Libertarianism in 6 Minutes


What we’ve been taught in our schools is
that we live in a free country. But when you stop to think about it we really
don’t. How so? If we don’t do certain things like pay taxes
we’ll be sent to jail. If we do other certain things that harm no
one like smoke weed in the wrong state, guess what? We’ll be sent to jail. This is where the idea of libertarianism comes
into play. But first a quick and simple history. Like most modern ideas, this one came about
around the 17th century and was meant to cure the unfairness that has plagued our world
since the very beginning. You see during this time people began to get
sick of being poor while making rich people richer. What I mean by this is that most people at
this time were ruled by some sort of lord and paid their lords with work and taxes in
the form of money, food, supplies, or whatever they were making. A man named Thomas Paine said for example
that “There are two distinct classes of men in the nation, those who pay taxes, and
those who receive and live upon the taxes.” So the idea of libertarianism really came
about just like the ideas of Socialism and Capitalism. It was a way to figure out how to make things
fairer. And in a nutshell it’s that you get to keep
what you earn instead of giving a portion of it to others. Now just like Socialism and Capitalism there
are hundreds of different thoughts and ideas about how to best practice this. But for the sake of this video we’re going
to look at what it means in the U.S. In fact in most other parts of the world the
term is more closely related to Socialism while here in the U.S. it’s more closely
related to the term Free Market Capitalism. The exact meaning of libertarianism is to
liberate or to defend freedom. And it is based on the assumption that there
is a natural harmony between productive people. And that it’s only when the government intervenes,
takes a portion of what we earn, and hands out rewards where we begin to get into conflict. Think about it like this. Libertarians believe in this idea called the
Non aggressive principle or NAP for short. This means that any law that a government
makes should not be a law that coerces people into following its rules if those rules don’t
apply to protecting other people’s natural rights. An example of a violation of this is taxes. Why? If you don’t pay your taxes, you can go
to jail. In other words the government is coercing
you to pay up and if you don’t there are some pretty severe consequences. Sounds pretty aggressive right? In terms of economic policy Libertarians favor
the freedom of the economy to do what it wants rather than regulate it with coercive laws. This means removing all but the most necessary
taxes to make a society work. Libertarians want to get rid of Social Security,
welfare, etc. while just having the bare necessities like a police force, firefighters, and whatever
else you need to create a functioning society. In terms of social policy, it favors the idea
that you can do basically whatever it is you want to do as long as you are not violating
another person’s natural rights. For example the government shouldn’t be
able to regulate your choices in life like smoking weed all day or marrying a person
of the same sex. And as far as who we should punish and put
into jail? Simple. Anyone who violates the rights of another
individual like murderers, rapists, and thieves. So this all sounds pretty straight forward… But you may ask yourself why it hasn’t caught
on to the mainstream public. There are a number of reasons. One simply being that the Democrats and Republicans
literally own the Commission on Presidential Debates . This means that they basically get
to choose who gets to debate during a presidential candidacy. And why would a republican or democratic want
more competition? But there are other reasons too. First there has yet to be a country that has
tried to implement this idea of libertarianism. You’d think that if it were such a good
idea that at least one country would have tried it. Second many critics say that it sounds like
a good idea. But they wonder how it would work practically. Meaning if businesses were no longer regulated,
how would monopolies stop from being formed? Or when people are too old to work and have
little savings or expensive health care bills, how could they live comfortably in retirement? Third, Libertarianism in the U.S. is basically
founded on this idea of the non-aggressive principle. The problem with this is that many economists
believe that having a non-regulated free market economy is a system that creates aggressive
coercion by itself. How? Simple. And here’s one example. It doesn’t address the conflict between
property owners and renters. If there is no governmental regulation of
people’s property rights or property owner’s rights then one day you might wake up and
say to yourself that you aren’t going to pay rent this month because your landlord
just raised it 50%. Of course the property owner isn’t going
to allow that and will use some sort of, most likely, aggressive coercion to get their rent. Fourth, there is an assumption in Libertarianism
that economic growth also grows the happiness of people. But this assumption hasn’t been proven with
science. This is called the Easterlin Paradox named
after a guy who studied this kind of stuff and found that during a great period of economic
expansion in the U.S. between 1946 and 1970 there was no increase in happiness. And fifth there are environmental criticisms
because if we don’t regulate our businesses there is no clear way to make sure they make
environmentally responsible decisions. In response, Libertarians say that people
wouldn’t purchase products from businesses that are unethical, but the fact is that we
already do. Libertarianism seems like a great idea. It’s all about providing the maximum amount
of freedom to the individual while protecting their individual rights. But the question still remains about how to
best implement a system like this in a way that would protect the freedom and rights
of every individual. Thank you watching. Please subscribe, hit the like button below
and share this motherf*cker.




Comments
  1. Intellectual property is the main point here. The idea that, somehow, just because a person had an idea first he now owns everything that someone does with that idea is ridiculous and wouldn't exist in a libertarian society. If ideas are free, then why buy when you can make? Why would you support a company that goes against your morals when you can buy it from Joe down the street, who is a very good friend to you.

    Libertarians make a compromise, QoL wouldn't necessarily improve for everyone in it, but it's the correct thing to do either way. Takes some time, but everyone soon realizes that libertarianism isn't about utilitarianism, and more about just doing what's right and ethical.

  2. I don't think libertarianism can be close to socialism in any part of the world. Here in Russia we have libertarian party and it's clearly free market party.

  3. Yeah, we already do because there's no competition, there's no competition because small businesses don't stand a chance and small businesses don't stand a chance because they can't afford to cater to all business regulations out there.

  4. Anarcho-capitalism would undoubtedly result the government would just become a puppet for the strongest company.  It would literally be the United States of Wal-Mart.  The mid west would be in a state of euphoria.

  5. Im not a radical libertarian and I believe the government should more protect the rights of individuals and regulate business

  6. and your landlord can make me you homeless because you're in breach of a social contract, you, willingly singed…. struggle breeds progress, taxation is theft, government officials are social servants

  7. In the preamble of the U.S. Constitution the Founding Fathers laid out what the purpose of the American Gov't is which is to protect the inalienable human rights of the individual what at the same time promoting the general welfare of ALL American citizens . This is not purely a binary zero sum game equation of one or the other. Both goals can be balanced against one another and achieved. There should be one extreme or another because the Founding Fathers recognized that in some cases individual rights took precedent while in other cases promoting the general welfare of the collective also benefitted the individual . For example have a strong military for national defense or build a standardized network of interstate roads, highways, rail and air ways to promote commerce. No individual is capable of doing that.

  8. Dude not true. No one in Europe thinks Libertarianism has anything to do with socialism here in Europe

  9. The rent example : lessor and lessie has to agree with a written contract, even in the most liberterian societies and cannot be violated until contract expires. The environment example: the environment is public property. If trees, air quality, lakes, river for eg. are polluted, then even in a liberterian society the autority has to step in because it created a health hazard to the public.

  10. Libertarians are greedy and selfish and basically rich people trying to con people worse than the Republicans do. They want to end Social Security which you pay into and is self funding and not paid thru general taxes. it's the worst of only the rich and strong survive. It's trying to convince greedy Republicans to be greedy Republican hippies.

  11. Property owner Vs. renter debate:

    The land lord owns the property. if the renter decides he will not pay his land lord, the land lord can kick the renter out. If the renter refuses to leave then he/she broke the NAP by trespassing or taking shop on another person’s property; leaving the land owner two options against the aggressor:
    1. Taking the trespasser out by force (vigilantism)
    “”OR””
    2. Negotiating a mutually agreed upon rent fee that will benefit both parties.

    This goes for all economic and social interactions within a libertarian society. It’s true freedom, but at the cost of not having the hand holding of the government.

    Personally I think the benefits of no government out-way the benefits (hardly any) of having a government.

  12. Monopolies don't form without government. Things that create monopolies are things like copyrights and patents. Nothing else can create a monopoly.

  13. Here’s the thing… big businesses are already fucking everyone… and so is the government…so fuck taxes, let people smoke weed, defend their weed with guns, with their gay partners.

  14. How did u gloss over the fact that u are in favour of imprisonment by a governing body when it suits your ideals?

  15. It's simple. I want to protect my weed farm and income along side my black transgender wife and all of our automatic firearms.

  16. You probably will need some sort of anti-trust/monopoly governance, otherwise too many things become winner-take-all, and those who got into that business first (e.g. just due to being born earlier) will lock out everyone else.

  17. The unfixed problem: I know of no libertarian plan for the least bad way to tax. The minimally intrusive government still needs revenue. Zero government won't happen within our lifetime or maybe ever. Who has the best (lest bad) suggestion for a tax plan?

  18. No nation has implemented the Libertarian ideal (whatever that is) but many have moved in a libertarian direction and had success for doing so.

  19. No government can survive without taxes, and laws. This is why libertarian governments don't exist and never work or function properly.

  20. I think that libertarianism should stand on two ideas:
    "Rights of your arm ends on my nose."
    and
    "Lack of any goverment creates despotism"

  21. the main issue with libertarianism is that it's paradoxical in nature. you can't have absolute freedom of individual rights and no (very little) degree of control, as a non-regulated free market would eventually result in massive accumulations of economic wealth. with no governmental policies to regulate this, people would just be victim to corporate monopolies all over again. And yes, the argument that enough competition in free markets would balance out the economy is a fair point, but doesn't account for the fact that it allows certain individuals to exercise greater freedoms over others. It's a socially conservative ideology and thus isn't viable as a stable governmental system unless you have a society of people with the same intrinsic values (which we all know isn't realistic).

  22. That's not true at all contract law would still be protected by some sort of government structure….. Including leases and rents.
    Also the large amount of competition in every space help to ensure the self-regulated system.
    Think the five star system on eBay Amazon Uber etc .. which works beautifully

  23. Rent example does not fin here. Liberaterianism does not exclude contracts people make.
    This vid doesn't really cover anything. For those who are interested read "Libertarian Mind" by David Boaz, and you go on from there.

    Every individual is protected. I don't see what are you getting at.

  24. 4:45: The landlord upping the cost of rent overnight is very likely a breach of contract, which the landlord can be prosecuted for.

  25. But how will disabled and senior citizens survive in libertarian system? Good times and bad times come to everyone. Government should help citizens in bad times and ensure they get back to good times by providing enough social security. Best possible system would be social democracy (pro capitalism with social net)

  26. An obvious attempt by left wing propagandist to distort and denigrate American libertarianism. No doubt this video was placed in a high search result position by the socialist who control Google and Youtube. I will never subscribe to YouTube TV as long as these sorts of fraudulent tricks are being played. And I will make every effort to avoid purchasing any products advertised on google or youtube until these unfair practices cease.

  27. Don't be fooled by this bogus left wing video that distorts some key libertarian positions. Check out this video for a great rebuttal to some of the questions posed starting at 3:40 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkcY7SVBG-4

  28. Hasn't history shown several times over that unregulated Capitalism inevitably becomes rife with corruption and exploitation?

  29. Libertarians have the energy of kids who say….

    You aren't my dad and you can't tell me what to do"

    Basically…. Cartman

  30. i don’t mind taxes to much to wish it wasn’t that necessary, and you could chose what you would fund, or you know just don’t have to pay them at all

  31. Those that live off people's taxes? Oh you mean the Corporations ! Yes of course Corporate Welfare! Libertarians can be left or Right Libertarians. Some believe business should be run by the people who work there. The workers should run the business and make the decisions ( Democracy ) and others believe If a CEO contiunes go grow big enough to eat the whole world…. that's just the way the cookie crumbles. I am a Left libertarian in that I believe in civil rights, I also think Big Business, Like Oil….should be strongly regulated. Insurance companies should not be getting rich of sick people. Somethings are more important then profits. etc etc etc. A Democratic Republic is a mixed economy.

  32. Full on libertarianism does not sound sustainable, but I would very much appreciate a sovereign state with a libertarian leaning set of laws, with minor regulations to protect against monopolies.

  33. One could argue that doing excessive damage to the environment could infringe on individuals rights by directly affecting people’s health. Thus being illegal in a libertarian society. Live and let live

  34. Our constitutional republic would work properly if it was actually WE THE PEOPLE who ran it. Our overlords are all corrupt and extremely wasteful with OUR money!!

  35. National sales tax with 0 income tax for everyone. Abolish the federal reserve and IRS. Enforce anti trust laws I could go on and on. Does it matter people are locked in a 2 party system and don’t give a shit about the constitution or the rights of others on either side.

  36. You're free to do those things. You're not free from those consequences. Liberals can't learn this. Hilarious name. "Liberals." What have they "liberated" or done good?

  37. We've tried this. This sounds suspiciously like the Articles of Confederation. I would like to get rid of Social Security, and other unnecessary Government Programs.

  38. Ever wonder why when every white bitch talks about prison, they make a white man as an example. It never fucking fails. Its why i hate this bitch country

  39. Fun fact! There have been libertarian and even anarchist communities. They are usually conquered by militaristic neighbors since most of these communities have been pacifist. Liberland is a currently existing libertarian society

  40. Republicans and Democrats have rendered themselves into being nothing more than 12 year old trolls. Just look at the comments! Two sides of the same coin. Join the Libertarian party, be a porcupine (Latin: spiky boi) and tell big Gov "hands off!"

    Whether it's marrying the love of your life, falling for an adorable lead chucking hunk of steel or simply your love for sweet sweet Mary Jane, big Gov has no business in YOUR business.

    For every man, woman and child a warm gun and a packed bong. Just remember, all political leaders are the enemy, use them like a discount hooker then chuck them the second they stop being beneficial. Why? Because it's OUR country, not their back pocket. #ThePartyofPrinciple

  41. Isn’t strictly obeying the rules of capitalism a form of totalitarianism ? A free market being the last judgement of individual freedom is a delusion of free will.

  42. why are libertarians so focused on taxes when the vast majority of people have more to gain from the taxes they pay (guaranteed health care, transportation/roads/etc), vs. the rich who have less to gain from paying taxes but are the vast minority of people?

    youre normal every day person has far more to gain by sharing ownership and profit and decisionmaking in their place of work vs. just being a wage laborer. for the majority of people, free market/less taxes is a shitty deal compared to shared ownership/tax funded necessities.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *