Where has "pure libertarianism" worked?
I have gotten this question, in different forms, over the years and it has a buried assumption built in. The problem is that it assumes that libertarianism is a binary proposition. It's all or none. A government or society is simply libertarian or it is not. I don't see how this would ever be true as most ideas seldom are expressed in idealistically pure form.
Libertarianism is a philosophy of non initiation of force. This happens all the time. It's happening right here on this forum. Any time people do not force each other to do something it's working. It only can be viewed from a perspective of 'purity' from an interaction level. So I think this is a flawed question.
Let's say we have a nation filled with libertarians that have fully accepted and try their best to live by the philosophy. There will always be people that decide to use force. They are not libertarian in action or philosophy so do you discredit the whole society now as 'not libertarian' or it 'does not work' because of this single failure?
Libertarianism is all around us. People participate in it all the time even if they are unaware of the philosophy or even if they do not accept it. Really the run-away idea of using force is the abnormal interaction. That is where failure lies. When we decide as individuals and groups in society that we must force people live by our demands. That is where it doesn't work.
We consider it unjust to steal even a $1 bill from our neighbor. Yet when government comes in play as an agent on our behalf then it suddenly becomes okay to take from others. By government action we give assumed authority over to do things we would never do as individuals because it creates an easy abstraction to behave in such a way. The "someone ought to do something" becomes a rationalization to let go of guilt and responsibility for something we supposedly care about and only empower our mechanism for blame when it is not done.
Not using force works all the time. It is when we force each other that the failures come into place and beget further failures when we don't recognize that is the core problem.
You could consider them the majority that doesn't vote, in turn casting their vote against democracy, as democracy is always Majority Rule, and in paradoxical fashion they denounce democracy and have done so for a long time, in fact I wonder when the last time a Majority of the population elected a representative to Congress or Senate, and we're not even talking about the Continental Congress and Senate, but the look-alike impostor, and usually when you don't use force with people that are forcing you, if you sit quietly and don't object even they will call it consent, and equally if you know an impostor is an impostor, treating them as legitimate afterwards is completely on you, because you aprove and you wish to be deceived, so why shouldn't we let you be deceived?
I actually do consider that, but we live in the reality of how it works and not how we wish it would. In the US, the voting system is the majority that shows up. I recognize we basically never get a true majority of those registered to vote much less of people in general.
It would be far more meaningful if those who actually wanted to protest turned in blank ballots. At best non voting is an ignored abstention at at worst simply recognized as not caring enough to even have a voice in the process.
People who do not vote are absolutely not "casting a vote against democracy". They lack of participation doesn't damage it one iota. Making a statement involved action. Not non participation and acceptance.
It's not the reality of How we wish but the reality of what Democracy is. It's either Majority Rule or it's not and reality doesn't come into play because we never went on a wishing trip.
It's a vote on principle, and regardless of blank ballots, and your inferring on what people "care", because clearly it's recognized that the Majority didn't Vote whichever way you slice it, so it's not Democracy.
If 11% gather to vote is it still Democracy, if 1% of 11% gathered is it still a democracy? The Beard Argument.
I think there is great irony in telling me what I am inferring from peoples votes :)
The reality is... no one cares and its not talked about except at the rare dark corner of the internet.
If you want to be counted take an action that can be. :) Thats my point.
It's only ironic if you assume you inferred correctly.
The point was that the action is to Not Play The Game, and a point you've not contested with logic, so at what point is the game no more? 11%?
Thats why its ironic. You are accusing me of inferring when im simply pointing out that you don't know. You are assuming everyone not voting is a protest. You simply have no clue.
And if you don't know how many non participates it would take to theoretically "stop the game" then you don't know that either.
You are making massive assumptions about stuff that you have no actual information on or limit.
Clearly some percentage of the population will keep on voting. You plan is so extreme as to be meaningless. Also you haven't recognized that your protests aren't even recognized because again, you are assuming everyone that doesn't vote is a protest. False.
Democracy isn't democracy without a majority, and when the majority doesn't participate, for whatever the reason, consciously or not, it's a majority or a Mandate in a very visceral and undeniably democratic way.
I don't know because I don't know, despite that I was questioning you rhetorically with any arbitrary percentage below that at which a majority could Theoretically be a Democracy, a threshold that hasn't been reached in as long as a majority haven't all cast their votes for one person or one issue.
Such as what a Democracy is and isn't and what or am I making assumptions on what majority does when they don't participate like you who claim that despite their non-participation it doesn't mean anything and can mean everything, but certainly not that it's either democracy or majority, or a valid choice even.
I made no suggestions.
It's not my business what others recognize, it's evident to anyone that a choice to not vote doesn't necessitate a protest, but non-participation and the questions is at what point does a Democracy stop being a democracy and why is the choice of non-participation not recognized and clearly so as NON-PARTICIPATION?
I thought that libertarians live by the NAP rules. So if someone uses force, then it's okay to use force on them, strip them of their freedom. As long you are not the initiator of force, or better said, not the one who breaks the NAP rule, then it becomes unethical to use force on you.
What I'm trying to say is, yes there will always be people who try to force others to do stuff, but there should be rules in place to deal with those who are dangerous. When are they dangerous, when they break the NAP.
Yet if you approve of democracy and argue that regardless of what democracy is, "reality" is different so "deal with it" or "play the game" you agree that democracy or Might is Right, Majority Rules, is ok, and, even if that's only a "majority that chose to play the game", you cannot abide by NAP, wouldn't you agree?
I don't approve of democracy. For the reasons you gave. If the majority wants to attack you, yes, in a democracy it might be ethical, but it breaks the NAP. The NAP should be the supreme rule, not the majority. So I do agree.
I am a capitalist, so I think people should rather vote with their money.
Congratulations @amthomasiv! You have completed the following achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on the badge to view your Board of Honor.
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPDo not miss the last post from @steemitboard:
SteemitBoard World Cup Contest - Semi Finals - Day 1
Participate in the SteemitBoard World Cup Contest!
Collect World Cup badges and win free SBD
Support the Gold Sponsors of the contest: @good-karma and @lukestokes
Congratulations @amthomasiv! You received a personal award!
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!
Go here https://steemit.com/@a-a-a to get your post resteemed to over 72,000 followers.