What is more dangerous, Libertarianism or Dominionism

[el_bryanto]

Libertarianism being the philosophy that government should do nothing but run the army; Dominionism being the idea the Christian Conservatives should run everything.

I think it's safe to say that these are two main streams of modern Conservatism/Republicanism (with Corporate Conservatives being the dominant one, of course).

Bryant

[Occam Bandage]

1. "Libertarianism being the philosophy that government should do nothing but run the army"

I don't think many libertarians believe this. Some libertarians are anarchists; other libertarians strongly believe in state-protected property rights.

[el_bryanto]

3. It's necessarily going to be short - dominionism describes a range of beliefs as well.N/T

[paulsby]

4. bingo

i think people here mischaracterize libertarians here.

frankly, i have more than a few friends who are libertarian, and NONE of them think that welfare should be abolished, or public schools should be abolished, etc.

so, to answer... i think libertarians are much less of a threat than the dominionists.

i can agree with libertarians on a lot of stuff, and much of the stuff i disagree with them, i can respect their positions

[guitar man]

2. Actually

Most of the big "L" Libertarians I know seem to think the only legitimate function of government is protecting the wealth of the wealthy.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

19. Exactly. nt

[baldguy]

5. Libertarians have the political mentality of a 10-yr-old.

But they generally don't advocate mass murder.

[leftstreet]

6. More like 14 yr olds with paper routes

...where Mom and Dad don't ask them to contribute any of their earnings to the running of the household

[Taitertots]

7. You can convince a libertarian, but there is no arguing with Jesus

I don't want government to be run by the whims of those with the most religious zeal.

[BolivarianHero]

8. Hard to say...

Dominionism is much scarier, but Libertarianism can appeal to sane people, which represent an overwhelming majority of the population.

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. Actually, I think you might have difficulty in supporting your contention:

that sane people represent an overwhelming majority of the population.

Holding shared delusions does not make the majority 'sane'.

[el_bryanto]

13. Is religion then a shared delusion? n/t

[RaleighNCDUer]

20. Absolutely. Religion is a man-created structure for spiritual beliefs.

Without even touching of if the 'god concept' is delusional or not, the delusion that some religion is more right, and worth killing and dying for, than any other religion is a delusion held by the majority of people in the world. The most enlightened proponents of embracing a spiritual life have made a point of separating spirituality from religion, and yet their followers insist on holding their own religion to be 'correct'. If embracing unreality and calling it reality is not sane, then the vast majority of the world's population is not sane. Fortunately, unlike with pregnancy, it is possible to be only a little bit insane.

[SIMPLYB1980]

10. =

[el_bryanto]

11. I'm afraid not. n/t

[SIMPLYB1980]

23. My opinion. nt

[JVS]

12. Libertarianism

Dominionism is only popular among the conservative Christians. Libertarianism has a lot of adherents who would end up creating corporate control over everything even though they don't realize it.

[Sebastian Doyle]

14. Dominionism by a litle bit

At least the Libertarians have drug policy, foreign policy, and their view of the "federal" reserve about right. The dominionazis are wrong about everything, not the least of which is that the very idea of dominionism is in direct contradiction with the teachings of Jesus Christ (i.e. "My kingdom is NOT of this world")

[Echo In Light]

15. Many proponents of theocracy aren't true believers, nor need be

It's a highly effective form of social control, which is why the affluent, and the institutions and org's they're beholden to are often intertwined w/organized religion, and the promotion of it.

[stray cat]

16. your definition of libertarianism is too rigid

[Tommy_Carcetti]

17. Hands down libertarianism, i.e. the people who say they are simply "fiscal conservatives"

Why? Because you know who the social conservatives are and what they believe. You may not agree with them, but they aren't going to lie to you in telling you how they think. I'd much rather deal with a person who puts their cards on the table. And I also think of the two camps, they are the ones who might otherwise be liberal on other ideas and might be convinced to vote liberal in their best interests if their minds weren't so clouded on a few hot button social issues.

On the other hand, the real bad ones are the economic/fiscal conservatives, the libertarians. Because they have no interest in actually being fiscally responsible. They simply think government should keep down the consumers and middle and lower classes to their benefit, and that government exists to give the upper class and big corporations as much free reign in possible under the guise of their notion of "capitalism." Yet they will lie to your face and claim it is all in the interests of "efficient government" and lower taxes. And in the end, they are the tail that wags the dog. They are the ones that control the social conservatives and keep them voting Republican even though in doing so they are voting against their own best interests.

Yet there are some on the left side who see the economic/fiscal conservatives as the more benign force because, you know, he/she supports abortion rights so they aren't as bad. No, I'm sorry. The economic/fiscal/libertarian conservatives are no doubt the most dangerous brand of that school of thought.

[el_bryanto]

18. In your opinion is there a difference between Corporate Conservatives and Libertarians? n/t

[Tommy_Carcetti]

21. I think the difference is....

....Corporate Conservatives will talk a good game on hot button social issues near and dear to the social conservatives' heart, thus duping the latter into thinking they are on "their side" even when the Corporate Conservatives really could care less. But they are good at masking themselves. I think Rush Limbaugh is the perfect example of a corporate conservative. He talks about social issues enough to make himself relevant, but it's obvious he really doesn't care about those issues nearly as much as the "me first" economic issues.

Libertarian conservatives tend to put themselves more out on the line and either ignore the social issues or actual dissent from them.

Both of them I trust less than the social conservatives, though. I think libertarianism in general is a very dangerous philosophy, whether one professes to be one or not. It scares me ten times more than "dominionism."

[JVS]

22. AMEN! There are no zealots as dangerous as those who worship Mammon!

[nightgaunt]

24. Dominionists exploit Libertarians

The part about corporations having unlimited power is where they might agree. That and a more exaggerated version of pay-to-play. If you have the money you can do mostly what you want. The religious part of it would say otherwise in some areas. Both are cold toward human kindness. A wretched religious based pseudo-science of "Social darwinism" benefits the wealthy and ruthless---something they both find as virtues. That was my experience of Greed is Good ethics they both promote. Ron Paul believes women should be slaves to their bodies by others wishes. No freedom for them in that area. I wonder where else he would be with the Dominionists?

They exploit each other but the Dominionists have the upper hand and would win out every time.

[Unvanguard]

25. Libertarianism has much less mass appeal. Thus, Dominionism. n/t

[Javaman]

26. this is like "who would win in a fight: Jesus or Superman", type argument.

these too groups are different sides of the same coin.

one group is bat shit crazy and the other is bat shit crazier. You make the call.

[el_bryanto]

31. I think it would be the Green Arrow. Nobody can defeat the Green Arrow! n/t

[JoseGaspar]

27. They are one and the same.

Google "Rousas John Rushdoony", the "father" of Christian Reconstructionism ("Dominionism"). Also google "Gary North". Modern "Dominionism" was funded by and born in the hot houses of the Libertarian think tanks. In turn, they have returned the favor by promoting "Christian Libertarianism" in the economic/political sphere.

[tonysam]

30. I think people believe though, that Dominionism is a threat

because of Rushdoony's lunatic ideas about schools, family, marriage, and that sort of thing.

But you are correct at bottom it is nothing more than economic libertarianism wrapped up in the Bible. It took a genius John Bircher, Rushdoony, to be able to combine old style fundamentalism with right-wing economics.

[tonysam]

28. Anybody who thinks Dominionism is a threat isn't paying attention

Libertarianism is the ideological factor currently running the Republican Party, and it has infiltrated the Democratic Party, both via Friedmanism.

That is the reason our economy is in the shitter.

Dominionism is mainly a threat to organized religion despite it being essentially libertarian economics wrapped up in a religious package.

With the far right relegated to the fringe, dominionism isn't on the radar. However, Friedmanism is still very much alive.

[depakid]

29. Depends on whether you like your feudalism with a dose of theocracy