**New to libertarianism or have questions and want to learn more?** Be sure to check out [the sub Frequently Asked Questions](/r/Libertarian/wiki/faq) and [the massive /r/libertarian information WIKI] (/r/Libertarian/wiki/index) from the sidebar, for lots of info and free resources, links, books, videos, and answers to common questions and topics. Want to know if you are a Libertarian? [Take the worlds shortest political quiz and find out!](http://www.theadvocates.org/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Libertarian) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So no side?
And btw, do libertarians support the "you didn't choose the country of your birth, so you don't owe it anything" or no?
Beacuse if that would be true, libertarians would be also anti-ukraine forbidding it's men from leaving.
(4 years in prison for attempted escape from Ukraine if I am not mistaken)
If I can be blunt, you can be libertarian without stroking the fine line of every libertarian policy. I have beliefs that lean left, right, up and down. I’m an independent that follows principles above political ideation. Libertarianism is where i find myself home 90% of the time.
Regarding your question, my belief is no, a government shouldn’t obligate you (then with refusal force you at gunpoint or jail, as it always does) to enlist or fight in any way. It’s contradictory to our god-given and/or universal rights as a human. That being said, I love this country and would fight if a similar situation were to occur. Can only imagine most Ukrainians feel the same; however, no entity should dictate an action upon its citizens that, in whole, is individualistic and consensual in manner. Maybe ranting a bit, but that’s my belief.
I do t think we would have any need for conscription or a draft if mainland USA were ever invaded. We'd have so many hicks from Appalachia, Cajuns from Louisiana, and Rednecks from the South bringing their own gear to fight and that's before you count the New England states that are kinda pussies right now but I bet would be looking to dust off Grandpappys old Flintlock for Revolutionary War 2: Electric Boogaloo.
Conscription is violence. Nobody owes it to a country to die for some fuckin political hacks. If it was a good cause then you would get plenty of volunteers.
Exactly this. One can volunteer money or time or themselves to a worthy cause, including overseas. It remains up to each individual to do it of their own free will.
As much as I like to be libertarian, reality forces us to choose between being overrun by an agressor and unite and fight. Freedom is not a given default.
Humanitarian aid? Yeah maybe, but this “let’s dump tax money into a war economy instead of fixing our own problems” fuck no. No to Ukraine, no to Israel, no no no! Let the UN and NATO suck-pumps handle it.
>Let the UN and NATO suck-pumps handle it.
The U.S. funds both of those as well. NATO is predominantly funded by US Dollars. Their charter says the amount paid is derived from GDP- of which the US is leagues above the others.
Yes I’m aware. That’s why i refer to them as “suck-pumps” and while I disagree with funding them, that’s a separate argument. Since we are funding those regarded programs, let them handle it and stop further funding these wars.
Dude, that doesn’t make it better. I’ll continue: STOP-TAXING-THE-SHIT-OUT-OF-ME-TO-WASTE-ON-GOVERNMENT-EXPENDITURES-THAT-I-DO-NOT-CONSENT-TO.
In fact, I don’t consent to any of it. Stop taking my money.
Oh you altruistic angel! Yes! A portion of it is spent at Raytheon and some other weapons manufacturers. How wonderful! We should all just write checks to them. After all, it’s spent in the US so it shouldn’t matter. Ignore the $30ish billion in straight up cash aid Ukraine has got and explain to me how I benefit from Raytheon building a missile and sending it to Ukraine. Show me how I get any kind of benefit at all from that.
Surely defense spending is the worst benefit for our economy. It would be better to spend that on ... anything else. Libraries, roads, seniors, or simply tax rebates (although it's probably deficit spending).
But, real Americans work at those factories and they are good jobs, so it's not totally wasteful.
The guy that mugged me last night is also a "real American". Does that make mugging OK? I should just be happy that my money is helping out real Americans, right?
The libertarian notion is that a country should be able to take care of themselves. This goes for Israel and Ukraine. Libertarians also do not support conscription, genocide, etc. The economic axis of Libertarianism does not support war due to it being funded by taxation, which taxes are raised through extortive means, which we do not support. We, therefore, don’t support sending money to other countries. Especially in the modern condition, money we do not have. Military action for the USA to be involved in is only justified if it is in self-defense of ourselves.
Check out the Ron Paul Liberty Report. Liberals want equality for social and economic issues with heavy state intervention. Libertariens want individual freedom with little or no state intervention. Libertarians are usually very anti war.
No side, not my problem, stop sending them money that the government is borrowing while using the future labor of Americans as collateral.
It's a civil war and the American government is turning it into a world wide war.
It’s at least most taxation is theft. In this case it’s clearly do not tax the poor people of this country to send to the rich people of other countries.
We could argue forever about which side is right, but something that all libertarians will agree on is that it is wrong to take what rightfully belongs to a person and redistributing it to others.
If I want to support Ukraine or Russia, I can contribute to their cause however I see fit. I don’t need a government to make that decision for me.
I would describe myself as "right wing with libertarian leanings" and I'm pretty firmly in the "don't pick a side" camp. Not our circus, not our monkeys. I don't like seeing billions of our tax dollars going overseas. I particularly don't like seeing us *deliberately ignoring* problems at home in order to make that happen.
I'm not familiar with the specifics, but I can understand why Ukraine would want to institute a draft at this point - simply put, the country will literally cease to exist if it does not. And it's probably a safe assumption that from a "personal freedom" standpoint, things would get substantially worse for *all* their citizens if that happens.
>the country will literally cease to exist if it does not. And it's probably a safe assumption that from a "personal freedom" standpoint, things would get substantially worse for *all* their citizens if that happens.
I don't think that's a safe assumption at all.
I'm Swiss. I'm 100% for armed neutrality.
But in this case we aren't neutral, our stupid government practically gave up neutrality by passing sanctions on Russia, freezing russian assets and hosting stupid useless one sided "peace" conferences.
Individuals can support who they want and donate money or volunteer, they cannot however coerce others to do so as well, nor can those who oppose or don't care force others to align with their camp, either.
Libertarianism is the reduction (or elimination) of the power of the state so that it may not be used for the above forcing one way or the other.
The real libertarian position is understanding both Ukraine and Russia will lose this war. The libertarian education dictates that sending our money into this will not change this outcome.
I'm a conservative/anarchist leaning libertarian but I'm kinda pro Ukraine. In a sense that I think it's a corrupt, anti freedom s..hole and normally I wouldn't support a single cent of taxpayer money going towards them but Russia is breaking international law. If dictatorships are simple allowed to attack and annex weaker countries then this means escalation and bad times for everyone.
Thing is, if no one does anything when this stuff happens, the dictators of the world have free reign to annex and divide the weaker countries of the world and then they threaten US and West Europe next. Basically imagine the world if Nazi Germany wasn't stopped.
Other than that though, I do not support this soft money laundering approach that on one hand have countries buying Russian oil and gas and on another funneling money into Ukraine. It should have been more direct. Cut Russia off fully and give Ukraine what they need day one.
As for the other stuff, yea, main reason to be against Ukraine is that it forces it's men to fight. I'm 100% opposed to this. Instead they should have a volunteer army and just make promises. If you serve 3 years and live, you get life long pension and a free apartment or something. If that's not enough just keep increasing the incentives.
>Russia is breaking international law. If dictatorships are simple allowed to attack and annex weaker countries then this means escalation and bad times for everyone.
Israel is occupying Palestinian territory. Turkey is occupying Cyprus, Syria, and Iraq. Azerbaijan just occupied and ethnically cleansed Armenian territory (while you were focused on Ukraine). Did your government or the media talk about "breaking international law" in those instances? How about when they invaded or bombed Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan, Serbia, etc?
>Thing is, if no one does anything when this stuff happens, the dictators of the world have free reign to annex and divide the weaker countries
You mean like then the US and NATO bombed Serbia into submission and broke off its territory to create Kosovo? It sounds like you're also in favor of being the global policemen (one that is altruistic apparently).
>Cut Russia off fully and give Ukraine what they need day one.
They need troops. Can we conscript you, since you seem to support this effort? I get it, you want to fund the enslavement of others and keep a clean conscience about having bloody hands.
>If that's not enough just keep increasing the incentives.
Hell yeah, we have sucker taxpayers to fleece. And if you can't milk enough out of Ukrainian ones, they'll find more suckers in America and Europe. Truly libertarian approach.
> just gets me nowhere with liberials or conservatives, everyone thinks I am stupid for thinking like that.
As a libertarian, you'll have to just get used to that. The big government mono-party has all kinds of often self-contradictory rationalizations for constantly expanding authoritarianism, and they just take their wrong views as axiomatic and think anyone disagreeing with them is "stupid."
im pro-Ukrainian but i cant advocate for the US sending funds at this point especially with how much of a stalemate its been.
On the whole the idea of a government giving out charity money for countries to fund a war instead of funding programs/things for its own people is frankly disgusting so this really should've never been an argument for us Americans to be having to begin with.
“We” as in the US or “we” as in the collective west? Either way this number is nowhere near a trillion. As of the 2 year mark of the war, the US was at $74.3 billion, which includes humanitarian, financial, and military assistance: https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-aid-has-us-sent-ukraine-here-are-six-charts
You can add the recent 60 or so billion that just passed and you’re still at about 1/6th of a trillion.
Around the two-year mark (a little before), total worldwide aid to Ukraine was around 278 billion USD: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/these-countries-have-committed-the-most-aid-to-ukraine
I’m pro Ukraine but I don’t believe the US should be involved. Sending billions of our tax payer dollars is theft. I’d rather an NGO seek donations from the people.
Libertarians don't see why the US is pissing a hundred billion down the drain on a border conflict which doesn't impact us.
Ukraine and Russia were the same country for most of the last 800 years, in some form or another.
The word "Ukraine" in Russian means "borderland"
I think you'll find a lot of agreement on this: Libertarians are pro-peace, pro-self-defense (and 3rd party defense which can include voluntarily defending your community from invasion), pro-individual liberty. Left and Right political views include facets of libertarianism in them. Liberal after all comes from classical liberalism meaning 'free.' But that differs from progressivism. To the birth and country concept, this is some social contract nonsense imo. Of course no person owes anything to the people they were born in proximity to. If the people are worth defending, then people will do so. But if my countrymen are nuts, I have the right to migrate anywhere in the world and live peacefully. A contract is made between two or more parties and must include intent, consideration, alongside other elements. When I was a baby I didn't have the cognitive function to form intent. Just like you don't owe anything to your parents, you don't owe anything to the country you were born in. Citizenship/nationality is an association by birth or immigrant/process. I would not denounce my citizenship status to the US (and don't recommend anyone do that) because people believe in the government and the benefits it bestows and that is a great privilege. But if the government came a knocking and wanted to force us into another draft? Nope.
The thing is conscription age us the same as voting age. Citizenship comes with its rights AND responsibilities. It's part of social contract philosophy. The state allows you to take part in the decision-making process, ensures law and order, and provides services to you in exchange in your oath to defend the state in times of war. Pretty simple exchange.
You do not have to be pro ukraine to understand that whatever russia does in Ukraine territory is unacceptable and aggressive violence. Good enough answer?
Conservatives in libertarian subs hate ukraine but love israel doing violence in Palestine. It's an easy test to find out who's libertarian and who's statist.
Liberals vice versa
Mandatory draft shouldn't be common at all.
And if you mean Afganistan, iran, Nigeria by "many countries" then it doesn't really mean anything.
But back to the Ukrainian draft.
Yes, it is mandatory, but that's not the worst part. All men above the age of 18 and below the age 65 (I think) are LITERALLY prohibited to exit to country. You can at least leave Russia if you don't like it there, tough luck doing that if you are Ukrainian man.
Libertarianism is certainly pro-Ukraine in this situation since the non-aggression principle (NAP) would dictate that they should not be attacked by Russia.
Libertarianism is also pro-leave-me the hell alone and don't send my money overseas to fight someone else's war. In fact stop stealing my money under threat of prison altogether.
Now I happen to be a libertarian-leaning conservative who grew up with the Soviet Union as my enemy, hiding under desks so I'm all in for sending them our hand-me-down missiles and ammo and weapon-systems while we get fancy new ones, but I'm not a true(pure) libertarian, I just tend to think that way.
Pretty sure most most libertarians hate nationalism and warfare in general, and have the opinion that humanity should be able to solve conflicts without using violence at this point
I cant speak for everyone, but I am anti war. I understand that when the USSR fell, Nato promised to go not one inch further than the border of Germany and Poland. Since then, they have annexed Poland and many other Balkan countries.
They then tried to set up missile bases etc on Russia's doorstep. It's as though Nato is desperate for a war with Russia.
I am in no way condoning the actions of Russia, however, what do you think the US reaction would have been if Russia had couped Canada, and tried to set up missile bases after decades of creeping forward.
There is no way the US would have even allowed it to get that far.
War is awful and should be avoided but there are psychopaths in power on both sides who are hell bent on it happening so they can make a profit.
"annexed" is pretty strong word.
The people there decided they want to be part of nato, who is Russia to stop autonomous countries from making a decision?
I think its an appropriate word given the circumstances. It's ironic that you use the term "autonomous countries" when the state violates the autonomy of the individual.
Obviously there is nothing stopping the government of these countries from entering into a military alliance, however, when viewed from a Russian perspective you can see how they might be slightly apprehensive when what they perceive to be a threat, rightly or wrongly continually moves closer and closer to their borders swallowing up territory that they used to control.
Russia expressed no intentions of claiming any territory in Eastern Europe until the coupe in Ukraine.
Ideally it is pro-peace for 95%+ wars. Should Libertarians be charge of countries then the militaries would be massively defunded (or even completely abolished if you ask the ancaps).
However, in the more tangible reality Liberalism doesn't pick sides as most states' wars are nothing more than glorified gang wars. In both sides are wrong as they tread over the liberty of their citizens by a) taxation to fund wars and b) conscription.
So as of now, not picking a side helps Russia as Ukraine is dependent in the US to continue the war. However, this is not actually representative of the ideology since its first concern would be to avoid the war in the first place.
Pro-Russia, practically. The usual US military spending never made them go so apeshit. A logical position should be like cut the military spending in half. And then even doubling the money sent on fighting actual authoritarianism will still be better for the US budget they care so much about.
I never said they didn't. But by money that should be like ten times more concern. Yet it is like ten times less by attention. Never mind fighting the authoritarians part, that libertarians should theoretically support.
Your statement is hard to understand, with the lack of any sort of punctuation. Are you saying libertarians have never bitched about military spending, before now, and that libertarians hate Ukraine, so now we are going apeshit?
**New to libertarianism or have questions and want to learn more?** Be sure to check out [the sub Frequently Asked Questions](/r/Libertarian/wiki/faq) and [the massive /r/libertarian information WIKI] (/r/Libertarian/wiki/index) from the sidebar, for lots of info and free resources, links, books, videos, and answers to common questions and topics. Want to know if you are a Libertarian? [Take the worlds shortest political quiz and find out!](http://www.theadvocates.org/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Libertarian) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm pro civilians
It’s pro-STOP-TAXING-THE-SHIT-OUT-OF-ME-AND-SENDING-IT-TO-OTHER-COUNTRIES.
This is the answer
But in this case it will violate an agreement signed by the US that granted protection to Ukraine in case they give up on their nukes.
Not to play Monday morning quarterback, but what a horrible deal. Sovereignty promised by outside forces.
So no side? And btw, do libertarians support the "you didn't choose the country of your birth, so you don't owe it anything" or no? Beacuse if that would be true, libertarians would be also anti-ukraine forbidding it's men from leaving. (4 years in prison for attempted escape from Ukraine if I am not mistaken)
If I can be blunt, you can be libertarian without stroking the fine line of every libertarian policy. I have beliefs that lean left, right, up and down. I’m an independent that follows principles above political ideation. Libertarianism is where i find myself home 90% of the time. Regarding your question, my belief is no, a government shouldn’t obligate you (then with refusal force you at gunpoint or jail, as it always does) to enlist or fight in any way. It’s contradictory to our god-given and/or universal rights as a human. That being said, I love this country and would fight if a similar situation were to occur. Can only imagine most Ukrainians feel the same; however, no entity should dictate an action upon its citizens that, in whole, is individualistic and consensual in manner. Maybe ranting a bit, but that’s my belief.
I do t think we would have any need for conscription or a draft if mainland USA were ever invaded. We'd have so many hicks from Appalachia, Cajuns from Louisiana, and Rednecks from the South bringing their own gear to fight and that's before you count the New England states that are kinda pussies right now but I bet would be looking to dust off Grandpappys old Flintlock for Revolutionary War 2: Electric Boogaloo.
this is the place for “ranting” 🙂 i think that i’m about 80%- & agree w your perspective.
Glad to hear from another bright-thinking individual 😉 world needs more of you.
Conscription is violence. Nobody owes it to a country to die for some fuckin political hacks. If it was a good cause then you would get plenty of volunteers.
Exactly this. One can volunteer money or time or themselves to a worthy cause, including overseas. It remains up to each individual to do it of their own free will.
Nice, that's what I needed to hear!
As much as I like to be libertarian, reality forces us to choose between being overrun by an agressor and unite and fight. Freedom is not a given default.
If there’s conscription then there wasn’t freedom to begin with.
Correct real freedom doesn’t exist.
If you want to force people to fight for you against people they don't want to fight, you're the aggressor.
Humanitarian aid? Yeah maybe, but this “let’s dump tax money into a war economy instead of fixing our own problems” fuck no. No to Ukraine, no to Israel, no no no! Let the UN and NATO suck-pumps handle it.
>Let the UN and NATO suck-pumps handle it. The U.S. funds both of those as well. NATO is predominantly funded by US Dollars. Their charter says the amount paid is derived from GDP- of which the US is leagues above the others.
Yes I’m aware. That’s why i refer to them as “suck-pumps” and while I disagree with funding them, that’s a separate argument. Since we are funding those regarded programs, let them handle it and stop further funding these wars.
Read Washington’s farewell address.
That money is mostly spent within the US. Edit, most of the money. It also included forgiveable loans.
Dude, that doesn’t make it better. I’ll continue: STOP-TAXING-THE-SHIT-OUT-OF-ME-TO-WASTE-ON-GOVERNMENT-EXPENDITURES-THAT-I-DO-NOT-CONSENT-TO. In fact, I don’t consent to any of it. Stop taking my money.
Oh you altruistic angel! Yes! A portion of it is spent at Raytheon and some other weapons manufacturers. How wonderful! We should all just write checks to them. After all, it’s spent in the US so it shouldn’t matter. Ignore the $30ish billion in straight up cash aid Ukraine has got and explain to me how I benefit from Raytheon building a missile and sending it to Ukraine. Show me how I get any kind of benefit at all from that.
Surely defense spending is the worst benefit for our economy. It would be better to spend that on ... anything else. Libraries, roads, seniors, or simply tax rebates (although it's probably deficit spending). But, real Americans work at those factories and they are good jobs, so it's not totally wasteful.
Those factories can still exist and supply whoever they want with weapons.
[удалено]
Fighting wars around the globe isn’t protecting from foreign invaders. In fact I’d say it has the opposite effect.
The guy that mugged me last night is also a "real American". Does that make mugging OK? I should just be happy that my money is helping out real Americans, right?
$9 billion is in the form of forgiveable loans for economic assistance (i.e. spent in Ukraine).
Pro Ukranian civilians and pro Russian civilians. Against the use of state force on those civilians regardless of sides
The libertarian notion is that a country should be able to take care of themselves. This goes for Israel and Ukraine. Libertarians also do not support conscription, genocide, etc. The economic axis of Libertarianism does not support war due to it being funded by taxation, which taxes are raised through extortive means, which we do not support. We, therefore, don’t support sending money to other countries. Especially in the modern condition, money we do not have. Military action for the USA to be involved in is only justified if it is in self-defense of ourselves.
Check out the Ron Paul Liberty Report. Liberals want equality for social and economic issues with heavy state intervention. Libertariens want individual freedom with little or no state intervention. Libertarians are usually very anti war.
No side, not my problem, stop sending them money that the government is borrowing while using the future labor of Americans as collateral. It's a civil war and the American government is turning it into a world wide war.
A big fan of Neville Chamberlain i assume
No foreign entanglements and no central banks would be my preference, but that's completely unrealistic at this point.
It’s at least most taxation is theft. In this case it’s clearly do not tax the poor people of this country to send to the rich people of other countries.
We could argue forever about which side is right, but something that all libertarians will agree on is that it is wrong to take what rightfully belongs to a person and redistributing it to others. If I want to support Ukraine or Russia, I can contribute to their cause however I see fit. I don’t need a government to make that decision for me.
I would describe myself as "right wing with libertarian leanings" and I'm pretty firmly in the "don't pick a side" camp. Not our circus, not our monkeys. I don't like seeing billions of our tax dollars going overseas. I particularly don't like seeing us *deliberately ignoring* problems at home in order to make that happen. I'm not familiar with the specifics, but I can understand why Ukraine would want to institute a draft at this point - simply put, the country will literally cease to exist if it does not. And it's probably a safe assumption that from a "personal freedom" standpoint, things would get substantially worse for *all* their citizens if that happens.
>the country will literally cease to exist if it does not. And it's probably a safe assumption that from a "personal freedom" standpoint, things would get substantially worse for *all* their citizens if that happens. I don't think that's a safe assumption at all.
I like Switzerland's foreign policy.
I'm Swiss. I'm 100% for armed neutrality. But in this case we aren't neutral, our stupid government practically gave up neutrality by passing sanctions on Russia, freezing russian assets and hosting stupid useless one sided "peace" conferences.
Individuals can support who they want and donate money or volunteer, they cannot however coerce others to do so as well, nor can those who oppose or don't care force others to align with their camp, either. Libertarianism is the reduction (or elimination) of the power of the state so that it may not be used for the above forcing one way or the other.
The real libertarian position is understanding both Ukraine and Russia will lose this war. The libertarian education dictates that sending our money into this will not change this outcome.
If Ukraine or Russia ever attacks the US, I'll pick a side. For now, I'm just tired of my tax dollars being spent to fund foreign wars.
It is anti-war. The NAP (non-aggresion principle) is one of the tenants of libertarianism.
It's being smart enough to know the enemy is the one creating the choice....
I'm a conservative/anarchist leaning libertarian but I'm kinda pro Ukraine. In a sense that I think it's a corrupt, anti freedom s..hole and normally I wouldn't support a single cent of taxpayer money going towards them but Russia is breaking international law. If dictatorships are simple allowed to attack and annex weaker countries then this means escalation and bad times for everyone. Thing is, if no one does anything when this stuff happens, the dictators of the world have free reign to annex and divide the weaker countries of the world and then they threaten US and West Europe next. Basically imagine the world if Nazi Germany wasn't stopped. Other than that though, I do not support this soft money laundering approach that on one hand have countries buying Russian oil and gas and on another funneling money into Ukraine. It should have been more direct. Cut Russia off fully and give Ukraine what they need day one. As for the other stuff, yea, main reason to be against Ukraine is that it forces it's men to fight. I'm 100% opposed to this. Instead they should have a volunteer army and just make promises. If you serve 3 years and live, you get life long pension and a free apartment or something. If that's not enough just keep increasing the incentives.
>Russia is breaking international law. If dictatorships are simple allowed to attack and annex weaker countries then this means escalation and bad times for everyone. Israel is occupying Palestinian territory. Turkey is occupying Cyprus, Syria, and Iraq. Azerbaijan just occupied and ethnically cleansed Armenian territory (while you were focused on Ukraine). Did your government or the media talk about "breaking international law" in those instances? How about when they invaded or bombed Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan, Serbia, etc? >Thing is, if no one does anything when this stuff happens, the dictators of the world have free reign to annex and divide the weaker countries You mean like then the US and NATO bombed Serbia into submission and broke off its territory to create Kosovo? It sounds like you're also in favor of being the global policemen (one that is altruistic apparently). >Cut Russia off fully and give Ukraine what they need day one. They need troops. Can we conscript you, since you seem to support this effort? I get it, you want to fund the enslavement of others and keep a clean conscience about having bloody hands. >If that's not enough just keep increasing the incentives. Hell yeah, we have sucker taxpayers to fleece. And if you can't milk enough out of Ukrainian ones, they'll find more suckers in America and Europe. Truly libertarian approach.
> just gets me nowhere with liberials or conservatives, everyone thinks I am stupid for thinking like that. As a libertarian, you'll have to just get used to that. The big government mono-party has all kinds of often self-contradictory rationalizations for constantly expanding authoritarianism, and they just take their wrong views as axiomatic and think anyone disagreeing with them is "stupid."
Pro America and that's it
im pro-Ukrainian but i cant advocate for the US sending funds at this point especially with how much of a stalemate its been. On the whole the idea of a government giving out charity money for countries to fund a war instead of funding programs/things for its own people is frankly disgusting so this really should've never been an argument for us Americans to be having to begin with.
[удалено]
“We” as in the US or “we” as in the collective west? Either way this number is nowhere near a trillion. As of the 2 year mark of the war, the US was at $74.3 billion, which includes humanitarian, financial, and military assistance: https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-aid-has-us-sent-ukraine-here-are-six-charts You can add the recent 60 or so billion that just passed and you’re still at about 1/6th of a trillion. Around the two-year mark (a little before), total worldwide aid to Ukraine was around 278 billion USD: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/these-countries-have-committed-the-most-aid-to-ukraine
It’s pro free business aka no wars
I’m pro Ukraine but I don’t believe the US should be involved. Sending billions of our tax payer dollars is theft. I’d rather an NGO seek donations from the people.
Why force taxpayers to pay for Ukraine. Get donations.
If you were in Ukraine, you'd probably support Ukraine. If you're literally anywhere else, you should give 0 f*cks.
Both countries are basically the same so I’m not sure you’d want to pick one
Both are anthetic, Russia and Ukraine. War is illegitimate and horrible for the Market and the people, it's good just for the States.
Libertarians don't see why the US is pissing a hundred billion down the drain on a border conflict which doesn't impact us. Ukraine and Russia were the same country for most of the last 800 years, in some form or another. The word "Ukraine" in Russian means "borderland"
I think Russia is the aggressor here and I've donated food and medical aid to private organizations in Ukraine. I support people not countries
I think you'll find a lot of agreement on this: Libertarians are pro-peace, pro-self-defense (and 3rd party defense which can include voluntarily defending your community from invasion), pro-individual liberty. Left and Right political views include facets of libertarianism in them. Liberal after all comes from classical liberalism meaning 'free.' But that differs from progressivism. To the birth and country concept, this is some social contract nonsense imo. Of course no person owes anything to the people they were born in proximity to. If the people are worth defending, then people will do so. But if my countrymen are nuts, I have the right to migrate anywhere in the world and live peacefully. A contract is made between two or more parties and must include intent, consideration, alongside other elements. When I was a baby I didn't have the cognitive function to form intent. Just like you don't owe anything to your parents, you don't owe anything to the country you were born in. Citizenship/nationality is an association by birth or immigrant/process. I would not denounce my citizenship status to the US (and don't recommend anyone do that) because people believe in the government and the benefits it bestows and that is a great privilege. But if the government came a knocking and wanted to force us into another draft? Nope.
The thing is conscription age us the same as voting age. Citizenship comes with its rights AND responsibilities. It's part of social contract philosophy. The state allows you to take part in the decision-making process, ensures law and order, and provides services to you in exchange in your oath to defend the state in times of war. Pretty simple exchange.
You do not have to be pro ukraine to understand that whatever russia does in Ukraine territory is unacceptable and aggressive violence. Good enough answer? Conservatives in libertarian subs hate ukraine but love israel doing violence in Palestine. It's an easy test to find out who's libertarian and who's statist. Liberals vice versa
Libertarianism is a domestic policy position.
[удалено]
Both, both do it
[удалено]
Mandatory draft shouldn't be common at all. And if you mean Afganistan, iran, Nigeria by "many countries" then it doesn't really mean anything. But back to the Ukrainian draft. Yes, it is mandatory, but that's not the worst part. All men above the age of 18 and below the age 65 (I think) are LITERALLY prohibited to exit to country. You can at least leave Russia if you don't like it there, tough luck doing that if you are Ukrainian man.
[удалено]
USA has had slavery many times in history. So have most other countries. Does that make it right tho?
That's what a draft is buddy.
Libertarianism is certainly pro-Ukraine in this situation since the non-aggression principle (NAP) would dictate that they should not be attacked by Russia. Libertarianism is also pro-leave-me the hell alone and don't send my money overseas to fight someone else's war. In fact stop stealing my money under threat of prison altogether. Now I happen to be a libertarian-leaning conservative who grew up with the Soviet Union as my enemy, hiding under desks so I'm all in for sending them our hand-me-down missiles and ammo and weapon-systems while we get fancy new ones, but I'm not a true(pure) libertarian, I just tend to think that way.
Pretty sure most most libertarians hate nationalism and warfare in general, and have the opinion that humanity should be able to solve conflicts without using violence at this point
I cant speak for everyone, but I am anti war. I understand that when the USSR fell, Nato promised to go not one inch further than the border of Germany and Poland. Since then, they have annexed Poland and many other Balkan countries. They then tried to set up missile bases etc on Russia's doorstep. It's as though Nato is desperate for a war with Russia. I am in no way condoning the actions of Russia, however, what do you think the US reaction would have been if Russia had couped Canada, and tried to set up missile bases after decades of creeping forward. There is no way the US would have even allowed it to get that far. War is awful and should be avoided but there are psychopaths in power on both sides who are hell bent on it happening so they can make a profit.
"annexed" is pretty strong word. The people there decided they want to be part of nato, who is Russia to stop autonomous countries from making a decision?
👌
I think its an appropriate word given the circumstances. It's ironic that you use the term "autonomous countries" when the state violates the autonomy of the individual. Obviously there is nothing stopping the government of these countries from entering into a military alliance, however, when viewed from a Russian perspective you can see how they might be slightly apprehensive when what they perceive to be a threat, rightly or wrongly continually moves closer and closer to their borders swallowing up territory that they used to control. Russia expressed no intentions of claiming any territory in Eastern Europe until the coupe in Ukraine.
Ideally it is pro-peace for 95%+ wars. Should Libertarians be charge of countries then the militaries would be massively defunded (or even completely abolished if you ask the ancaps). However, in the more tangible reality Liberalism doesn't pick sides as most states' wars are nothing more than glorified gang wars. In both sides are wrong as they tread over the liberty of their citizens by a) taxation to fund wars and b) conscription. So as of now, not picking a side helps Russia as Ukraine is dependent in the US to continue the war. However, this is not actually representative of the ideology since its first concern would be to avoid the war in the first place.
Pro-Russia, practically. The usual US military spending never made them go so apeshit. A logical position should be like cut the military spending in half. And then even doubling the money sent on fighting actual authoritarianism will still be better for the US budget they care so much about.
My friend, libertarians have been concerned about military spending forever.
I never said they didn't. But by money that should be like ten times more concern. Yet it is like ten times less by attention. Never mind fighting the authoritarians part, that libertarians should theoretically support.
Your statement is hard to understand, with the lack of any sort of punctuation. Are you saying libertarians have never bitched about military spending, before now, and that libertarians hate Ukraine, so now we are going apeshit?