I haven't noticed any poll options, so for those who'd like to make their stances known feel free to post here to identify your (current) position.
#3. Other (please elaborate)
I'm a member of the second camp.
[EDIT: It's also understood that all comments of which of the above is "right" will be saved for other threads.]
"Melody is a form of remembrance. It must have a quality of inevitability in our ears." - Gian Carlo Menotti
I guess the second camp has now two members
One night I dreamed of chewing up my debetcard - there simply is nothing like hard cash in your pocket!
I am a paleolibertarian, since I believe that the state has the right to protect the unborn. I am a strong proponent of civil liberties. I am not a Left-Libertarian nor market anarchist because I believe that copyright (NOT patents) createc innovation. I also believe that the state has the right to restrict immigration of the "inferior races." I am a paleolibertarian because Ron Paul is also a paleolibertarian. I am not a minarchist because I hate its utilitarian aspect. Every individual is unique and should be protected. No individual should assassinated in order to benefit the "majority".
I'm Constitutional Monarchist. Unforunatly I'm hort in time to elaborate.
"We are nothing. Mankind is all. By the grace of our brothers are we allowed our lives. We exist through, by and for our brothers who are the State. Amen."
Rothbardian anarchist. :)
Ultra-minarchist, currently flirting with anarchism.
Very Moderate Minarchist, and philosophical anachist.
A minarchist, at the moment. My position might change after I read more Mises and Rothbard. I am still fairly new to the Austrian School.
Corporations are an extension of the state.
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
I accept all of the following labels (in alphabetical order)
Abolitionist, agorist, agnostic, American, anarcha-feminist, anarchist, anarcho-capitalist, anarcho-liberal, anarchristian, anti-ageist, anti-aggression, anti-classist, anti-fascist, anti-interventionist, anti-nationalist, anti-racist, anti-statist, anti-war, artist, audiophile, austrian, autarchist, author, bibliophile, consistent, diversitarian, Earthling, environmentalist, extreme skeptic, feminist, fiscal conservative, free market anarchist, free marketeer, free market environmentalist, free market liberal, green libertarian, honest, hopeless romantic, human, humanist, ifeminist, individualist, individualist anarchist, individualist feminist, individualist masculist, intellectual, leftist, left-libertarian, left-Rothbardian, left-wing capitalist, *** feminist, liberal, libertarian, libertarian capitalist, libertarian feminist, libertarian masculist, market anarchist, market liberal, Marylander, masculist, moderate, natural lawyer, patriot, philosopher, private propertarian, progressive, propertarian, proletarian, radical, radical libertarian, realist, revolutionary, scientist, sex-positive feminist, skeptic, soft utilitarian, stigmergic socialist, student, thinker, tolerant, voluntaryist, and writer.
I do not view voting or copyrights to be unethical, however, despite my appreciation of agorism and voluntaryism.
Short answer: I'm in the second camp.
According to this quiz, I am:
And according to this quiz, I'm:
According to this quiz, I am not an anarchist but am a libertarian.
The ever-baised Political Compass quiz also does not place me where I belong. Egh.
That's a lot of labels!
I consider myself a market anarchist with agorist, left-rothbardian persuasions (that's right, I said left-rothbardian).
Left-Libertarian, Market Anarchist, Anti-Minarchist.
The Origins of Capitalism
And for more periodic bloggings by moi,
Minarchist-Libertarian influenced by Franklin-Jefferson-Hayek-Rothbard.
I think of myself as liberal (by this I mean an over-arching outlook which subsumes private property anarchism and classical liberalism). I do not think I have sufficient reason to agree with Mises against the anarchists or vice versa (this is not just because I am still studying the ideas; I think many anarchists and their opponents should acknowledge the need to give this controversy further consideration), so I prefer to identify myself as liberal, open to different specifications within the broad group of positions which emphasise liberty.
The atoms tell the atoms so, for I never was or will but atoms forevermore be.
I am an anarchist (Rothbard style).
All libertarians believe that all humans are alike in dignity, all have the same natural rights.
I have these questions to "libertarian" who said in his post there are inferior races:
How is it that you think there are inferior races? Which ones are inferior and superior according to you? Does the superior have more rights?
How can you support Ron Paul, whe he has said many times that all individuals have the same natural rights no matter the race, religion, sexual preference, etc.?
Luis Eduardo Zamorano:
I have these questions to "libertarian" [...]
I have these questions to "libertarian" [...]
That's what the PM function is for. This thread is for identification.
I would say that I'm a minarchist. I realise the problems in having a minimal state (in keeping it minimal) and also with raising funds through coercive taxation but I consider it the lesser of two evils when I compare with anarchism which will (in my opinion) lack a universally and equally applicable judicial system. People must have their property rights upheld whether or not they can afford to buy this "service". It is a pre-requisite to it being a free market.
I honestly don't know.
"All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree." -James Madison
"If government were efficient, it would cease to exist."
Time will tell
I am a market anarchist. But I prefer Free (Market) Radical, LOL. We currently have the smallest government possible, IMO. Once the wishes of each sub-group to gain control of the government or a slice of the government, have their say so, you get what we have. There can be no scaling back, because as long as their is some unseen "greater good" to be served, everyone should and does have a share in what that is. So the only greater good that can exist is individual freedom, unless you want what we have. I don't think that it is anymore preferable to wrest control from the federal tryany just to hand control of it to a local or state tyrany.
I am a polycentrist, in that I believe that a "natural order" (anarchy) would be based upon reciprocal obligations channelled by respected authorities in particular fields. I am also against elective abortion, as I feel it is as much an aggression against human dignity as war or slavery or taxes.
Court system, police force, and a small standing army for self-defense are the only rightful activities of gov't.
In real life though, I am much more willing to accept the mob's drive for redistributive action if it isn't specifically creating gov't monopolies to provide whatever good/service the mob is seeking at any given time. LOL
Paleolibertarian (which most definitely means market-anarchist), currently looking at the validity of the counter-economy, ie agorism.
Of course, I accept the main tenets of agorism, I'm just not sure it could ever achieve its goal of running the state "out of business", so to speak.
"I cannot prove, but am prepared to affirm, that if you take care of
clarity in reasoning, most good causes will take care of themselves,
while some bad ones are taken care of as a matter of course." -Anthony de Jasay
I went from being not interested in politics to being influenced by Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand to being a Libertarian to being a libertarian to being an anarcho-capitalist. Not exactly a 'long, strange trip", but I've still come a ways.
I went through pretty much the same progression as MacSnafu, though my influences were Rand, then Bastiat, Rothbard, Mises, etc. I put myself firmly in the Anarcho-Capitalist camp.
My progression of influences went roughly from Jesus to Bill Maher and John Stossel, then to Harry Browne (with a pinch of Michael Badnarik, introducing me to the concept of natural rights), on to Murray Rothbard. But of course there are hundreds of others that had influences upon me, including Bastiat, Spangler, etc. etc., just not as fundamentally as Browne and Rothbard.
I guess I would be Other, mainly because I only recently
crossed over into libertarian territory fairly recently, of which I credit to
Ron Paul, although I can't say I agree with him 100% (probably 90%).
However, even when I was a self described "progressive leftist" a half-year ago, I was always reading on opposing
viewpoints. I have to agree on
a lot of what I've read so far on minarchy, particularly with Fried Egg's
comment on upholding property rights as a pre-req for the free market.
I'll get back to this thread when I stop living online and I've hit some books
"Look at me, I'm quoting another user to show how wrong I think they are, out of arrogance of my own position. Wait, this is my own quote, oh shi-" ~ Nitroadict
At this point, I'm a minarchist with anarcho-capitalist leanings. The only thing that keeps me the former as opposed to the latter is the worry that a wealthy enough business (or a small set thereof) - a bank maybe - could potentially hijack the situation (perhaps hiring thugs and mercenaries as enforcers) and turn itself into a self-perpetuating set of inherited monopolies which use force to make sure that people buy their brand and their brand only, at least on a local scale, with little or no chance of being pulled down. We saw this in the US with some of the mining towns, and also possibly with the hijacking of the US government today - at least that's how I perceive it. I could be wrong on this, but that is simply my concern regarding anarcho-capitalism. The way I see it anarchism of any form would eventually turn to either democracy (which really seems to be little more than oppression by the masses), monarchy, or some kind of rule by the corporate board of executives or whatever. In an ideal world, I would certainly prefer anarchism, however the world is not ideal, so I think there is at least a need for some kind of impartial judiciary to decide on cases of breached contracts at a bare minimum.