Implied in my question is a request to provide illustrative examples.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Definition Of "libertarian"
- Thread starter Revoltingest
- Start date
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
The Early Christian Church! A cooperative communalism that pool their talents and resources together in order to live in the grace and freedom of a loving community.
Alceste
Vagabond
Your company would be competing against a coop or collective where the means of production is controlled by the workers and the workers share equally in any generated revenue. Or perhaps several of these, using several different models.
That's who you'd want to watch out for, since the competition would be likely attract the most competent and productive workers without necessarily increasing the cost or reducing the quality of the product.
You may also have to watch out for your neighbours - the community in which your factory operates - as they may not be willing to tolerate environmental degradation or labour exploitation that may be associated with your factory. Ideally, they'd exert their liberties through persuasion and direct action rather than through bureaucratic pipelines.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
And I don't think he gets that private property is about limiting the freedom and liberty of others by it's very nature.
Alceste
Vagabond
It depends on the circumstances. The community in which you operate has a vested interest in your activities there and may take action to prevent operations that they feel interfere with their own liberties. A crude example would be if you decide it's cheaper and more profitable to pump your building's sewage into the community's open waterways instead of piping it all the way to a sewage treatment plant. If that were the case, you could expect to become the target of direct action against you and your building by the community.
If your liberties do not interfere with the liberties of others, you can expect to be left alone to do your thing.
My question is not facetious.
The way to understand is to ask questions to which one doesn't know the answer,
& that answer would be illuminating. If you don't want to answer my questions
because you feel they're not legitimate, then I'll not understand your position.
Again, these are more the kind of answers I'm looking for.
They paint a picture of governmental structure (or lack thereof).
except they have been answered several times now. like just about, your question has no meaning in this context. I explaid that, I explained why. Now its time for you to as again. :thud:
Alceste
Vagabond
True, right libertarians in general tend to conflate the concept of freedom with the concept of private ownership and private profit, even while recognizing that it generally takes a whole community of others to generate that private profit for them.
From my perspective, what the ideal society looks like is one question, and certainly land could not be bought and sold in an ideal society. But from a practical point of view, since we are starting from a point where 11% of the land in my country is already "owned" by someone or other, my preference would be preventing further transfers of our collective land or the right to exploit it to private interests while allowing those who own or want to own land within that 11% to trade it to their heart's content.
What you don't get is that the lack of private property also limits freedom to
accomplish things. A balance is to be struck, one which you've yet to face.
you say that like it is demonstrable truth.
could you expand upon that idea?
I ask cuz I want to understand.
If you think you've answered enuf, & don't want to answer any more, then of course you needn't.
but i like you.
An example is the iPod that I'm listening to is my personal property but the apartment I'm living in would be considered communal property that I am currently in possession of.
Anarchist communism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Personal property - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Private property - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It's what happens in all societies (that I know of).
There is common property & private property.
And this division will differ greatly among them.
It is demonstrable. It is not "truth".
Alceste
Vagabond
Sure. Governance would be holarchic. Individuals are accountable to themselves and their immediate community. Communities are accountable to themselves and to each other. Groups of communities are accountable to themselves and other groups, and so forth. At every level, any diplomatic representative of the interests of any group at any level must live and work within that group. At no point can an individual or group of individuals from a community thousands of miles away impose a top down decision on communities in which they do not personally live and work.
It's a form of direct democracy.
I have dreams of taking warm showers with you too,
but your answers so far do not paint a very complete
picture of your beliefs for me. But I'll go with what
I have.
Would I be able to compete with communal housing...offering a product which tenants would prefer?