THE ANGRY!: Defining Socialist-Libertarianism

2.07.2006

Defining Socialist-Libertarianism


Recently while looking for other sites with my same political attitudes and bad-ass coolness I googled: Socialist Libertarian. I was shocked at what I found; it does not seem that I am quite like what I found, so I am attempting to re-define it as a true philosophy. The philosophy, and this post may take a long time to perfect, so if it is not finished be patient! Eventually I may have a manifesto…


My Theory of Socialist-Libertarianism incorporates the economic benefits of Socialism and the personal freedoms of Libertarianism; you could almost call it Anti-Fascism. The way it works is that the purpose of government is to guarantee the protection of Life, Liberty and Property, with special exceptions on regarding property. Private property will not be abolished, but it will be the companies and corporations that will all be (partially) publicly owned, so that the company may never become abusive to the people. You may ask, how could this happen? It would make everything so chaotic and would be part of the reason that a true democracy is not possible in a world with large populations. In a way it would be a true democracy; all parts of government elected by popular vote, where business and corporations are also held to the same standard. Mass voting can be achieved in today’s modern world through the internet. I am not doing away with Capitalism, because the companies will still be privately owned, and will allow for the accumulation of wealth within the company, however it will not be shareholders, calling the shots, eliminating the upper-class from screwing over everyone else and filling their pockets at the same time.

I would suggest that the actual government work on the American system, which has a very effective method of checks and balances; also there should be minimum voter turnout (which should not be needed with internet voting). Unlike the Libertarian government, I am not making the government be smaller. In fact it would be extremely hard for a small government to get anything done. From my liberal background, I would like to see the government and mass populous be liberal in their thinking; however I know this may not be possible.

When everything is broken down, it is simply giving people the power to manage the large corporations that have a huge impact on their lives. It is very similar to CO-OPing everything. This whole theory may take sometime to perfect. If it ends up being the people who make unreasonable demands of companies, than it would be the court that steps in. Remember that all voting is optional, so if an out of the way company will only be affected by people who care about it.

Please, If there is anything I have missed, tell me! Lave your thoughts here so I can perfect my theoretical system that may lead to a (dare I say utopia?) better system..

2 Comments:

Anonymous Joe said...

"Mass voting can be achieved in today’s modern world through the internet".

No democracy has ever survived mass voter turn out and none ever will. You;ve got it all wrong, but your ideas are getting close.

We need about 5 billion less people, the sae constituion we had, some of the ssame systems we have now, but less idiots voting and all will be great.

No more anchor children would be great and deportation for a few million idiots and we'd be doinga lot better. libertatioan party is the only way, that and less voter turn out.

good luck youngster. !

11:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm picking up what you're putting down. One cannot ignore the historical failings of traditional socialism when trying to put forth an actual, viable political theory that can be introduced to a populace that contains a large population of people who feel violently opposed to even the thought of the institution of any kind of socialist system. However, the impending hardship that surely willl follow further extension of the horrible recession we are mired in will leave people seeking any relief. I believe socialist libertarianism is the means to an end that would be acceptable to even the most die-hard "tea-bagger" when they are faced with the prospect of either a career in the food service or sanitation fields

6:31 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home