Uh no actually he would be close to his second formal warnig because CAPSLOCKMAN is Bluffcove.
Retard…we arent that stupid. :roll:
But it’s not right-wing. Although you’ve already seen this, you should see it again perhaps.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Stanford University.
“Libertarianism is often thought of as “right-wing” doctrine. This, however, is mistaken for at least two reasons. First, on social – rather than economic – issues libertarianism tends to be “left-wing.” It opposes laws that restrict consensual and private sexual relationships between adults (e.g., gay sex, non-marital sex, deviant sex), laws that restrict drug use, laws that impose religious views or practices on individuals, and compulsory military service. Second, in addition to the better-known version of libertarianism – right-libertarianism – there is also a version known as “left-libertarianism.” Both endorse full self-ownership, but they differ with respect to the powers agents have to appropriate unappropriated natural resources (land, air, water, etc.). Right-libertarianism holds that typically such resources may be appropriated by the first person who discovers them, mixes her labor with them, or merely claims them – without the consent of others, and with little or no payment to them. Left-libertarianism, by contrast, holds that unappropriated natural resources belong to everyone in some egalitarian manner. It can, for example, require those who claim rights over natural resources to make a payment to others for the value of those rights. This can provide the basis for a kind of egalitarian redistribution.”
So you see, despite the left and right factions of libertarianism, libertarianism is founded upon liberalism and it is left-wing politics, regardless of the faction. Read the 1st line in thier description of libertarianism. It summizes libertarianism in preparation for the full text:
"Libertarianism is often thought of as “right-wing” doctrine. This, however, is mistaken for at least two reasons.
Done deal.
EDITED TO CORRECT A TYPO
iron man
I just dont agree:
http://www.libertarianism.org/ex-5.html
I abhor cut and paste, however, from the same site:
Chapter 3
Property Rights
In fact, the ownership of property is a necessary implication of self-ownership because all human action takes place over property. How else could happiness be pursued? If nothing else, we need a place to stand. We need the right to use land and other property to produce new goods and services. We shall see that all rights can be understood as property rights. But this is a contentious point, not always easily understood. Many people wonder why we couldn't voluntarily share our goods and property.
Property is a necessity. "Property" doesn't mean simply land, or any other physical good. Property is anything that people can use, control, or dispose of. A property right means the freedom to use, control, or dispose of an object or entity. Is this a bad, exploitative necessity? Not at all.
If our world were not characterized by scarcity, we wouldn't need property rights. That is, if we had infinite amounts of everything people wanted, we would need no theory of how to allocate such things. But of course scarcity is a basic characteristic of our world. Note that scarcity doesn't imply poverty or a lack of basic subsistence. Scarcity simply means that human wants are essentially unlimited, so we never have enough productive resources to supply all of them. Even an ascetic who had transcended the desire for material goods beyond bare subsistence would face the most basic scarcity of all: the scarcity of one's own body and life and time. Whatever time he devoted to prayer would not be available for manual labor, for reading the sacred texts, or for performing good works. No matter how rich our society gets--nor how indifferent to material goods we become--we will always have to make choices, which means that we need a system for deciding who gets to use productive resources.
We can never abolish property rights, as socialist visionaries promise to do. As long as things exist, someone will have the power to use them. In a civilized society, we don't want that power to be exercised simply by the strongest or most violent person; we want a theory of justice in property titles. When socialist governments "abolish" property, what they promise is that the entire community will now own all property. But since--visionary theory or no--only one person can eat a particular apple, or sleep in a particular bed, or stand on a particular spot, someone will have to decide who. That someone--the party official, or the bureaucrat, or the czar--is the real possessor of the property right.
Libertarians believe that the right to self-ownership means that individuals must have the right to acquire and exchange property in order to fulfill their needs and desires. To feed ourselves, or provide shelter for our families, or open a business, we must make use of property. And we need to be confident that our property right is legally secure, that someone else can't come and confiscate the wealth we've created, whether that means the crop we've planted, the house we've built, the car we've bought, or the complex corporation we've created through a network of contracts with many other people.
Left wing policies traditionally advocate state ownership, collective health and education measures etc. As Adam smith (the inventor of the free market and a Darling of right wing policies) is considered one of the fathers of libertarianism, I just dont see how it an be regarded as left of centre. - end of cut and paste.
Perhaps our views of left and right of centre policies are differing, now i am willing to discuss the start point as we need this to achieve a common demoninator.
For instance the Uk Conservative party is probably more letf wing than the Democrats in the US. So where do we start from?
Edited to show end of paste…
Bugger I had money on CAPSLOCKMAN being Ironmans evil twin
well I dont htink I was any more annoying than IRONMAN so would you please dan one of the two of us!
Yes please do. I mean All I have done is edit behind people and post unsupported comments.
Something must be done!
Sorry Bluffcove …Capslockman is no more. Please do not open a second account in the furture or I will have to issue you a formal warning. No big deal just dont do it again. Im giving you the same treatment as I did erwin “when his brother opened him a new account”
In case you did not go to college, the opening statement of an article is a summary of that article. They made it plain:
“Libertarianism is often thought of as “right-wing” doctrine. This, however, is mistaken for at least two reasons.”
Sorry. Libertarianism is not right-wing doctrine.
Sorry Bluffcove …Capslockman is no more. Please do not open a second account in the furture or I will have to issue you a formal warning. No big deal just dont do it again. Im giving you the same treatment as I did erwin “when his brother opened him a new account”[/quote]
I guess MISQUOTEMAN is no more then 
why could people do such dumb things?
Being condescending is not a smart thing to do…
Sorry Bluffcove …Capslockman is no more. Please do not open a second account in the furture or I will have to issue you a formal warning. No big deal just dont do it again. Im giving you the same treatment as I did erwin “when his brother opened him a new account”[/quote]
I guess MISQUOTEMAN is no more then :D[/quote]
Is Misquoteman another of Bluffcove’s account? :evil: So far the evidence does not show but … im sure i can find out. So Bluffcove if it is fess up to it now or I will give you a formal warning. I can make certain changes if i need to about your account but I really dont want to. Your a welcome member but I dont need a Troll. If you feel you are being treated unfairly please PM FW-190 or you can contact Erwin and we can talk about it on MSN. Thanks
Sorry Bluffcove …Capslockman is no more. Please do not open a second account in the furture or I will have to issue you a formal warning. No big deal just dont do it again. Im giving you the same treatment as I did erwin “when his brother opened him a new account”[/quote]
I guess MISQUOTEMAN is no more then :D[/quote]
Is Misquoteman another of Bluffcove’s account? :evil: So far the evidence does not show but … im sure i can find out. So Bluffcove if it is fess up to it now or I will give you a formal warning. I can make certain changes if i need to about your account but I really dont want to. Your a welcome member but I dont need a Troll. If you feel you are being treated unfairly please PM FW-190 or you can contact Erwin and we can talk about it on MSN. Thanks[/quote]
Twas me I am afraid. Slap the irons on and cart me away…
The username doesn’t work anyway :twisted:
Sorry Bluffcove …Capslockman is no more. Please do not open a second account in the furture or I will have to issue you a formal warning. No big deal just dont do it again. Im giving you the same treatment as I did erwin “when his brother opened him a new account”[/quote]
I guess MISQUOTEMAN is no more then :D[/quote]
Is Misquoteman another of Bluffcove’s account? :evil: So far the evidence does not show but … im sure i can find out. So Bluffcove if it is fess up to it now or I will give you a formal warning. I can make certain changes if i need to about your account but I really dont want to. Your a welcome member but I dont need a Troll. If you feel you are being treated unfairly please PM FW-190 or you can contact Erwin and we can talk about it on MSN. Thanks[/quote]
Twas me I am afraid. Slap the irons on and cart me away…
The username doesn’t work anyway :twisted:[/quote]
You get a slap on the wrist this time just dont do it again. 
Won’t do… It was just too tempting! :lol:
OK. So long as you know you’re dissagreeing with one of the most respected universities in the world. Shouldn’t we get back to the subject now? We’ve wandered.
Ironman, twisting and turning like a twisty turny thing
I said this:
Left wing policies traditionally advocate state ownership, collective health and education measures etc. As Adam smith (the inventor of the free market and a Darling of right wing policies) is considered one of the fathers of libertarianism, I just dont see how it an be regarded as left of centre. - end of cut and paste.
Perhaps our views of left and right of centre policies are differing, now i am willing to discuss the start point as we need this to achieve a common demoninator.
For instance the Uk Conservative party is probably more letf wing than the Democrats in the US. So where do we start from?
Ironman said this:
In case you did not go to college, the opening statement of an article is a summary of that article. They made it plain.
So instead of trying to be patronising and saying that because I didnt go to college Im not somehow able to comprehend an articl, please answer my question. I will not patronise you, my premise is that perhaps our views on what Libertarianism is are so far apart that we need to agree on a common denominator to start with. I may indeed agree with you.
So instead of talking down to me why dont you just answer my question.
As this is a declared off topic place,congratulation for your medals .
As this is a declared off topic place,congratulation for your medals .[/quote]
:lol: