Alright Kiddie-Os -- Who Loves A Smaller Government -- DU GROUP?

[Cats Against Frist]

Even though I do not hope to stifle discussion of this topic in General Discussion, I thought maybe, if enough people were interested -- and it does seem like quite a few people are, particularly in the wake of being introduced to "Big Brother's Other Brother," -- in having a DU group to discuss AND debate the virtues of libertarianism/anarchism/mutualism/anarcho-syndicalism/federalism and other systems of decentralized or reduced government, and how it relates to being Democrats, voting with Democrats, and what it could mean in light of the GOP crappo-majority.

I do want to say, however, in the interest of NOT creating a disruptive or controversial group, that part of the mission statement would include a caveat that those who are participating be left-leaning libertarians, and be nonviolent, I guess.

If it doesn't happen, my heart won't be broken, because I do like having "smaller-government" threads in GD, simply so a wide range of people can debate.

I'd also like to invite people who are adamantly against libertarianism, but who understand that most of the libertarians here would be left-leaning, and share ends with the Democratic party and believe in a virtuous (though noncoersed) society.

There are parts of this discussion that are not necessarily subversive and are intellectually stimulating, involving political philosophy and theory, the study of the Constitution and the founders, as well as what "big government" means, in the face of right-wing, statist authoritarianism.

So, if you're interested -- please post a response in this thread. If you have a donor star, all the better. And if it doesn't work out -- thanks for reading this.

[DBoon]

1. There needs to be left wing libertarianism, too

Based on classic anarchism of Kropotkin, and the belief than human beings can organize themselves into a just, free and democratic society.

Call it the "Emma Goldman DU Group"

[RafterMan]

2. I'd take the occasional peep

Any smaller/decentralized government post tends to set off quakes of terror in GD:Politics, so maybe the putschist approach of a separate group would be best.

Good luck.

[msgadget]

3. I can't wait to check it out!

:hi:

[xequals]

4. The reason I don't think it would work as a group

is that the Democratic Party is a liberal party - of varying degrees, and the entire belief system of liberalism and conservatism (i.e. "remake society how I want it to be" ideologies) is antithetical that that of libertarians -- even moderate "small l" libertarians like myself.

More than anything I enjoy learning about people's political beliefs. I read and take part in forums/websites which range the political spectrum, even though I disagree with the average member of most of those sites, including this one.

[cattleman22]

12. I think it could work as a group.

In the main discussion boards, I have seen some pushes for more federalism to allow liberals to at least be able to get liberal policies enacted more at the state level.

I also think that there is widespread support for the social libtertarian positions.

[Selatius]

5. Count me in

Anarcho-syndicalism seems like a good idea, to me anyway. In short, direct democracy in the factory and in our communities. I grow weary of electing people for a set amount of time and praying that they do what we ask them to do and not sellout to the industrialists in the marketplace who give little to no voice to the workers who work for them.

[illbill]

6. Big government and corporate regulation by gov't....

owns.

[Cats Against Frist]

7. That's all fine and good

but what happens when your enemies become all-powerful and usurp the giant centralized bureaucracy that you helped create? And why can't the consumer's lazy, apathetic ass help to regulate business?

And I'm definitely for some corporate regulation -- mostly, however, in the form of punishment, rather than "regulation." At any rate, I think that smaller government is no more experimental or ludicrous than expecting everyone to "do the right thing" and support and egalitarian, regulatory welfare state -- which I'd, personally be fine with, if everyone were in concurrence, and we didn't have to worry about our right-wing reactionaries. That, however, is not the case.

[xequals]

16. Exactly - liberals and conservatives like to think

that The Big Government they create will be the good and just remaker of society.

What they fail to realize is that any large powerful state can be usurped by any political group with any agenda, that the "Peaceful Servant" can and will inevitably become the "Violent Master" the founding fathers warned us about.

[XemaSab]

21. Yeats

The Great Day
by William Butler Yeats

Hurrah for revolution and more cannon-shot!
A beggar upon horseback lashes a beggar on foot.
Hurrah for revolution and cannon come again!
The beggars have changed places, but the lash goes on.

[Selatius]

22. I'm not against corporate regulation

I'm all for it. If we are going to continue to live the way we have lived, then we need common sense regulation of the markets to protect them from their own excesses and abuses due to greed.

Personally, even if we got what we wanted as far as regulations and services are concerned, there will always be the danger that they will be undone by some corporatist (aka fascist) thug winning power and then using it to undo everything we have fought for. That's what you get when you concentrate power into the relative hands of a few.

That power, in the hands of the right people, can be used for tremendous good (FDR), but if it falls into the wrong hands (GWB), it can do as much harm if not more so. By diffusing that power and giving people as much direct control as possible over the affairs of the community, it would become that much harder to usurp power and destroy all that has been created.

Hypothetically, if a community followed a direct democracy model or something approaching that model where citizens themselves essentially act as the assembly appointing people to keep up the local utilities and the sanitation and permits and such and met, say, just once a week to discuss issues (like a townhall meeting format), it would be much more difficult to buy-out and corrupt than if there was only a city council of, say, 9 people who are in charge of appointing people and issuing building permits and such.

Personally, I am beginning to fear the idea of a corporation. It was designed to minimize risk and maximize profit. Too often the temptation is to reduce people down to simple numbers, statistics, assets, and liabilities, not look at them as human beings.

I guess the argument is not over the size of the government but over the fundamental issue of how we run our affairs to begin with.

[Cats Against Frist]

8. Thanks, everyone who has responded so far -- and others: keep em coming!

[rman]

9. ok

though i don't like the libertarian label; that term is to ambiguous for my taste.
but i'm in favor of a form of self-governance that avoids concentration of any kind of power.

[el_gato]

10. I'm up for a discusssion group here

In the realm of social theory the anarchist milieu is from my observations the most developed. As well, I constantly see misconceptions and outright distortions of anarchist and libertarian
positions on this board which may be due mostly to a lack of understanding.

I would also like to point out that the corporate dominance that
exists today would not be possible without the aid of the state.

[IndianaGreen]

11. It would be nice to have a forum to discuss proper role of government

Many people embraced the PATRIOT Act out of sheer fear of terrorism, while forgetting the fact that the same government you give power to do the things one wants, can also use that power to do the things you don't want.

I am all for a government restrained by separation of powers, federalism, and a Bill of Rights. All of those things have been undermined for well over a century by power hungry politicians across the political spectrum.

[Cats Against Frist]

13. Oh & Two other things

This might be a good forum to even discuss Howard Dean's federalism, and how it relates to libertarianism, the conservative idea of "federalism," etc.

Also: nonviolent can include civil disobedience...:)

[sweetheart]

14. Too many groups.

Quite honestly, i have a group in each window, and only 1 pair of
eyes. I can actively participate in about 4-5 groups max, before
the windows become unmanageable. Too many lists to peruse and
discuss in. All it does is fragment and already fragmented left.

I am a libertarian socialist and believe very strongly in a smallller
government, end to the WoD, end to wars, and have great sympathy
with real small "c" conservatives. That said, we should discuss
those points in GD to introduce the left-wisdom of such thinking to
the mainstream fringe... as holing up in a separate forum is a sure
way to make sure fewer people are introduced to said topics.

I would love it if DU had 1 giant forum with lots of sub categories,
that i could, if i wished, remove the subcategory filter and see
the whole lot as 1 giant GD. Then if i wanted, i could home in on
one discussion in an arcane sub-forum. As it stands, most of DU's
forums i've never ever visted. Why go there, if conversations are
old and seldomly read.

[Nite Owl]

15. This could be a very interesting discussion

Their are many points that we can agree with someone like Ron Paul the libertarian from TX. His speeches on the Patriot Act and how it is destroying the constitution for example. The whole issue of abortion is really libertarian. No one is 'for' abortions we just want the right and to have government stay out of the decision. As dems we want the government to step in and provide some help to those who can't afford it but on the idea of keeping government off our bodies and out of the bedroom that part is libertarian.

[starroute]

17. I'm in

I think it's becoming pretty obvious that representative democracy doesn't scale well. When we have representatives who have never met most of their constituents passing bills they don't have the time to read or the expertise to understand, something is badly out of control.

This isn't even a question of idealism any more -- it's becoming a matter of the system no longer working.

I'd like to see a discussion that starts with the most basic issue -- what is the proper function of government? -- and considers what people actually expect of their governments and what alternatives there are in fulfilling those expectations.

I'm not a libertarian -- I don't want to throw things like social welfare or infrastructure maintenance or the environment onto the free market. The current flu vaccine fiasco alone shows that the profit motive is not a workable foundation for handling matters of health, clean water, or other basic human needs.

I guess I really want to see a third alternative, neither government nor for-profit business. My real concern is with what form an alternative of that sort might take.

[toddaa]

18. This is a great idea, count me in

There are so many misperceptions about small government minded political philosophies on DU, that it's time some rational discourse without the rants had a place of its own.

[robre]

19. a kick

and a note of my support

[6th Borough]

20. I'm up for it.

Unfortunatly, I'm too tired to post anything of any consequence.

I think such a board would make for some interesting discussion and debate. Sounds like a good idea to me.

[Sgent]

23. New board

Could be very enligtening -- for instnace the previous poster brought up the flu vaccine. As someone very familiar with the situation, I think a debate would be good on that and other issues.

I don't know that I would label it Libertarian/Anarchist however, perhaps the board should be labeled "Structure/Purpose of Government" or similar.

[Cats Against Frist]

24. I'm going to let this float for a couple days

to see if we can get more support. I know some others who are going to post their support -- so, those who are enthusiastic, kick the thread, when appropriate.

I'm also taking seriously the consideration that to marginalize this topic, as sweetheart suggested, might take away from this discussion in the "general pop." I agree that that's possible, but I also agree that there are some discussions that could take place that wouldn't benefit the general pop -- and that people would still post "smaller/decentralized" government posts in GD, too.

Any thoughts from anyone on that?

[Warren DeMontague]

25. Left Leaning Libertarian-Minded Democrat Here

Count Me In.

[Cats Against Frist]

26. One last kick to see if there's any interest

We have ten starred members -- but to add another whole group, and take the discussion out of GD, I would like there to be more. We can always try again, later...