Re: The War on Terror /Central Asia/Mid East/Africa thread
Posted: Wed August 18, 2021 2:37 am
I didnt say I was a libertarian. I'm just anti-government.
Come you masters of war...BurtReynolds wrote:
BurtReynolds wrote:I didnt say I was a libertarian. I'm just anti-government.

LolRob wrote:“Small government” is just something some people say, they don’t really mean it.
BurtReynolds wrote:I didnt say I was a libertarian. I'm just anti-government.
Unfortunately I think this is usually true. But there are some people who mean it. You just wont find them in governmental power or cheering for either team.Rob wrote:“Small government” is just something some people say, they don’t really mean it.
Maybe a cartoon version (which lots of libertarians invite upon themselves). But also, there wouldn't have been a 20 year war on terrorism or a war on drugs or mass incarceration, etc., etc. I know there's other things that you (and some that I) support that wouldn't happen either, but there are some significant things that you probably would happily accept if they had gotten to make those policy decisions.Rob wrote:Libertarianism is like a young hot chick you could get down with for a bit, but you know ahead of time you’ll have to grow out of it. Some choose not to. Whatever.
tragabigzanda wrote:No knowledge or opinion on assange’s specific claims but this “war” has always been about corporate profits. Criticizing the humanitarian crisis unfolding now is a bit like criticizing a car for its lack of empathy: it’s not what it was designed to do.
Yes biden made the right move in pulling out, and then bungled the execution to a humongous degree, and now deserves all the criticizing coming his way. But our 20 year stint was never about spreading democracy or freedom or any of that shit. The well ran dry and the getting is looking good in the Ukraine, so time to pivot.
I was mostly messing around, referring to those cartoon versions of online libertarians like Burt. My whole life I’ve heard “small government” but it was usually Republicans using that in an economic sense - low taxes, fewer services, free markets… but they never talked about those 3 examples you give (they actually grew those polices). So were they small government? The left tends to want less government in the social sphere (replacing the war on drugs, less incarceration, getting the government out of the bedroom or decision to marry, etc… but they want more services for the people, even if it means higher taxes. Why is that automatically the big government side? I guess I just think for most people, it doesn’t really boil down to big or small government. More about what you think its priorities should be.4/5 wrote:Unfortunately I think this is usually true. But there are some people who mean it. You just wont find them in governmental power or cheering for either team.Rob wrote:“Small government” is just something some people say, they don’t really mean it.
Maybe a cartoon version (which lots of libertarians invite upon themselves). But also, there wouldn't have been a 20 year war on terrorism or a war on drugs or mass incarceration, etc., etc. I know there's other things that you (and some that I) support that wouldn't happen either, but there are some significant things that you probably would happily accept if they had gotten to make those policy decisions.Rob wrote:Libertarianism is like a young hot chick you could get down with for a bit, but you know ahead of time you’ll have to grow out of it. Some choose not to. Whatever.
One of the reasons I favor UBI (universal basic income) is to get a smaller government. You get UBI but we scrap social housing, school lunches and a whole slew of other poverty reduction programs.Rob wrote:I was mostly messing around, referring to those cartoon versions of online libertarians like Burt. My whole life I’ve heard “small government” but it was usually Republicans using that in an economic sense - low taxes, fewer services, free markets… but they never talked about those 3 examples you give (they actually grew those polices). So were they small government? The left tends to want less government in the social sphere (replacing the war on drugs, less incarceration, getting the government out of the bedroom or decision to marry, etc… but they want more services for the people, even if it means higher taxes. Why is that automatically the big government side? I guess I just think for most people, it doesn’t really boil down to big or small government. More about what you think its priorities should be.4/5 wrote:Unfortunately I think this is usually true. But there are some people who mean it. You just wont find them in governmental power or cheering for either team.Rob wrote:“Small government” is just something some people say, they don’t really mean it.
Maybe a cartoon version (which lots of libertarians invite upon themselves). But also, there wouldn't have been a 20 year war on terrorism or a war on drugs or mass incarceration, etc., etc. I know there's other things that you (and some that I) support that wouldn't happen either, but there are some significant things that you probably would happily accept if they had gotten to make those policy decisions.Rob wrote:Libertarianism is like a young hot chick you could get down with for a bit, but you know ahead of time you’ll have to grow out of it. Some choose not to. Whatever.