AmberCutie's Forum
An adult community for cam models and members to discuss all the things!

Anarchism, Libertarianism, etc...

  • ** WARNING - ACF CONTAINS ADULT CONTENT **
    Only persons aged 18 or over may read or post to the forums, without regard to whether an adult actually owns the registration or parental/guardian permission. AmberCutie's Forum (ACF) is for use by adults only and contains adult content. By continuing to use this site you are confirming that you are at least 18 years of age.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove the financial penalties of smaller violations? What would you use as a deterrent for minor things that called for punishment of some sort?

No. Remove what state and local governments are placing inside the citations. Removes the whole core concept of Policing For Profits, as there's no profits from the state. At the very least, at least RECOGNIZE these hidden fees as taxes (which I view them as tax) so they'd have to be voted on, as per TABOR laws. Could you imagine the outrage of the population when every year states and municipalities are asking them if they can raise the tax on citations? How many people do you think would vote it up? Obviously no one in California who receives a $500 "Fix-It" citation....
 
Oh, and a lot of smaller citations shouldn't even exist. Spitting in public? Loitering? Not wearing a seatbelt? Ya know, things that aren't really crimes.

On the topic of the whole seatbelt things. How come you and your child has to wear one in a car, but as soon as they jump onto a school bus their life isn't *THAT* important that police have to regulate it?
 
Anyone see the Libertarian Townhall? Johnson really needs to let Weld do all the talking. One thing about 3rd party candidates. They're not the best orators in the world. Seems like that's something you need in politics, especially up on the debate stage. Not about your policies, it's about what you say about them.
 
Also seems like they're trying to go way more centered on the Libertarian spectrum. Tiptoed around a lot of issues, such as legalization of prostitution, ect. Definitely not as hardcore as Ron Paul, who called for legalization of heroin, among other things.

Which I totally get it, you need to be electable. You've got hardcore Libertarians (Ya know, the guys in Wookie costumes holding up Don't Tread On Me flags) cringing over it though!
 
Anyone see the Libertarian Townhall? Johnson really needs to let Weld do all the talking. One thing about 3rd party candidates. They're not the best orators in the world. Seems like that's something you need in politics, especially up on the debate stage. Not about your policies, it's about what you say about them.

Not really surprised, honestly? Gary has never been much of a speaker. He's honestly a terrible example of Libertarian, for exactly the reasons you later say. He's basically not all that libertarian. He never makes the case.
 
Not really surprised, honestly? Gary has never been much of a speaker. He's honestly a terrible example of Libertarian, for exactly the reasons you later say. He's basically not all that libertarian. He never makes the case.

It's a shame we're not ready for a hardcore Libertarian ticket, and that's the depressing truth. One of these days. As it is, true libertarianism is too extreme for most people. Especially those that haven't been caught up in the follies of government or the correctional system.

Honestly, I feel that Gary would stand a better chance than the "Legalize everything EXCEPT government!" candidate that I would love to see.

Shame we're not ready for that type of candidate. Shame what the RNC did to Ron Paul. Shame we weren't all prepped for Paul a couple years in advance. Shoulda, woulda, coulda........
 
Listening to talk radio this past week, a Libertarian interview. Naturally, the Drug War came up. So then, shall we tell it like it is? Or do we downplay it?

Downplay it of course. Oh, we really don't to end the Drug war...

:vomit:
 
As I've said, the Libertarian party candidates aren't really Libertarian at all. There is no principled, intellectual base for Gary Johnson, and his veep is even worse.
I agree, and think the more attention/success they meet with, the more they will conform.

also, would be interested in hearing any views anyone has on the Occupy Wall Street episode (if you feel like the bother).
 
also, would be interested in hearing any views anyone has on the Occupy Wall Street episode (if you feel like the bother).

Not much to say. It was a largely ineffectual mess of poor direction and bad ideology. It's protests turned into absolute nightmares, and it lacked frankly any sort of actual impact on the political stage at all, entirely unlike the comparable period Tea Party, which at least managed to push a slate of candidates, even if they were easily coopted too. Neither were particularly my shtick, but I think the two should be compared for their motivations and effect.

At the end of the day, Occupy was just a protest that missed the point, like so many folks do.
 
I think that most of the electable Libertarians are still on the sidelines as Libertarian leaning Republicans and Democrats. If Johnson gets into the debates and does well, it could help to legitimize the party, hopefully for the long term. That could potentially draw in more members who could actually win elections.

But we've seen sporadic third party interest in U.S. presidential elections in the past too (.e.g., Ross Perot in 1992).

I want the Libertarians to be a legitimate third party, but I have a feeling that the interest in Libertarianism this election cycle has more to do with people just not liking Clinton and Trump. I suspect that once this weird election gets over with, things will return to normal, and the Libertarians will be largely ignored like they have been for years.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: justjoinedtopost
Status
Not open for further replies.