Talk:Bleeding-heart libertarianism

This article was nominated for deletion on 20 March 2017. The result of the discussion was redirect to Left-libertarianism.

Criticism [June 2012]

That fact that "a guest blogger" does not prefer to identify as a follower of a political philosophy is not a criticism of that political philosophy. I'm not convinced the linked blog post really constitutes any particular criticism of the political philosophy either... unless "criticism" is just meant to refer to criticism of the term "bleeding-heart libertarian" (in which case, why bother even having this section).— Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.163.0.5 (talk • contribs)

Needs Work

This page needs a lot of development. The sections on history and criticism are a good start, but there is virtually nothing here about the substance of the view itself, apart from the very brief précis in the introduction. More needs to be said about the sense in which BHL is a "libertarian" doctrine, how it stands in relation to other forms of libertarianism like left-libertarianism and right-libertarianism, what it means by "social justice," and so forth. Along these lines, the references section (like the article itself) is heavily weighted toward criticisms of the doctrine, without much there to guide interested readers who might want to read more in depth about what the doctrine is. Some of the links on the BHL "About Us" page might be a good place to start. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.184.253.36 (talk) 22:41, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What this article needs is deletion. The term "bleeding heart libertarian" has no currency in political discourse and is not commonly used. In fact, the term has been used exactly once in the New York Times, in a 2006 Op-Ed piece by John Tierney and he used it as snark. Gillartsny (talk) 11:05, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, this seems to be a portmanteau of the much more commonly used pejorative term "bleeding-heart liberal" and "libertarianism". I don't understand why such a term warrants a Wikipedia article. TheCascadian 00:22, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree as well. AFD? -- Forridean^(T/C) 01:48, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-concept?

Wikipedia lacks an article on non-ethical ethics. It also lacks one on "A is Non-A." Snezzy (talk) 13:00, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gary johnson ??

"2012 Libertarian Party presidential candidate and former governor of New Mexico, Gary Johnson, has also been identified as a bleeding heart libertarian, one time even posing for a photo in a bleeding heart libertarian T-shirt"

This seems a stretch to me -- I suggest removal , but will leave in for now since maybe there's some truth to it (under a broad umbrella definition of BHL). Maybe someone can find better source than "he modeled a T-shirt" Danski14^(talk) 01:44, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not only is this flimsy, the reference, like many on this page, is from the blog of the BHL'ers themselves. Weak reference, and WP:Trivia at best. Shatterpoint05 (talk) 04:33, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Complete overhaul or deletion?

What is this article actually about? A blog? A slogan? A philosophical tradition? The page lacks conceptual coherence; few, if any, independent and reliable sources; too much WP:Trivia; occasional original research; and over-reliance on user generated sources. Shatterpoint05 (talk) 05:00, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would support deletion -- Forridean^(T/C) 05:52, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]