Neither - your poll is flawed. The "freedom" to work for bosses in return for the wages you depend on to survive is no freedom, unless you are born with grotesque privilege. It is a tyranny of many small tyrants - the boss, the landlord, the cop who defends their property.
And if you are given freedom from want - free access to the means of production - but the state imposes tyrannical control, you are no more free. It is another tyranny.
The only real freedom is democratic freedom, with no tyrants small or large. Real freedom requires free access to the means of survival - freedom from want - and freedom from state power. The argument between libertarian capitalists and authoritarian socialists that you pose is misleading. It's false. One wants to dominate you through private power to protect their own privilege - the other wants to dominate you through state power to protect their own privilege. Both sell this domination to you as "freedom".
Read Kropotkin, Dunayevskaya, Thomas Paine - libertarian socialists. Those folks know what's up.
HellcatF6F - 13 years ago
I would rather fend for myself than have the government decide my life for me.
Tristan Brown - 15 years ago
And for ease of access, that post exists here: http://tbschemer.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/style-of-government-poll/
Tristan Brown - 15 years ago
Actually on second thought, it would probably be easier if comments and further explanation were directed to the post that I made on the poll. The functionality of that system is much better.
Daniel - 15 years ago
I would be willing to give up some rights namely those that would infringe on the rights of others ie making lots of noise or being in privately owned areas. Furthermore I would be willing to give up some financial freedom in the form of taxes to provide basic services such as police, fire, funding for various important government agencies such as NIH or a collective healthcare program. Rights I would not be willing to compromise on would be things such as freedom of religion, right to make my own moral code, privacy (within reason) amongst others.
Tristan Brown - 15 years ago
If there's some middle ground between these two extremes that you prefer, it would be helpful if you'd explain exactly where you draw the line (i.e. what rights you'd be willing to give up if it were necessary to ensure that the government could take care of you).
Neither - your poll is flawed. The "freedom" to work for bosses in return for the wages you depend on to survive is no freedom, unless you are born with grotesque privilege. It is a tyranny of many small tyrants - the boss, the landlord, the cop who defends their property.
And if you are given freedom from want - free access to the means of production - but the state imposes tyrannical control, you are no more free. It is another tyranny.
The only real freedom is democratic freedom, with no tyrants small or large. Real freedom requires free access to the means of survival - freedom from want - and freedom from state power. The argument between libertarian capitalists and authoritarian socialists that you pose is misleading. It's false. One wants to dominate you through private power to protect their own privilege - the other wants to dominate you through state power to protect their own privilege. Both sell this domination to you as "freedom".
Read Kropotkin, Dunayevskaya, Thomas Paine - libertarian socialists. Those folks know what's up.
I would rather fend for myself than have the government decide my life for me.
And for ease of access, that post exists here: http://tbschemer.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/style-of-government-poll/
Actually on second thought, it would probably be easier if comments and further explanation were directed to the post that I made on the poll. The functionality of that system is much better.
I would be willing to give up some rights namely those that would infringe on the rights of others ie making lots of noise or being in privately owned areas. Furthermore I would be willing to give up some financial freedom in the form of taxes to provide basic services such as police, fire, funding for various important government agencies such as NIH or a collective healthcare program. Rights I would not be willing to compromise on would be things such as freedom of religion, right to make my own moral code, privacy (within reason) amongst others.
If there's some middle ground between these two extremes that you prefer, it would be helpful if you'd explain exactly where you draw the line (i.e. what rights you'd be willing to give up if it were necessary to ensure that the government could take care of you).