Should we de-fund/abolish the police?

[AttackFormation]

The definition of libertarianism to which I am referring to involves the following: A political philosophy that upholds individual liberty as a core principle. Maximum freedom and autonomy, freedom of choice, voluntary association, and individual judgment. Restriction of coercive social institutions and limited state power.

-Augustus-

Yes... right-libertarianism is based on negative liberty as an ideal (freedom is to be free from violence and fraud) whereas left-libertarianism is based on positive liberty as an ideal (freedom is control over decisions and consequences to the extent they affect you).

 

[user43770]

About the riots specifically:

1) That it's easier to change your life than to change an entire system. He'd probably advise minorities living in Minneapolis to move - maybe even outside of the USA.

2) That protesting or rioting can make you a target - the government can't track everybody, contrary to popular belief, but it will track those who seek attention.

3) That business owners who are victims of looting should not rely on police for protection.

4) That organized solutions are group traps. You sacrifice money, time, and freedom for limited results. (Circles back to #1.)

5) That feeling unnecessarily guilty over the state of affairs is being in the Morality Trap.

I could probably go on and on...

I respect the hell out of Harry, but the libertarian movement died with him. Their platitudes, while justifiable, aren't realistic. Same as liberals.

 

[user43770]

@samspade not to say that a person shouldn't read "how I found freedom in an unfree world."

Game changer for me and you. Red pill before there was one. I'd take a knee before Harry Browne, as king.

 

[zekko]

I'd take a knee before Harry Browne, as king.

What is up with all this taking a knee business? I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it is odd that there was the anthem protest in the NFL with athletes taking a knee, and then that cop murdered George Floyd with his knee, kneeling in almost the same position. Kind of weird.

 

[user43770]

Agreed on both posts. It's not realistic from a governing standpoint. Otherwise we'd have competing sewer systems and interstates.

But from a standpoint of personal sovereignty, he was spot on.

And he wouldn't want you to take a knee!

He would have been an intelligent, benevolent king. He was a good person, and I don't say that about many people.

There are so many holes you can poke in libertarianism, if you want to be realistic.

 

[user43770]

What is up with all this taking a knee business? I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it is odd that there was the anthem protest in the NFL with athletes taking a knee, and then that cop murdered George Floyd with his knee, kneeling in almost the same position. Kind of weird.

It's a show of submission.

 

[user43770]

@zekko the knee hold is common around the world for police. Bowing before an NFL commissioner, on the other hand...

 

[Augustus_McCrae]

I'm not that concerned over whether "income" is taxed at a flat or progressive rate.

I am concerned about dividing "income" into what used to be called earned income and unearned income - the concept of economic rent arising from platform monopolies, barriers to entry (but also to exit, especially for individuals' choices), anticompetitive practices, externalities (like pollution and burnout, or benefitting from public infrastructure and spending), market cornering (such as in real estate, particularly since land is a fixed and unevenly valuable supply), privatized natural monopolies (like commercial banking that creates the money supply), and inheritances that source back to acts of violence (such as privatization by land enclosure, or income from slavery).

I don't think capitalism is a desirable form of government, but I think a progressive implementation of economic democracy is the way to solve that, not "taxation of income". In other words, I'm a left-libertarian.

Why do you think capitalism is not desirable?

-Augustus-

 

[user43770]

Why do you think capitalism is not desirable?

-Augustus-

Because it ultimately results in the current state of all western nation's?

Sorry, I was thinking of democracy

 

[Augustus_McCrae]

I'm not that concerned over whether "income" is taxed at a flat or progressive rate.

I am concerned about dividing "income" into what used to be called earned income and unearned income - the concept of economic rent arising from platform monopolies, barriers to entry (but also to exit, especially for individuals' choices), anticompetitive practices, externalities (like pollution and burnout, or benefitting from public infrastructure and spending), market cornering (such as in real estate, particularly since land is a fixed and unevenly valuable supply), privatized natural monopolies (like commercial banking that creates the money supply), and inheritances that source back to acts of violence (such as privatization by land enclosure, or income from slavery).

I don't think capitalism is a desirable form of government, but I think a progressive implementation of economic democracy is the way to solve that, not "taxation of income". In other words, I'm a left-libertarian.

And what do you mean by “a progressive implementation of economic democracy“?

-Augustus-

 

[EyeBRollin]

Because it ultimately results in the current state of all western nation's?

Western nations are capitalist?

 

[Alvafe]

I'm not that concerned over whether "income" is taxed at a flat or progressive rate.

I am concerned about dividing "income" into what used to be called earned income and unearned income - the concept of economic rent arising from platform monopolies, barriers to entry (but also to exit, especially for individuals' choices), anticompetitive practices, externalities (like pollution and burnout, or benefitting from public infrastructure and spending), market cornering (such as in real estate, particularly since land is a fixed and unevenly valuable supply), privatized natural monopolies (like commercial banking that creates the money supply), and inheritances that source back to acts of violence (such as privatization by land enclosure, or income from slavery).

I don't think capitalism is a desirable form of government, but I think a progressive implementation of economic democracy is the way to solve that, not "taxation of income". In other words, I'm a left-libertarian.

ok, and what is economic democracy?

 

[user43770]

Western nations are capitalist?

To varying degrees, yes

 

[user43770]

@EyeBRollin some countries covertly use capitalism to fuel their socialism, but those chickens have been coming home to roost since Trump has been in office

 

[user43770]

Suddenly, European nations are having to worry about their own defense. And they're seriously starting to think about the possibilities.

 

[AttackFormation]

Why do you think capitalism is not desirable?

-Augustus-

Because it isn't built on positive liberty: control over decisions and consequences to the extent they affect you. Instead it is built on negative liberty, and thus it sanctions authoritarian economic relations which is a contradiction against [economic] democracy.

This leads to deprivation, exploitation, and suffering - although much of it could be alleviated with the right kind of capitalist government, this doesn't happen in practice and capitalism's inherent tendencies (like cost shifting, profit maximization, regulatory capture and a large distance between decision makers and the affected) largely work against it. Statism is also undesirable because a state is an authoritarian institution just like a corporation, and totalitarianism is even worse as your civil liberties are removed. But capitalism relies on and always has relied on the state, including for violence against organized labor.

That said, I don't think capitalism should be replaced in a blind, destructive frenzy nor do I think democracy in of itself is inherently good because people may not be good (just ask Socrates). Virtue in culture is fundamental to organizing a successful society for a pro-social species like ours, regardless of which form of government there is. I am pragmatic and pessimistic.

And what do you mean by “a progressive implementation of economic democracy“?

-Augustus-

It should be implemented in a way that doesn't cause civil war.

ok, and what is economic democracy?

"Economic democracy is a socioeconomic philosophy that proposes to shift decision-making power from corporate managers and corporate shareholders to a larger group of public stakeholders that includes workers, customers, suppliers, neighbours and the broader public. No single definition or approach encompasses economic democracy, ..." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_democracy

 

[zekko]

I get it, but a vocal minority should NOT get to make the silent majority less safe. There are people in that city who weren't responsible for any of the mayhem, attempted to discourage or stop it, spoke out against it(at their own risk), and lack the resources to leave. If Minneapolis goes through with this, every politician in that city should be rounded up and publicly executed, for serving their flock to the wolves.....after a speedy trial, of course.

And as has been noted, if there are fewer police, it's the poorest people who are going to suffer the most.

 

[user43770]

This may be overly optimistic of me, but I suspect the recent dose of reality may be sufficient to flip some of those cities to the Right, this election cycle.

 

[Xenom0rph]

As @Solomon already pointed out, abolishing the police department would only encourage armed vigilante gangs patrolling around like they're the Justice League and it would only result in more violence and more looting. Businesses would leave, residents would move away and the communities would slowly die.

Drug gangs would move in and set up shop unchecked.

Abolishing the police dept is an idiotic idea.

 

[user43770]

As @Solomon already pointed out, abolishing the police department would only encourage armed vigilante gangs patrolling around like they're the Justice League and it would only result in more violence and more looting. Businesses would leave, residents would move away and the communities would slowly die.

Drug gangs would move in and set up shop unchecked.

Abolishing the police dept is an idiotic idea.

Way to state the obvious. You gonna get worked up about it?

Obviously, no police is a horrible idea. Who would protect the elites? Lollol