T Nation

Libertarian Countries


heres an interesting article, the most libertarian countries catagorized by topic:


ALL DRUGS LEGAL in portugal

Russia is the MOST CORRUPT western nation

PROSTITUTION is essentialy legal in Canada


good read.


But notice that really to be a Libertarian you have to have all of those topics. Not one country was in all of them. You need low taxes and high individual freedom to be Libertarian.

Good Read, but really misses the point of actually being Libertarian.

Need to look into Jersey.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


If my only knowledge of libertarians was that article I would assume they were just people who enjoyed prostitutes for gay sex while under the influence of drugs.

Oh and they don't like taxes because it cuts into their budgets for the above.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Wonder what the result has been for Portugal?

Are there more or less STD's in Canada?




Im a little ignorant on what it means to have a true libertarian society, what would it be like if not just a bunch of legallized guilty pleasures and small government?

I'd be willing to bet a lot of people would consider themselves libertarian cause it sounds cool


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


I was going to point out that the article seems to have nothing to do with libertarianism, but it appears others beat me to it. Libertarianism is a political philosophy based on self-ownership and non-aggression. If you believe my right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins and vice versa, you are a libertarian. Most people are libertarians but have been conned into believing otherwise.


I believe the term you are looking for is "nudged".


Whats the true goal?


From the very same post:


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Just like many political terms the generalizing nature leads to a lot of confusion. It means different things to different people just like Republicans don't agree on all things Republicans agree with. Someone like Ron Paul who I voted for twice some people argue isn't a true libertarian. I don't usually try and get caught up in all that.

For me libertarian is a freedom thing.

The left claims they are for freedom by allowing things like personal choice when it comes to some drugs and things like abortion. (generalizing) They want their noses in business and many other things and generally want to micro-manage your life. The government can do a better job than you so lets grow it. It's always about how businesses are trying to fuck you.

The right claims they are for freedom by generally trying to stay out of the way on businesses (not always, but generalizing) and some aspects of commerce. But that is quite limited. They were for the bailout. They were for sending stimulus checks in the mail. They are most against this type of shit when they aren't doing it. And they want to control your personal life. They will say shit when arguing about gun control like well why not make murder illegal, oh wait it already is but not apply that same thinking to abortion. Most of the Bible Belt would love to turn us into a theocracy. Why aren't we teaching creationism in science classes type shit. The Bible verse on the Texas run through thing got righties up in arms because how can the government tell those kids they can't have that on their and have their faith? If it was a verse from the Koran....be a whole different story with that crowd. They are the biggest fighters against any faith that isn't their own.

Here is a link to the party platform. I don't agree with everything in there, but you don't really need to imo. At the very least I believe a two party system is always going to be inherently flawed and I wish SOME party would come to at least allow a broader discussion of issues.



Whats the true goal?


The "true goal" means different things to different people, but Robert Nozick lays it out pretty well in Anarchy, State and Utopia, which was a response to John Rawls, A Theory of Justice.

Edit: I'd say Nozick lays out the "right wing" vision of Libertarianism as opposed to the more "social" libertarians.


I feel like coming to a concrete consensus would make one not really a libertarian. :wink:


Be careful with trying to represent libertarianism as pro-abortion(not sure if that's what you were doing...it just seemed you may be, to me). There are at least two schools of thought in the libertarian party on that issue. A lot depends on when someone considers a fetus to be living(actually, the Ayn Rand branch may say abortion is fine because nobody has a right to live off of anyone else). I would say it's a human from the moment of conception(just to be on the safe side). I would answer the Ayn Rand branch by saying that although nobody has a right to live off anyone else, a person does have a right to obtain what is guaranteed them in a contract(or similar), even if the contract starts working against him or her at some point(the woman made a decision to have sex and she has to deal with the consequences-I'm not articulating my belief well here-maybe I'll be able to do it better after sleeping).

As far as teaching creationism in science class goes, that is as legitimate as teaching evolution in science class. Neither can be proven. Both are religious views. It would be better to leave things that can't be proven out of science class and stick to...science(remember having to use the scientific method when you did a science project in fifth grade?).

I had to look up the "Texas run through thing," and I see no way for the "right" to fight the school board on that one. If the federal government was stepping in, I would say the Constitution actually allowed for STATES to sponsor religion. It just didn't allow for a national religion. By the same token, surely a LOCAL school board can outlaw any religious display it wants. A libertarian would merely have to say that the display did not affect anyone's life, liberty, or property.