A Declaration of the Rights of Individuals and the Obligations of Government. It was composed for political purposes: to promote a set of ideas for Libertarians to consider in creating platforms.
I am a little confused about how these “rights” are determined. Who decides what age-appropriate freedoms are? I have found the Libertarian philosophy to be very similar to the One World Order’s philosophy that we are so useless we need “Dad” to set the rules. How is that freedom exactly because the t sounds like an ‘out of the frying pan, into the fire’ scenario to me.
I would be interested in the rights you propose but I feel our current political system is clearly flawed and geared more towards greed than any care for the welfare of the people. This is what needs to change. IMHO. 🙂
You decide upon your choices because you know more about your strengths, weaknesses and circumstances than strangers do. Of course you will facilitate your choices from ppl and sources you trust, not unknown bureaucrats.
So the idea then is for each individual to choose what rights they choose? There would still be a requirement for oversight (government) of some kind. How would that work? Similar to the governamce we have now, elected officials? Clearly that doesn’t prevent corruption at all levels. I like the idea of the People choosing for themselves but it would still have to benefit overall society so how do you implement that without governance? The Libertarian party, as far as I can tell from researching it, is a more radical version of conservatism than the Republicans are.
A great article Gene. But you lost me on people’s constitution and OLP. OLP is just another right party like PPC with their charter of rights for Ontario. Luckily, LPoC is untainted for now. I am fan of a kingdom, private domain and of the individual. No one takes a rented vehicle for detailing. Hence, your expectation from government officials may not be realistic. I would trust a hired mercenary than a police officer in Canada for my defence if given a choice. The word people implies populism or mob rule to me. Having said that, networking with LP of USA is a great idea.
I am in agreement with your ancap ideals, but I am also a pragmatist. Not everyone wants an ancap society or a monarchy. What everyone wants is a good life achieved under their personal vision of why that means. Instead of the “mob rule” of today, give me the option to OPT OUT of as many government rules and taxes as I want and let anyone who wants them make their own choices to OPT IN. Read my “Digital Direct Democracy” series to understand how this might work.
Thanks Gene. You are indeed a wise man and I will read your book once I am not sensitive to the word democracy. I am not concerned with others’ expectations of life. They can choose what they want like dominatrix if that makes them happy. My concern are my individual rights. I am a fan of meritocracy and private domains. I will never support democracy to avail of natural born rights. I have also found pragmatism to be subjective. A kingdom may house like minded subjects as it is a private domain. Such kingdom with a libertarian king or queen can then create a libertarian society and defend their property with natural born rights. UAE, Monaco, Sultanate of Oman and Bahrain are classic examples of private domains. Democracy is mob rule and I have never seen a mob giving an opt in opt out option. Just like locust plague; they will devour everything in their path without exceptions. I have personally seen the wrath of a mob. And I want no part of it in any form.
I am a little confused about how these “rights” are determined. Who decides what age-appropriate freedoms are? I have found the Libertarian philosophy to be very similar to the One World Order’s philosophy that we are so useless we need “Dad” to set the rules. How is that freedom exactly because the t sounds like an ‘out of the frying pan, into the fire’ scenario to me.
I would be interested in the rights you propose but I feel our current political system is clearly flawed and geared more towards greed than any care for the welfare of the people. This is what needs to change. IMHO. 🙂
You decide upon your choices because you know more about your strengths, weaknesses and circumstances than strangers do. Of course you will facilitate your choices from ppl and sources you trust, not unknown bureaucrats.
So the idea then is for each individual to choose what rights they choose? There would still be a requirement for oversight (government) of some kind. How would that work? Similar to the governamce we have now, elected officials? Clearly that doesn’t prevent corruption at all levels. I like the idea of the People choosing for themselves but it would still have to benefit overall society so how do you implement that without governance? The Libertarian party, as far as I can tell from researching it, is a more radical version of conservatism than the Republicans are.
A great article Gene. But you lost me on people’s constitution and OLP. OLP is just another right party like PPC with their charter of rights for Ontario. Luckily, LPoC is untainted for now. I am fan of a kingdom, private domain and of the individual. No one takes a rented vehicle for detailing. Hence, your expectation from government officials may not be realistic. I would trust a hired mercenary than a police officer in Canada for my defence if given a choice. The word people implies populism or mob rule to me. Having said that, networking with LP of USA is a great idea.
I am in agreement with your ancap ideals, but I am also a pragmatist. Not everyone wants an ancap society or a monarchy. What everyone wants is a good life achieved under their personal vision of why that means. Instead of the “mob rule” of today, give me the option to OPT OUT of as many government rules and taxes as I want and let anyone who wants them make their own choices to OPT IN. Read my “Digital Direct Democracy” series to understand how this might work.
Thanks Gene. You are indeed a wise man and I will read your book once I am not sensitive to the word democracy. I am not concerned with others’ expectations of life. They can choose what they want like dominatrix if that makes them happy. My concern are my individual rights. I am a fan of meritocracy and private domains. I will never support democracy to avail of natural born rights. I have also found pragmatism to be subjective. A kingdom may house like minded subjects as it is a private domain. Such kingdom with a libertarian king or queen can then create a libertarian society and defend their property with natural born rights. UAE, Monaco, Sultanate of Oman and Bahrain are classic examples of private domains. Democracy is mob rule and I have never seen a mob giving an opt in opt out option. Just like locust plague; they will devour everything in their path without exceptions. I have personally seen the wrath of a mob. And I want no part of it in any form.