• Ajen@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    I think you misunderstood my point. What you’re referring to as “libertarianism” and “the Libertarian party” is what I referred to as “American libertarianism.”

    I don’t believe true libertarianism exists in the USA. I agree with your point that the Democratic party most closely aligns with the theory of libertarianism. It sounds like you agree with the point I was trying to make, but maybe misinterpreted it.

    Edit: I want to add that the Libertarian party in America doesn’t follow the principal of non-aggression as I understand it.

    • Sibshops@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Oh yeah, I think I was confusing in my response. I should have said:

      All libertarian parties both in and outside of the United States don’t ascribe to your interpretation of the theory of libertarianism.

      I included Australia as an example, but here is Canada’s platform as well.

      https://libertarian.on.ca/platform/2011/environment Agreements among neighbours would be another factor that would replace top-down regulations.

      • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        That’s disappointing. Maybe “modern libertarianism” would have been more accurate than “American libertarianism.” According to Wikipedia, in the 1950’s libertarianism was synonymous with liberalism, which seems to align much better with my interpretation.

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism#Etymology

        I wonder if Penn’s (old) interpretation of libertarianism was the same as mine.