Libertarian-Progressivism

[Tinker]

I am working on my thoughts on Libertarian-Progressivism. I should think you might have some interesting insights into the topic and I hope you would help me form it into a coherent philosophy. I think there is something there. Seeking to achieve progressive goals through free-market means.

Community healthcare. This is one place where Bush was absolutely right, and Obama is absolutely right for backing Bush being absolutely right. Faith based initiatives. Fucking brilliant. The perfect place to institute cultural socialism but without the coercion. Churches already run a lot of medical services, using the increased interconnection of global information culture, resources can be shared and people in the community can be linked. If a Catholic Clinic doesn't want to provide birth control they don't, if you want it you go to the Progressive Clinic that believes in those things.

I believe that if all the effort fighting about what the government should and should not provide went in to actually trying to provide these things by grassroots effort, we could probably build more sustainable community centric models for these things.

Liberty is important and Social Justice is important. I fail to see how they are at odds.

Libertarian-Progressivism can without sacrificing idealism can straddle progressives, greens and libertarians all at once. I am not talking about moderates. No. I am talking about extremists, people who really truly believe in these principles. Permaculture techniques and philosophy should underly the way we look at everything. THe essence of permaculture is to build sustainable systems that are supported by and supportive of the local geography. Seaweed comes from the ocean but dates can be grown in the desert.

A move against a consumptive lifestyle, with a participatory culture put in its place. At the local level we should seek to find ways to include everyone who wants to be included in the system of providing for one another. This creates a more sustainable sense of bottom up economy. Instead of trickle down theory, you have grow up theory. The notion that the local community is the foundation for the entire economy and that economic schemes should not focus on large decentralized organizations, but be grassroots and community supported.

No violent revolution is required. Just as a credit union may exist within a world of JP Morgan and Bank of America, so too should a locally grown insurance cooperative be able to exist in a world of AIG and Blue Cross. Medical is too expensive because there is a profiteering racket selling snake oil in order to not show billion dollar losses because a corporation created a drug taht people mostly don't need.

Literacy, Numeracy and Scientific knowledge are highly important. Every single person should have a solid foundation in anatomy physiology, touching on proper exercise technique and educate them on the basis of nutrition. If everyone in the country had the baseline medical education that I received in a two year degree from massage school then it would drive down healthcare costs immeasurably. We are able to be sold snake oil because we are largely medically illiterate.

The entire revolution can be fought at the cultural level between individuals. There's even a slogan. "Independence is the opposite of dependence."

I'll work on it more, but those are my initial thoughts.


I invite Mr. Perfect to help me walk the walk and lets figure out how to solve society's needs without turning everything into a government entitlement.

[Hapax Legomenon]

This whole concept seems very idealistic, but not wholly unfeasible because of the readiness of a great percentage of the populace for REAL change. Many of my friends that voted for Nader are completely comfortable voting for Ron Paul, and reciprocated. Maybe it is our generation, that is not nearly as sure of the future as our predecessors. I'm not sure. Your system seems that it requires noocracy or benevolent dictatorship and that is very unpredictable in the short-term, even though we have historical records of the long-term results--not good. Why not just pull a Tyler Durden and "let the chips fall where they may," without the structure? That seems to be the one thing that hasn't been tried.

[noddy]

thats pretty much my utopia.

now, just got to wait for all the athiest secular types to wake up and smell the fact they are the new catholic fundamentalists and that no - we dont all have the same priorities and opinions about the perfect life.

even better would be if the fundie conservatives stopped trying to be god and punishing people for being different aswell - they are pretty weak in my parts so i dont tend to worry about them much.

their are many ways of approaching the good life, we dont quite all agree on the details, but we can all agree not to kill each other or steal from each other and let the good ideas/bad ideas stand and fall on their own merits

snot going to happen in the current world order but it is the nicest utopian vision imho - aslong as your prepared to watch stupid kill itself and only intervene with words, not actions... which is the current stumbling block and the reason its not going to happen.

[Endovelico]

A couple of thoughts:

1. Big fish eat little fish. Get rid of big fish, no matter how tempting economies of scale may be. If you can't get rid of them because their products need huge investments, nationalize them and give workers a couple of voices on the board.
2. No thinking person should be against a market economy. Markets are not ideological. They just are, and have been around ever since a cave man traded something with another cave man. The point is, smart, rich people who have figured out how markets work, have been able to subvert market mechanisms to their advantage. Regulate this type of subversion out of the markets.
3. Private banking is the HIV of the economy, and it always kills the patient. Only state and cooperative banking should be allowed, with a strong independent supervision.
4. Education and health care are universal rights. Look to Sweden and Finland for the solution.

[noddy]

[Endovelico]

[YMix]

What about countries with low/very low faith-based activism?

[noddy]

[noddy]

[YMix]

[noddy]

[Endovelico]

One of the problems of localizing politics is a general lack of interest among the locals. Most people want things done...by others. If everything is running smoothly they never show up. When things go wrong, somebody else is to blame for the failure. How do you keep enough people involved for such a localizing of politics to be both effective and meaningful? You would have to make it compulsory, which would go against the spirit of localizing politics. Something like, "you can only benefit from local services if you participate in the decision making process", might do the trick, but I doubt such a compulsory attendance would do much to improve things...

[noddy]

[YMix]

@noddy

When I said "low faith-based activism", I meant that the Romanian Orthodox Church (BOR) does very little in Romania, as far as I know. Hospitals? None that I've heard of. Retirement houses? Maybe. Never heard of one run by the church either, but I wouldn't discount the possibility. Homes for the orphans? Not as such, but they are somewhat involved in the effort. The BOR has enough problems finding the money required to maintain the existing churches. I don't think they could raise enough for even one hospital.

[noddy]

intersting - in aus both catholics and protestant groups have all of the above, the protestants are running out of members and let in athiests now but their institutions are going strong.

i know nothing of your country, wouldnt know where to start thinking about being in europe, i only know north western europe as part of my heritage - and thats full of grumpy do it yourselfers.

communism would have had a big effect on local cohesion and self sufficiency i would imagine, its the complete opposite of the empowered small group model.

[YMix]

[noddy]

[YMix]

[noddy]

[Sparky]

[YMix]

Right now I'm trying to survive a combination of economic recession and 8.6% inflation rate.

[skyhook77sfg]

and the pimps and shills of the corporate state media are all preoccupied with filling airwaves and front pages with titillating prurient adolescent graffiti...

gives a whole new dimension to the term STAGFLATION

[crashtech]

Libertarianism is not a left or right ideology. I'd prefer a centrist libertarianism to a so-called Progressive version, but currently the perception is that the right has co-opted some libertarian views as a selling point. So left-leaning version of libertarianism may serve as a valuable and illustrative counterweight, eventually revealing where the libertarian ideology coincides with and complements certain right and left philosophies.

In the end, I believe libertarianism does not gain adherents because most citizens are glad to leave the tough decisions up to others, which of course leads to the positive feedback loop of authoritarianism.

[Tinker]

[Tinker]