List your parties in order of preference.

BonnieDundee · 25-04-2008, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smidgey

BNP are too left wing to be libertarian.

Probably a slim majority of libertarians have been leftwing if you estimate them all. From Proudhon through the first international to the CNT in Spain and all the way up to the 60s and today.

Smidgey · 25-04-2008, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BonnieDundee

Probably a slim majority of libertarians have been leftwing if you estimate them all. From Proudhon through the first international to the CNT in Spain and all the way up to the 60s and today.

Except that is not what I was talking about.

If I was talking about football I wouldn't except you to come along and say: "The majority of footballers use their hands when playing".

Stop bringing up these old definitions that only you and your father (seemingly) know about. It is absolutely clear to every single person on this forum, apart from you what people mean when they use the word libertarian.

Can I ask you BonnieDundee, why is it that every time someone uses the word libertarian, you bring up the old definition as some sort of counter? It must have happened at least five times now. Everyone knows what I and others mean by the word libertarian, just as they do with the word football, liberal or American (a citizen of the USA, not a North or South American). What you are doing (if you can't tell my mood by my post) is extremely annoying and pointless.

I really am becoming exhasperated over this constant semantic nonsense and having to reply to it every single time. Is one response not enough? What are you really getting out of this? Why do you keep doing it?

BonnieDundee · 25-04-2008, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smidgey

Except that is not what I was talking about.

If I was talking about football I wouldn't except you to come along and say: "The majority of footballers use their hands when playing".

Stop bringing up these old definitions that only you and your father (seemingly) know about. It is absolutely clear to every single person on this forum, apart from you what people mean when they use the word libertarian.

And many other people know of it, the American usage is unfortunately spreading but it hasn't conquered the world quite yet. It is still in use throughout most of the world except for America and those influenced by American political fringes. You are no doubt influenced by the American political system but the broader definition which has suffered there(but is not entirely wiped out.) has not been extinguished here, most Britain's don't yet associate the word with Milton Friedman or Hayek unless they spend time on American message boards, and I don't wish to see it distinguished. It is a very useful word and I hope to support a successful rearguard action to stop the halt of American style becoming the exclusive usage here.

Quote:

Can I ask you BonnieDundee, why is it that every time someone uses the word libertarian, you bring up the old definition as some sort of counter? It must have happened at least five times now. Everyone knows what I and others mean by the word libertarian, just as they do with the word football, liberal or American (a citizen of the USA, not a North or South American). What you are doing (if you can't tell my mood by my post) is extremely annoying and pointless.

I keep bringing it up because in the UK I don't want to see that word being exclusively used by American style libertarians. This is still an equally popular usage in the UK, particularly among those cut-off from American political message boards and I want to defend this usage.

Quote:

I really am becoming exhasperated over this constant semantic nonsense and having to reply to it every single time. Is one response not enough? What are you really getting out of this? Why do you keep doing it?

Because in the UK I want to use the word libertarian without instantly being thought of as a Freidmanite or Randriod. If you admit that the word libertarian can have a much wider usage than these currents of it then that is fine. Let's not forget other usages, on a global scale, still are as numerous if unfortunately declining.

Also although I am influenced by American style libertarian thinkers and have read many works by them but I know my decentralist and libertarian history and know that other usages have a much more interesting theoretical and practical core than alot of those who adhere to the American usage.

Globally other usages are still as numerous and to answer your questions I fully intend to keep up telling people of the other usages and to try and stop the word being exclusively claimed by one current.

g hall · 25-04-2008, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by British-Conservatism

It it was a Nazi party would it have Jewish members and such a pro-Israeli possition?

Is the ss in position a freudian slip mien herr ?

Smidgey · 25-04-2008, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BonnieDundee

And many other people know of it, the American usage is unfortunately spreading but it hasn't conquered the world quite yet. It is still in use throughout most of the world except for America and those influenced by American political fringes. You are no doubt influenced by the American political system but the broader definition which has suffered there(but is not entirely wiped out.) has not been extinguished here, most Britain's don't yet associate the word with Milton Friedman or Hayek unless they spend time on American message boards, and I don't wish to see it distinguished. It is a very useful word and I hope to support a successful rearguard action to stop the halt of American style becoming the exclusive usage here.

What then, do you think we should call so-called 'American Libertarians'? I would use liberal, but do you see our predicament? It was taken from us in the same sense as one could say that libertarian is being taken from you.

Quote:

I keep bringing it up because in the UK I don't want to see that word being exclusively used by American style libertarians. This is still an equally popular usage in the UK, particularly among those cut-off from American political message boards and I want to defend this usage.

As I have said in the past, I never learned the word libertarian on any message board. I learned it during my degree when I studied Nozick.

You do realise that plenty of British people have learnt these words from books? Especially if they are politically literate enough to know what a libertarian is.

You might wish to defend that usage, but the reference of my usage in this thread was clear to everyone else and did not require you to jump in an offer your two cents on something that really doesn't matter in the big scheme of things.

I'm sorry if I sound annoyed over this, but it's because I am. I see it as being almost completely irrelevent. I get the impression that you only made that comment to start a sort of pseudo-debate. Although, I could be wrong.

Quote:

Because in the UK I want to use the word libertarian without instantly being thought of as a Freidmanite or Randriod. If you admit that the word libertarian can have a much wider usage than these currents of it then that is fine. Let's not forget other usages, on a global scale, still are as numerous if unfortunately declining.

Most words have a wide usage. I would like to use the world liberal without being seen as a wet leftist. Sadly, I cannot. Do you know what I do? I live with it and use the word libertarian instead.

P.S. I'm not a Rand fan. If I wanted to be associated with her, I would be called an objectivist.

Quote:

Also although I am influenced by American style libertarian thinkers and have read many works by them but I know my decentralist and libertarian history and know that other usages have a much more interesting theoretical and practical core than alot of those who adhere to the American usage.

Globally other usages are still as numerous and to answer your questions I fully intend to keep up telling people of the other usages and to try and stop the word being exclusively claimed by one current.

You can do that as long as you like. The fact is, you are like Canute trying to stop the tide. Friedman himself called himself a liberal - look at what liberal means now. Furthermore, it is far better that it means one thing, especially in this context. Consider, for example, the use of the word libertarian in a different context - the philosophy of free will. Libertarianism is the position that free will exists. Again, another example of libertarianism associated with freedom.

BonnieDundee · 26-04-2008, 02:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smidgey

What then, do you think we should call so-called 'American Libertarians'? I would use liberal, but do you see our predicament? It was taken from us in the same sense as one could say that libertarian is being taken from you.

Well you can use the word just not exclusively. I still like your kind of libertarianism and read it and am influenced by it. I'm arguing more for a broad usage than it simply being used by leftwing anarchists and libertarian socialists as it used to be. To identify the particular brand you are into I simply attach "American style" to it.

A

Quote:

s I have said in the past, I never learned the word libertarian on any message board. I learned it during my degree when I studied Nozick.

You do realise that plenty of British people have learnt these words from books? Especially if they are politically literate enough to know what a libertarian is.

Most learn it from message boards or involvement in US politics, it has become trendy, even amongst academics its seems. Ron Paul seems to have given it an unwelcome boost in my opinion.

Quote:

You might wish to defend that usage, but the reference of my usage in this thread was clear to everyone else and did not require you to jump in an offer your two cents on something that really doesn't matter in the big scheme of things.

I'm sorry if I sound annoyed over this, but it's because I am. I see it as being almost completely irrelevent. I get the impression that you only made that comment to start a sort of pseudo-debate. Although, I could be wrong.

It is not a debate really, I don't particularly want to debate this. I'll use my usage and you use yours.

Quote:

Most words have a wide usage. I would like to use the world liberal without being seen as a wet leftist. Sadly, I cannot. Do you know what I do? I live with it and use the word libertarian instead.

Well actually the word liberal here has even less to do with American usage. I usually mention I'm a decentralist and libertarian, so that sometimes works for me.

Let's not forget this isn't the only time American style libertarians have done similar things. The term Anarcho-capitalist springs to mind.

Quote:

P.S. I'm not a Rand fan. If I wanted to be associated with her, I would be called an objectivist.

I don't mind Rand sometimes, I prefer her to Milton Friedman in many ways. I really like Hayek, Mises, Rothbard and David Friedman. I also like Karl Hess and Konkin alot.

British-Conservatism · 26-04-2008, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Bear

No it does not.

Churchill especially was anti fascist in the extreme.

To take on (or appear to take on) some of the principles of people such as Churchill is absolutely NOT sufficient to claim that the BNP represents almost 100% of their opinions let alone their policies.

In fact it is disingenuous in the extreme.

Would the BNP have Jewish members?

Where’s the proof that it does?

And even if it did who’s to prove that any such member had not simply been fooled by the fleece around the wolf?

As for supporting Israel, that is exactly the same as saying that it supports Australia or Rhodesia or The Maldives.

In fact to use Israel in the context that you do implies that there might be some reason why any right thinking person should not.

The BNP is just as anti-fascist as Churchill was.
As for jewish members the BNP not only has Jewish members but local organisers and elected officials.

The Bear · 26-04-2008, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by British-Conservatism

The BNP is just as anti-fascist as Churchill was.
As for jewish members the BNP not only has Jewish members but local organisers and elected officials.

The BNP is anti fascist in about the same way and to the same degree that the Nazi's were humanitarian.

As for the possibility of there being "Jewish" members of the BNP, even if true and there is no evidence that it is, I have always maintained that there are decent people who don’t see through the smoke and mirrors.

But why pick on Jesish as being important? How many Muslim members? How many “Yardies”, British born, British bred, Black as their cousins in Jamaica, but British just as much as you or I?

Come out with some of those groups and then you might be able to make claims about the cosmopolitan and multi ethnic qualities about the BRITISH National Party.

mkpdavies · 26-04-2008, 09:37 AM

I doubt having a recruitment campaign for Yardies would improve their image much.

British-Conservatism · 26-04-2008, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

I doubt having a recruitment campaign for Yardies would improve their image much.

very funny.

26-04-2008, 09:37 AM	#49 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,087 Party: Libertarian Party	I doubt having a recruitment campaign for Yardies would improve their image much. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode