As usual there are 2 parts. There is the ideal part and there is a damage reduction compromise. For the former I am all in. For the latter, just come up with better idea than mine then, anything that works.
1. Government must not interfere at all in consensual sex and reproduction. Every sex and reproductive acts between consenting adult should be legal whether it’s commercialized or not. Marriage should not get any favorable treatment compared to prostitution. It’s not up to government to decide which one is which (which is very confusing even for most philosophers anyway).
That’s my main idea. That’s the only think I want to promote. What is so not libertarian about that? The rest are just explanation why most problems we have now will go away by it self if that’s implemented. Yes that means less welfare, trade restrictions, poverty, war etc.
You can check explanation here http://freemarketforever.com/2012/03/08/freedom-and-compromise/ You don’t have to agree with it. It’s just an explanation why this idea is not just an ideal but an actually practically good idea that will bring good results. Others are not libertarian and we need more ammo to convince them than simply it’s freedom.
1b. Men (and anyone) should compete globally and women are free to choose any male (or partner) from any country under any consensual terms
Of course when I use words like men/women, it should work the other way around too. It’s just that the politic nowadays tend to presume that women are coerced but not men. So I’ll make that easier.
This is just a corollary of 1.
Why bitch about women being oppressed by Taliban? Just allow them to immigrate here. Allow oppressed women (or anyone oppressed) from Taliban(or anywhere else) to be girlfriends/wives/sugar babies/sex workers/employers/businessmen in western countries (or asia). Restrict women trafficking laws to only punish non consensual trafficking. Then Taliban would go extinct by themselves. Just put some additional safeguard ensuring that it’s consensual. I am sure 95% of Afghan women are better of being fuck toy here than becoming a wife of some cavemen. Let THEM choose.
2. Decouple redistribution of wealth with number of kids/needs.
This is a compromise, not ideal. Ideally there is no redistribution of wealth. Now that there is, we should decouple it.
If you have kids, well governments pay for public school. It’s natural to expect that government spend the same amount of money for those with no kids, say by paying cash.
For the same reason, government shouldn’t help someone just because he is poorer and sicker. Ideally there is 0 money for them. But if government pay for the poor and sick, government should also give cash to the rich and healthy. Simple right? Less incentive to be poor and sick.
It’s Milton Friedman’s idea actually.
What is the problem? Which one you disagree? Yes both have eugenic gene pool survival implication. However, as usual you do not need to agree with me on that. As a libertarian, do you think it’s a good idea already even without it?
BTW: I read about a dimwitted women who got their uterus cut against her wish. I am NOT advocating that. It’s not up to government to decide who is unworthy. That is NOT my idea.
Incoming search terms:
- powered by phpBB hot naked women (40)
- naked slaves (13)
- powered by phpBB beautiful women in competition (8)