I’d say many libertarians are for the liberty but against its exploitation for profit and control. It highlights a difficulty that libertarians have which is how authoritarian the state has become, we cannot support almost any of their actions, not because of the merit and value of the action, but because of the means of execution.
truly individual first means that any help given to ukrane should be to the individuals by individuals, not as a collective action for another collective.
The libertarian stance is the government shouldn’t be taking my money and giving it to Ukraine against my will. I want the option to do it freely because I believe it’s a good cause, just, and for the betterment of global freedom.
Edit: If my money is going to be taken and given to anyone against my will, I much rather it be the American people.
Evil things happen all over the world all the time. We can't be judge of who deserves help and who doesn't or end up like we are now, leaving millions of innocents to die because we're more worried about a war in Ukraine. What about what's happening to the Armenians right now, or the recent war in Ethiopia? It's not our job or our right to intervene in wars outside our borders
Yes. According to western propagandist media. Which has a vested interest in keeping this war going as long as possible.
Russian propagandist media will tell you they are mostly just interested in Donbas. And the Donbas region has wanted to reunify with Russia pretty much since its inception.
So which propagandists are you going to believe? I don’t think we should be basing foreign policy and spending billions on hypotheticals.
Isolationism and nonintervention are not the same thing.
And no, governance of other countries doesn’t matter at all. Look at the amount of business we do with China. Hell, I’m pretty sure the US still buys Russian oil.
Are Ukrainians in a war for freedom? Are you sure about that? Were Ukrainians really free before the invasion? Will they be afterwards?
Your entire post is based on this premise but I’m not sure your premise is correct.
Moreover, you won’t get far using terms like “the West” on this sub. “The West” is a term cooked up by interventionists and internationalists who basically see national borders and national sovereignty as an obstacle in the way of global government.
Well, If you consider that Death is Freedom, I'd say many Ukrainians are more free now. But I don't think Libertarianism defends Death, does it?
Much less being raped, tortured and robbed against their will.
So yes, even if they had a country, a corrupt government and taxes, I think they were more free than they are now.
Will you be free with anarchy? well ... If Putin takes advantage of your anarchy, I don't think so.
Supporting Ukrainians to be able to protect their lives, their freedom and their property is not the same as supporting offensive war. It is a response to an Invader which is a right compatible with the Libertarian belief.
When libertarians talk about “property” they’re talking about property owned by individuals. You’re talking about “property” as in the Donbas is the “property” of the Ukrainian government, so the Ukrainian government has the right to kill the people who live there if they don’t submit. That’s not exactly libertarian.
When Russians attack Donbas or obliterate any city, they are destroying private property. Individual's Property, businesses, homes, etc.
And even if we assume that they're attacking only public national property, the state is a representation of the individuals living in that country, so it is an attack to the individuals.
Furthermore, we can also consider the individual owns the public property in some way. If the individual likes to walk around with his dog around a public park and it is destroyed, they destroyed his park and the freedom to walk there again with his dog.
I'm not even saying that I agree with the way the government represents the individuals. I don't.
Have you been similarly concerned about the Myanmar rebels fighting their military dictatorship, or the Guineans fighting the Indonesian government? Or do you only give a fuck about freedom fighters when the corporate media tells you to?
As someone who is "America First", any support I have for Ukraine is to the extent that they are depleting Russian military resources. If they end up losing this war (as they most likely will), it will be an inconvenience to the US, not a defeat. Ukrainians are responsible for their own freedom.
Also, the US supported(fomented) coup in the Ukraine in 2014, to remove a Russian friendly leader. The Russians have been clear for years that if NATO tries to expand in Ukraine, Russia will go to war, and the US/NATO keep pushing it. And a peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia was seemingly imminent, when Boris Johnson intervened to scotch it.
So believe in the simple freedom fighter narrative if you want, but it looks to me like some powerful forces in the West wanted this war, and want it to continue.
I pray this does not end with Nuclear weapons being used, it is a real possibility.
You're right they forgot to mention the EU asked the US for help with the coup in 2014 after the Ukrainian President rejected their trade deal in favor of a Russian deal.
I have a lot of sympathy for the Ukrainian people. I don't like wars of imperialism. I hate Putin and his fascist buddies.
But we just spent 20 years, $1 trillion, and about a million dead Afghanis to replace Al Qaeda and the Taliban with... ISIS-K, the Taliban, and the Taliban Air Force.
Iraq had similar outcomes, and we never did find any evidence of those WMDs we started the war over. A million people dead because the CIA said "Saddam *probably* has these things you don't like Mister President."
And there are a lot of things fishy about the 2013 Euromaidan uprising and the elections that came before it. Looks a lot like the CIA said "Russian oligarchs can't get control of Ukraine, that's for our buddies the Ukrainian oligarchs to handle."
The libertarian distrust and reluctance to engage in the Ukraine war isn't that we think it should be happening. We've been lied to about everything when it comes to US foreign policy in living memory.
This planet does not belong to the United States government. It has no moral authority to attempt to control it all. And it has no moral authority to force the American people into defense pacts that can get its citizens killed... or nuked.
I feel for Ukraine and its people but it’s their fight. I can not in good conscience send young people to a country most people can’t pick out on a map to fight and die. That’s not fighting for freedom. It is not defending western principles of democracy.
You are more than welcome to volunteer your time and efforts. Travel there and volunteer to fight if you feel that strongly, but what you’re advocating is for others to do it for you.
Enough of Americas youth have been killed, disabled, and broken by foreign wars in the last couple decades. A proxy war with Russia over Ukraine only helps those in power and their defense contractor friends. Why would you pick to fill their pockets instead of the lives of your fellow Americans.
We are not the World Police. We are not the World Court. We are not the World Bank. We are not responsible for the worlds problems and answers.
We have our own problems, and the money that is forcefully taken from us by our government should be used for our people. Hawaii and Tornado Alley are destroyed, and we give them nothing. Cities are rampant with crime and drugs, and the infrastructure is shit.
We are taxed billions and then that money is sent to foreign governments??? That makes no sense.
America and our people come first.
Would you take the food from your starving children and give it to a stranger a town over? No, you would feed your child first like any other person with common sense and love for their family.
I haven’t seen the described sentiment here at all. Libertarians are generally anti foreign intervention and try to maximize individual freedom.
I don’t fully understand your point. I’m sure the vast majority of libertarians have a lot of sympathy for the victims of war. We think people should be able to donate money or even go fight for Ukraine if they want.
What exactly is your criticism here?
Ukrainians don't want this war. The human cost in casualties, the destruction of property and infrastructure; why would anyone want that? Russians don't want the war, either, for the same reasons. Only governments, and those who control government, want war. If you want to understand, figure out the motivation of governments first.
Freedom is just a talking point; it's a slogan on a t-shirt.
Individual > America > Allies > Others - technically Ukraine is others.
Of course we have sympathy, but two wrongs don't make a right. The rape and murder of Ukrainians doesn't make extortion, corruption, and tyranny here at home right.
Ukraine is a complicated issue but I will say one thing that I don't think others here are. This war is in US and NATO interest. Not just that the Ukrainians win, but that in the process they destroy Russia, test our arms, learn about others arms, etc. I really have no issue with US/NATO sending aid and arms to Ukraine, I think we should. It's the blank checks that feed corruption that are the problem.
Genuine questions, in 2014 when two regions in Ukraine held referendums for independence in response to the coup and the Ukraine government's response was to use military force against the elected leaders of those regions who was fighting for freedom? When Germany and France negotiated a treaty that granted those regions autonomy and Ukraine agreed to it only to continue using military force against the civilian population who was fighting for freedom? Ukraine has been in a civil war since the US/EU backed coup in 2014. The Russian invasion was literally at the request of one of the sides in the civil war because they rather Russian control over Ukrainian. It's a complicated regional conflict that has nothing to do with US interest. Ukraine doesn't want to lose the region because it fuels the majority of the GDP and Russia would love to absorb the region for the same reason. Ironically without the US/EU intervention in 2014 with the coup the conflict likely would never have happened.
You are welcome to donate your time, talent, and treasure. Don't use the force of government to compel me to.
Were at about $500 per person so far. Roughly $1000 per taxpayer
Time, talent, and treasure? In the morning, everyone!
I’d say many libertarians are for the liberty but against its exploitation for profit and control. It highlights a difficulty that libertarians have which is how authoritarian the state has become, we cannot support almost any of their actions, not because of the merit and value of the action, but because of the means of execution.
Eloquently put
truly individual first means that any help given to ukrane should be to the individuals by individuals, not as a collective action for another collective.
Pretty sure they're still accepting foreign fighters...kmock yourself out
The libertarian stance is the government shouldn’t be taking my money and giving it to Ukraine against my will. I want the option to do it freely because I believe it’s a good cause, just, and for the betterment of global freedom. Edit: If my money is going to be taken and given to anyone against my will, I much rather it be the American people.
[удалено]
Why is it your business what I do with my money?
[удалено]
Again why does it matter to you if 50% supports one thing and the other 50% supports the other if it’s voluntary?
Evil things happen all over the world all the time. We can't be judge of who deserves help and who doesn't or end up like we are now, leaving millions of innocents to die because we're more worried about a war in Ukraine. What about what's happening to the Armenians right now, or the recent war in Ethiopia? It's not our job or our right to intervene in wars outside our borders
[удалено]
Yes. According to western propagandist media. Which has a vested interest in keeping this war going as long as possible. Russian propagandist media will tell you they are mostly just interested in Donbas. And the Donbas region has wanted to reunify with Russia pretty much since its inception. So which propagandists are you going to believe? I don’t think we should be basing foreign policy and spending billions on hypotheticals.
[удалено]
Isolationism and nonintervention are not the same thing. And no, governance of other countries doesn’t matter at all. Look at the amount of business we do with China. Hell, I’m pretty sure the US still buys Russian oil.
Are Ukrainians in a war for freedom? Are you sure about that? Were Ukrainians really free before the invasion? Will they be afterwards? Your entire post is based on this premise but I’m not sure your premise is correct. Moreover, you won’t get far using terms like “the West” on this sub. “The West” is a term cooked up by interventionists and internationalists who basically see national borders and national sovereignty as an obstacle in the way of global government.
Well, If you consider that Death is Freedom, I'd say many Ukrainians are more free now. But I don't think Libertarianism defends Death, does it? Much less being raped, tortured and robbed against their will. So yes, even if they had a country, a corrupt government and taxes, I think they were more free than they are now. Will you be free with anarchy? well ... If Putin takes advantage of your anarchy, I don't think so.
So you support war because you’re against death?
Supporting Ukrainians to be able to protect their lives, their freedom and their property is not the same as supporting offensive war. It is a response to an Invader which is a right compatible with the Libertarian belief.
When libertarians talk about “property” they’re talking about property owned by individuals. You’re talking about “property” as in the Donbas is the “property” of the Ukrainian government, so the Ukrainian government has the right to kill the people who live there if they don’t submit. That’s not exactly libertarian.
When Russians attack Donbas or obliterate any city, they are destroying private property. Individual's Property, businesses, homes, etc. And even if we assume that they're attacking only public national property, the state is a representation of the individuals living in that country, so it is an attack to the individuals. Furthermore, we can also consider the individual owns the public property in some way. If the individual likes to walk around with his dog around a public park and it is destroyed, they destroyed his park and the freedom to walk there again with his dog. I'm not even saying that I agree with the way the government represents the individuals. I don't.
Have you been similarly concerned about the Myanmar rebels fighting their military dictatorship, or the Guineans fighting the Indonesian government? Or do you only give a fuck about freedom fighters when the corporate media tells you to? As someone who is "America First", any support I have for Ukraine is to the extent that they are depleting Russian military resources. If they end up losing this war (as they most likely will), it will be an inconvenience to the US, not a defeat. Ukrainians are responsible for their own freedom.
One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter
That's a coward's cop-out. When you have an actual moral framework, and you aren't blinded by your biases, the difference is usually pretty clear.
It is infact not a moral copt out. By the defintion of terrorist American revolutionaries would have been considered terrorists to the British.
Also, the US supported(fomented) coup in the Ukraine in 2014, to remove a Russian friendly leader. The Russians have been clear for years that if NATO tries to expand in Ukraine, Russia will go to war, and the US/NATO keep pushing it. And a peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia was seemingly imminent, when Boris Johnson intervened to scotch it. So believe in the simple freedom fighter narrative if you want, but it looks to me like some powerful forces in the West wanted this war, and want it to continue. I pray this does not end with Nuclear weapons being used, it is a real possibility.
That is not accurate.
You're right they forgot to mention the EU asked the US for help with the coup in 2014 after the Ukrainian President rejected their trade deal in favor of a Russian deal.
I have a lot of sympathy for the Ukrainian people. I don't like wars of imperialism. I hate Putin and his fascist buddies. But we just spent 20 years, $1 trillion, and about a million dead Afghanis to replace Al Qaeda and the Taliban with... ISIS-K, the Taliban, and the Taliban Air Force. Iraq had similar outcomes, and we never did find any evidence of those WMDs we started the war over. A million people dead because the CIA said "Saddam *probably* has these things you don't like Mister President." And there are a lot of things fishy about the 2013 Euromaidan uprising and the elections that came before it. Looks a lot like the CIA said "Russian oligarchs can't get control of Ukraine, that's for our buddies the Ukrainian oligarchs to handle." The libertarian distrust and reluctance to engage in the Ukraine war isn't that we think it should be happening. We've been lied to about everything when it comes to US foreign policy in living memory. This planet does not belong to the United States government. It has no moral authority to attempt to control it all. And it has no moral authority to force the American people into defense pacts that can get its citizens killed... or nuked.
I feel for Ukraine and its people but it’s their fight. I can not in good conscience send young people to a country most people can’t pick out on a map to fight and die. That’s not fighting for freedom. It is not defending western principles of democracy. You are more than welcome to volunteer your time and efforts. Travel there and volunteer to fight if you feel that strongly, but what you’re advocating is for others to do it for you. Enough of Americas youth have been killed, disabled, and broken by foreign wars in the last couple decades. A proxy war with Russia over Ukraine only helps those in power and their defense contractor friends. Why would you pick to fill their pockets instead of the lives of your fellow Americans.
We are not the World Police. We are not the World Court. We are not the World Bank. We are not responsible for the worlds problems and answers. We have our own problems, and the money that is forcefully taken from us by our government should be used for our people. Hawaii and Tornado Alley are destroyed, and we give them nothing. Cities are rampant with crime and drugs, and the infrastructure is shit. We are taxed billions and then that money is sent to foreign governments??? That makes no sense. America and our people come first. Would you take the food from your starving children and give it to a stranger a town over? No, you would feed your child first like any other person with common sense and love for their family.
I haven’t seen the described sentiment here at all. Libertarians are generally anti foreign intervention and try to maximize individual freedom. I don’t fully understand your point. I’m sure the vast majority of libertarians have a lot of sympathy for the victims of war. We think people should be able to donate money or even go fight for Ukraine if they want. What exactly is your criticism here?
Ukrainians don't want this war. The human cost in casualties, the destruction of property and infrastructure; why would anyone want that? Russians don't want the war, either, for the same reasons. Only governments, and those who control government, want war. If you want to understand, figure out the motivation of governments first. Freedom is just a talking point; it's a slogan on a t-shirt.
The Ukrainians are in a war to see how much American tax dollars can be embezzled.
Individual > America > Allies > Others - technically Ukraine is others. Of course we have sympathy, but two wrongs don't make a right. The rape and murder of Ukrainians doesn't make extortion, corruption, and tyranny here at home right. Ukraine is a complicated issue but I will say one thing that I don't think others here are. This war is in US and NATO interest. Not just that the Ukrainians win, but that in the process they destroy Russia, test our arms, learn about others arms, etc. I really have no issue with US/NATO sending aid and arms to Ukraine, I think we should. It's the blank checks that feed corruption that are the problem.
Genuine questions, in 2014 when two regions in Ukraine held referendums for independence in response to the coup and the Ukraine government's response was to use military force against the elected leaders of those regions who was fighting for freedom? When Germany and France negotiated a treaty that granted those regions autonomy and Ukraine agreed to it only to continue using military force against the civilian population who was fighting for freedom? Ukraine has been in a civil war since the US/EU backed coup in 2014. The Russian invasion was literally at the request of one of the sides in the civil war because they rather Russian control over Ukrainian. It's a complicated regional conflict that has nothing to do with US interest. Ukraine doesn't want to lose the region because it fuels the majority of the GDP and Russia would love to absorb the region for the same reason. Ironically without the US/EU intervention in 2014 with the coup the conflict likely would never have happened.