to kick out the lackeys of the rich and form a government that governs instead of just providing a stage for the next election.
  • thumb
    Jul 18 2012: I think maybe the problem with this discussion is that when some "Hippies" hear right-wing they think Tea-party and when some "Libertarians" hear Hippy they think Stoner. Al though regarding Tea-party the "Contract from America" mostly makes sense. I just don't understand why such a high percentage of people who identify themselves with the Tea-party are anti-abortion and anti-gay etc. I fail to see the connection. Just like I fail to see the connection between pure communism and smoking pot. Here's another one. When a US citizen hears the word cummunist they think Socialist. None of the so-called communist countries ever actually achieved cummunism. They all had a government!
    • Comment deleted

      • thumb
        Jul 22 2012: I understand where you're coming from, and the addition of Gary Johnson probably did not serve the debate well given there are still niche issues in which he appeals to a traditional base, at the cost of a lot of people in the middle. Also, Barack Obama has become so polarized that anything other than "Anti Obama", has been deemed unacceptable.

        My main point was to convey, how both groups, libertarians, and hippies, are most adamant about decreasing government sponsorship of corporations, reducing the military industrial complex, and encouraging local small business. Both groups are very open minded on civil liberties, and very close minded to the idea that banks, the fed, or a large government stimulus can save our economy. Both groups believe that the concept of pre emptive warfare makes no sense.

        Both are opposed to the war on drugs.

        Both are pro gay marriage.

        Abortion, is realy the only key issue, they disagree on. Many libertarians believe a fetus is a person with rights...

        If they could get past that, they could create a powerful unifying platform with the power to appeal to a broad swathe of people. The ultra left and ultra right, are both right... it's the middle that sucks.
        It's the fighting that sucks. That's how the really screwed up people take power.
  • Jul 18 2012: Largely I thikn you all ignore over 100 years or more of a successful experiment in FREEDOM. It happened in the United States. The ideas you discuss are not new. Turns out the greatest prosperity, health and freedom for the most number of citizens of a country was accomplished using very few important precepts. SO WHAT if they are not new. SO WHAT if you have heard them before. IGNORE ME and read up on how much prosperity accross race, creed, gender, age and any other vertical you want to measure. Read about the first colony here and how Collectivism, that is good well meaning socialism, destroyed that group and freedom and property ownsership created effing THANKSGIVING.... thanks for what... FOOD. HEALTH. Here is the problem you have. Most of you. you thikn you can somehow manage things better. MANAGE MY CHOICES and others CHOICES... when what you need is freedom with a few other rules. Those rules have been written down and have existed for quite a while and I will not even put down here what it is. Most of you snub your noses at it and say its a living breathing document. It is not. We want documents that are very SOLID and simple.. we want politicians that have very little power. Or money. Eff it. Its the constituion supporting limited government, property rights, free markets, and a democratic republic with limited federal government and states with more power than any president. BUt you will ignore me even though I am 100 percent backed up by history. But you scoff at history and will still try to MANAGE MY EFFING CHOICES YOU LYING HYPOCRITE LIBERAL PUKES.... get your hands off my freedom. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SOCIAL JUSTICE.. its a lie.. its a pure unudalterated EVIL IDEA to make us all EVEN..... puke on TED.. its so clearly anti freedom and put up by American hating Sociliasts pukes. You pepper the talks with some freedom and some WOW but you want the UN doing things? puke on the UN.. and puke on most of you.. and delete my account.HND
    • thumb
      Jul 18 2012: Learn to read Kent... I want government out... Hippies want government out... Libertarians want government out. We're all right.

      That's my point. The hippies, are not socialist. They are sick of American Imperialism, and they want to return to freedom and capitalism. Right wing morons, have convinced you that they do not, so you hate hippies...

      That's what people in power want. They want to convince you that hippies and libertarians are mortal enemies. They want you to hate people, who believe the exact same thing as you, so that you don't talk to them, work together, and attack leadership... the real enemy.
      • thumb
        Jul 18 2012: To correct yet another point of ignorance Libertarians are as right wing as you can get.
        • thumb
          Jul 18 2012: I'm a libertarian... I'm voting for Gary Johnson... I just hang out with lots of young hippies, and they have the exact same philosohy as I do, on almost everything. They just see a small government, rather than large private companies, running a couple more services than most libertarians... It's an incredibly subtle difference, and there is a lot of room for us to work together if we stop hating each other.
        • thumb
          Jul 27 2012: Libertarians hold very left-wing views on most social issues, Pat. Same-sex marriage and abortion come immediately to mind. It's on economic issues that we're right-wing.
      • thumb
        Jul 18 2012: I don't have any hate? Libertarians don't have a problem with big companies? The key is that they are not crony capitalists. The problem with voting for Johnson (who I like and did wonders in New Mexico the opposite of our governor moon beam) is that it takes a vote away from Romney.
        • thumb
          Jul 18 2012: No, I assure you that it does not take a vote away from Romney. In the choice between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, I would choose Barack hands down. It's not even close.

          I don't understand how anyone ever voted for Romney in the primary. If I was a republican I'd be embarassed. I don't understand how republicans voted for anyone other than Ron Paul though. He's the only one who made sense.

          Sorry, Romneycare is the basis for Obamacare, and Romney is way too anti gay, and anti family planning for me. Also he's a chicken hawk... He would never fight for this country, but he is certain we need to get involved in more wars. If America elects Mitt Romney president, it will be another 8 years of George W Bush, and all the smart people are just going to start leaving the country.

          We're already being brain drained by CERN.
      • thumb
        Jul 18 2012: I can only take so much of you and I'm definitely at my limit.
        • thumb
          Jul 18 2012: No worries Pat. Come back any time. Getting called a socialist, by a "libertarian"... for, voting for the libertarian candidate... It never gets old.
      • thumb

        Gail .

        • 0
        Jul 18 2012: Hey DAve, Capitalism is the cause of ALL of our problems today. It cannot exist in the presence of equality. It requires poverty for some and even death because of it for those in the least class.

        Our economic model, that most find offensive, takes us farther and farther away from any possibility of our working together. It's corrupt. It is supported by war, crime&punishment, illness & injury, extreme poverty, and especially diseducation (in order to prevent people from seeing that what they call "freedom" is really slavery.
        • thumb
          Jul 18 2012: There is absolutely no evidence of that Gail. In fact, if you examine what is truly destroying this country it is very easy to see that it is socialism.

          Who funds Monsanto? The government, it changes the law every time Monsanto breaks the law.

          Who funds the oil companies? Government oil subsidies. What do the oil companies use that subsidy money for? To buy green technology patents and burn them.

          Who funded Wal Marts enormous expansion, which destroyed a whole bunch of middle class general store jobs? The Fed... at 0% interest. Government sponsored socialism.

          Who funds factory farms and Mcdonalds? Subsidies and the fed.

          Capitalism has never been our problem... Socialism. The government being used to sponsor the worst corporations we have, is destroying our country. It has nothing to do with capitalism.
        • thumb
          Jul 18 2012: Actually, it was really unfair for me to call it socialism... It's crony capitalism... but it is the symbiosis of corporations and state... and that is fundamentally against the principles of capitalism.
    • thumb
      Jul 18 2012: Actually I thought the US only came to great economic prominance by avoiding any major damage from either world war and making money out of them to boot. And before you mention Pearl Harbour one raid is hardly significant. The Japanese made over 100 raids against the Australian mainland.
      • thumb
        Jul 18 2012: The U.S. came to prominence by having the freer market. Which enabled them to beat Germany and Japan simotaenoulsy (with help from England and Russia) by sheer volume. Which is another example of quantity beats quality every time.
        • thumb
          Jul 18 2012: Its much easier to build planes in a factory that isn't bombed every night. Also if you check history the Germans had already started to withdraw before the US got involved. It was called the Battle of Britain Pat.
      • thumb
        Jul 18 2012: So the war would have turned out the same way if the U.S. had not participated?
        • thumb
          Jul 18 2012: In europe the main diference would have been where the line between east and west ended up. The russians would have walked right through germany. The D day landings in 44 were essentially to stop the russians taking the whole of europe as the German retreat was in full swing on the eastern front by late 42. The pacific air and sea war is where the US won the war. Superior US technology allowed direct strikes on Japan which destroyed morale. As to the land war in south east asia the Japanese had already been turned before US troops landed on New Guinea in late 42. Australian troops recaptured Buna in December 42 and the Japanese never re-took ground after that
      • thumb
        Jul 19 2012: The world owes the Aussies for stopping Japan?
        • thumb
          Jul 19 2012: We stopped them invading Australia. The pacific war would have been very different if Japan had bases in Australia during the battle of the Coral sea rather than the US having bases. If the Japanese had taken Northern Queensland they would have been able to attack the US fleet from the north and south simultaneously. You often find the most interesting histories of war are those written by the losers.
      • thumb
        Jul 19 2012: You learned me some stuff about this.
      • thumb
        Jul 19 2012: Thanks, but the main point I was looking at was the advantage of out producing the enemy for whatever reason.
  • thumb
    Jul 18 2012: I think you'll find the weakness in both philosophies is that they both assume everyone is the same. Pure hippie style communism assumes everyone is nice enough so that they will contribute to society out of a sense of contributing to the common good. Libertarians assume everyone is equally self-centred so the big pool of self interest produces everything that anyone requires within the population. The first has no mechanism for coping with narcissists and sociopaths and the second has no mechanism for dealing with the bleeding hearts or the disabled. Thats the strength of democracy. When the economy is weak you vote right when the economy is strong you vote left. The bit I don't understand is how the US can have a republican government that still doesn't balance the budget. Probably would have been easier for George W if his dad had finished the job in Iraq the first time. That would have saved him heaps of doe!
    • thumb
      Jul 18 2012: I agree, I would only point out, that... After coming to completely different, and contradictory conclusions... The prescription to solve the problems, are identical, and work. Stop the government from enacting force on anyone not enacting force on another member of society. That part, they both got right.

      It is unacceptable how many Americans are in jail for non violent crimes. It is unacceptable that flying killer robots judge all military aged men enemy combatants. It is unacceptable that flying killer robots now monitor American private homes without warrants. It is unacceptable that we torture.

      The only people who don't agree to these basic principles are the 1000 or so sociopathic politicians we have... imho.
      • Jul 18 2012: That's why Libertarians and Hippies both love Ron Paul. And it doesn't hurt that he's the only non-sociopath in Congress.
  • thumb
    Jul 17 2012: Does anyone really want a country where you don't HAVE to pay tax? No body likes the idea of it but we all know it keeps the country alive.
    • thumb
      Jul 17 2012: This is actually the main misunderstanding, in my opinion, of both philosophies. This misunderstanding has been caused predominantly by the fact that both movements have at times been taken up by, for lack of a better word "whackjobs and drug addicts".

      What I believe every human being on earth wants, is a government that is spending their money so wisely, that there is no need for a violent enforcement of the tax code. There is no country on earth where money is being spent that wisely, and that is why the code must be enforced with police, and irs agents.

      If a government was run as an efficient charity organization for the legitimate benefit of the people... There would be very little objection to taxes from either group.

      I think at their core however both philosophies simply boil down to "I have a right to live my life, and make my own choices in it. You do not have a right to spend my money being violent".
    • Aug 9 2012: The only way for the govt to spend our earned tax dollars wisely is if they spend it on the programs that we as tax payers choose which programs will receive our tax funding. A market based tax system will solve more problems in this world than my little brain can think of at this moment.

  • thumb
    Jul 17 2012: it is so nice you have these things you know nothing about.

    "Libertarians are often cynical, and emotionless"

    if you find any, and i mean any data, reasoning, evidence or anything to support that statement, i eat my hat with a fork and a knife in public.
    • thumb
      Jul 17 2012: If you can find any evidence I said that... I'll eat my hat with a fork and knife in public.

      You see Krisztian, sometimes when someone makes a statement they use a device called a comma... and that denotes that there is more coming, and that the statement is not yet finished. A period shows that a sentence has come to an end.

      I said "Libertarians are often cynical, and emotionless enough to suggest, "That is what democracy could never be". Suggesting that while libertarians have supreme confidence in the intelligence of consumers... they have absolutely no faith in the intelligence of voters in a democracy, which is cynical, and emotionless. It is based in the idea that people are too stupid to govern themselves. There is evidence to support this theory, but it is still a cynical theory, and in that manner libertarians are cynical. Not in every manner.

      Good try though, you are almost as good at parsing statements as the American news media, you would be a fine propaghandist... You don't even mention that I called hippies naive and stupid... but obviously the only insulting part of my rant was about libertarians.

      You can construct a better argument than this you big teddy bear American hippy, you : p
      • thumb
        Jul 17 2012: aha, so you are claiming that i misrepresented your words, and then you explain that you actually meant what i implied. good work!
        • thumb
          Jul 17 2012: I have loads of evidence to support my original statement, not the one you parsed out.

          Talk to many libertarians, especially in America, and they will tell you that democracy is incapable of being reformed in a way that moves us towards a voluntary society. Ron Paul is the exception... Not the rule. I said often... not always, I can support that.

          This is the illusionairy conflict I am talking about. Not between all hippies and all libertarians, but between many. I think you and I are both for a voluntary society ultimately, are we not?

          I am however pretty confident you consider me a hippy, hence the joke at the end... I would like to suggest that many "hippies" in America, are secretly libertarians, who just hope the majority is going to wake up. Lots of libertarians, in America, secretly worry, that private companies will boldly go where hundreds have gone before, ie low earth orbit, but a huge public coffer, would be a much more efficient tool for getting us to mars... ie NASA.

          I admitted it was a broad generalization about certain members of the different groups... I am not trying to suggest all members... I will make the bold assertion, that in California, New York, and the populated United States, there are a lot more hippies and libertarians, than register green or libertarian... They choose the lesser of 2 evils, and we should probably stop.

          I imagine Austria has a similar conflict, though your hippies are a bit more existentialist from what i'm told... and that has to be frustrating for an economist, lol.
        • thumb
          Jul 17 2012: Krisztián

          Thanks for the genuine LOL.

          You will have to forgive David he is a product of the U.S. education system. By the way David Krisztián is from Hungary.


          The hippies I know are mostly dead from drug overdoses.

          I have been a registered Libertarian for 35 years. In a nut shell we espouse to civil liberty. Volunteerism has nothing to do with it although there is nothing wrong with that and I do it myself from time to time and that doesn't even include learn-in economically illiterate TEDsters.
        • thumb
          Jul 18 2012: Sorry Pat, you must be the product of the American education system. Volunteerism, has nothing to do with a voluntary society. Voluntary societies are ones in which taxes are not collected by force, but by investment in civil institution through individuals free choice.

          I apologize for confusing you as Austrian. Must be because of the economics. Kokesh, Ron Paul, and a boat load of other libertarians, eventually see the government becoming something that does not need to be imposed on people through force. That is a voluntary society. Whether or not people volunteer is up to them, but with less of their resources being diverted to murder, it is likely that they will have more free time to volunteer.

          I love how both of you completely ignore my core point, because you know it's true, and you have an irrational hatred of hippies, so you don't want to accept that it's true. Hippies believe in a society that does not impose its will by force. Libertarians believe in a society that does not impose it's will by force... Deal with it.

          You're both so caught up in believing that you're right, and everyone else is wrong, that you forget what you actually believe in... It really is quite funny.
        • thumb
          Jul 18 2012: Maybe I'm ignorant but Libertarians has nothing to do with Volunteerism or a voluntary society which would not work Period.

          An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama’s socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

          The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama’s plan”. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A…. (substituting grades for dollars – something closer to home and more readily understood by all).

          After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

          The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

          When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

          As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

          To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
          It could not be any simpler than that.

          There are five morals to this story:

          1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

          2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

          3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
        • thumb
          Jul 18 2012: 4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

          5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
        • Jul 18 2012: Pat, that is a beautiful experiment Sharing with all and sundry!
  • Comment deleted

    • thumb
      Jul 18 2012: Read my profile, and you'll understand... The Douglas Adams quote, about lizards : )
      • Comment deleted

        • thumb
          Jul 18 2012: I vote for third parties... to throw my vote away proving we don't have to vote for the lizards.

          Most people in America believe that because this is a democracy, and we all voted for these representatives... It must not be as bad as someone like me suggests.

          Down a few lines in this conversation you will see a man who calls himself a libertarian, a party of non lizards... I am a libertarian. I am going to vote the libertarian non lizard candidate. He thinks that makes me a socialist, because that takes a vote away from Romney... A lizard. In other words "If I didn't vote for a lizard, the wrong lizard might get in".

          I don't consider the lizards the best thing that ever happened to us... but many people say that the republicans... or the democrats... are the best thing that have ever happened to us... They're both wrong of course, completely and utterly wrong... but someone's got to say it, because that's what advertisers pay the news for.

          I will admit that I did vote for Barack Obama, but that was partially for the historical importance of electing the nations first black president... and, I got suckered in by the whole "I will go line by line through the federal budget and eliminate wasteful spending"... Mostly though, I just thought, and still think the guy is a decent figurehead, and the president is basically a Ken doll anyway.

          I have no intention of voting for the lizards again any time soon.
        • thumb
          Jul 18 2012: In other words. In this analogy, the republicans and democrats are lizards. Hippies, and libertarians are the people... Especially young people. Just for fun I'll site a bit of evidence, the article is from vice.com, but they didn't do the research, it's legitimate.

  • thumb

    Gail .

    • 0
    Jul 18 2012: Gee - as a former Hibby and a present-day rational anarchist (Libertarian), I suspect that you might be painting with a rather broad brush. I am not a supporter of NASA. I object to extortion (taxes at the point of a gun). You can have a non-profit orgaization if you want, but pay your organizational taxes and don't force me to support it with my tax dollars. Don't force me to pay for your wars. Don't force me to support your religion or your religious "charitable" programs. Ask me for my support and I might give it to you, but don't use the over-extended power of government to steal from me.

    I do not want my goveernment to be a non-profit corpration. I want the smallest government possible - just like the connstituion called for before we lost our constitutional republic in a coup d'etat conducted by bansters & the wealth-class, using the Supreme Court as their proxy. If it weren't for that coup, you wouldn't even have been able to conceive your question.

    I only disagree when it comes to land ownership, but society isn't ready to hear my views on that yet.
    • thumb
      Jul 18 2012: "society isn't ready to hear my views"

      i can't wait
    • thumb
      Jul 18 2012: Do tell..

      How is it that Libertarians span from the likes of Ron Paul / John Stossel to Noam Chomsky. Maybe the definition of Libertarian is misunderstood?
    • thumb
      Jul 18 2012: Again, you are confusing voluntary society, with forced volunteerism... They are exact opposites. A voluntary society, run by a non profit corporation, is exactly what you describe.

      Just replace small government, with small non profit. Again, to me, this is the subtle difference between hippies and libertarians. Hippies are down for 10% tax to do good things, ie small government. Libertarians want all government contribution to come by choice, which would be more similar to a non profit.

      Small government is fine, but it is not what you are describing. A small government takes your money at the point of a gun. A small charity organization, you choose to donate to, does not. Ie nerds can donate to NASA. That's what I mean by it being run like a non profit, no force.

      I don't mean it has to re envision itself as a hippy daisy charity : p