Talk:Libertarianism (disambiguation)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Libertarianism as anarchism[edit]

I was about to remove the line about libertarianism as a synonym for anarchism, on the grounds that we already say it in the section on libertarian socialism, but then it occoured to me that some might object that this doesn't account for anarcho-capitalism. Still, I wonder if libertarian is ever used to mean anarcho-capitalists as opposed to minarchists, propertarians, etc. I've never heard it used that way; at least in European usage, libertarian as a synonym for anarchist always carries the connotation of socialist anarchist (of course, "anarchist" carries that connotation too). VoluntarySlave 07:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we could avoid this question, but also avoid the slightly odd apparent disjunction between libertarian socialists, anarcho-capitalists, and anarchists by restructuring the article to make the political meanings sub-points of the

  • In politics, libertarianism refers to any of a number of views that emphasize the importance of freedom. In its most absolute form, this focus on freedom would make libertarianism a synonym for anarchism.
    • Before the 1950s, and in non English speaking countries to this day, libertarianism generally refers to specifically left-wing forms of anarchism, known as libertarian socialism. Libertarian socialism is an egalitarian and anti-authoritarian movement that emphasizes collective or cooperative property, anti-capitalism, individual rights and personal freedom.
    • In the English speaking world since the 1950s, libertarianism generally refers to an individualist and capitalist ideology that emphasizes individual rights, including the right to own property, and personal freedom, but may stop short of the anarchist position of a complete rejection of the state. Anarcho-capitalism, which rejects the state, and minarchists, which advocates a minimal state, are both libertarian ideologies in this sense.
    • Civil libertarianism denotes a more general advocacy of personal freedom, regardless of what other political views he or she may hold. The Political compass is notable for using the term libertarianism to refer strictly to support for personal freedom.
  • Libertarianism in metaphysics...

I'm not sure where exactly we'd put this link to the list of parties in this scheme. Maybe just after the different meanings? Or in the bit on capitalist libertarianism, as all the parties listed are libertarian in that sense, I think. VoluntarySlave 07:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


Why not just keep it as simplistic as possible? This article should be a disambiguation, but it was starting to look like an essay. "Libertarianism" is simply a synonym for anarchism. That's really all that anyone needs to know. "The principle division in anarchism, also known as libertarianism or antiauthoritarianism, is between social anarchists, who believe in a nonstate form of socialism, and the individualist anarchists, who oppose socialism and favor capitalism or are opposed to any form of social organization whatsoever." Busky, Donald. Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey, Praeger/Greenwood (2000), p. 4 (Rothbard was calling his philosophy "libertartarianism" before the term started being associated with state libertarianism, and was simply using the term interchangeably with anarchism.) "Despite this diversity, we can categorize all anarchists as essentially left-wing libertarians who champion the growth of the individual within a community (Anarcho-Communists, Christian Anarchists, and most Anarcho-Pacifists) and right-wing libertarians (Anarcho-Capitalists, and ultraindividualists) who are most egoistical and stress the individualism of the unregulated marketplace. Since the social ethic of American is not communal but is based on a private world of personal fulfillment and satisfaction (the self-made man, not social man) it is not surprising that what I call right-wing libertarianism was the predominant element of the new, explicit anarchism." DeLeon, David. The American as Anarchist: Reflections on Indigenous Radicalism. John Hopkins University Press, 1978, p. 123Anarcho-capitalism 18:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
It is obviously false to say that libertarianism = anarchism, since many people who describe themselves as "libertarians" are minarchists, not anarchists. -- Nikodemos 23:45, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
That's why there's a disambiguation page. Different people mean different things by "libertarianism." For some libertarianism = anarchism. For some, libertarianism = libertarian socialism. For some libertarianism = consequentialist libertarianism or classical liberalism. For some, libertarianism = minarchism, etc. Need another source? "For a century anarchists have used the word 'libertarian' as a synonym for 'anarchist', both as a noun and an adjective." Ward, Colin. Anarchism: A Very Short Introduction.Anarcho-capitalism 00:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I never contested the fact that libertarianism was originally a synonym for anarchism (or the fact that many anarchists call themselves libertarians today). I only said that "libertarianism" is no longer used exclusively by anarchists, and that this disambig page should give a short description of every group calling itself "libertarian". -- Nikodemos 00:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I have no problem with having very short descriptions as long as they're sourced. People were just making stuff up.Anarcho-capitalism 00:14, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
You seem to have a lot of sources on this topic. Why don't you provide some? I will gladly admit to knowing far less than you do about the use of the word libertarianism. You are more qualified to write the descriptions. -- Nikodemos 00:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Spylab has shortened this page to a real disamb page, not an article. Would it be sensible to move some of the material in the longer version [1] to the start of the libertarianism page? BobFromBrockley 11:51, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Removed extraneous links[edit]

I removed the links to the civil libertarianism and anarchy pages, as both are discussed in depth the libertarianism article. Since that leaves only Libertarianism (metaphysics), I propose deletion. -- MutantPlatypus (talk) 09:10, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Proposed move[edit]

I propose we move (or make a redirect) out of this page to "Libertarian". We should model it after Liberal. Note how Liberalism isn't a disambiguation page, only Liberal and Liberal (disambiguation) are, the disambiguation page is a redirect to Liberal, and there is no Liberalism (disambiguation) MutantPlatypus (talk) 00:14, 28 February 2010 (UTC)}

Please read WP:Disambiguation which reads:
Disambiguation in Wikipedia is the process of resolving conflicts in Wikipedia article titles that occur when a single term can be associated with more than one topic, making that term likely to be the natural title for more than one article. In other words, disambiguations are paths leading to different articles which could, in principle, have the same title'
Obviously that is true for Libertarianism and Libertarianism (metaphysics). To such an extent that someone removed your attempt to have a hat note linking the second article to the first. Here. There are those who hold to libertarianism in metaphysics who do not want it automatically linked to political libertarianism. And, yes, libertarianism and anarchism are used interchangeably by people along the political spectrum, sometimes supportively, sometimes derisively, so that also is relevant.
The long list that you have unnecessarily added to this page to make your point that there shouldn't be a page is not considered good wiki-etiquette. So I've reverted to the original three from here. What others might there legitimately be?
I personally have been opposed to Civil libertarianism because it doesn't have its own article and is barely mentioned in the Civil liberties article. But others might support it. Maybe Libertarian Party would be since that might be what some people were looking for? CarolMooreDC (talk) 04:32, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Ouch. Way to assume I acted in bad faith! :P All I really did was search "libertarian" and started putting every article with libertarian(ism) in the title on this page. I thought that's what a disambiguation page was for. Again, I suggest Liberal is a good example. MutantPlatypus (talk) 23:02, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Also, why should civil libertarianism have its own article? Unlike, liberty, liberties, libertarian, and libertarianism; civil liberty, civil liberties, civil libertarian, and civil libertarianism don't have any extra meaning added to them. A civil libertarian advocates for civil liberties. There's no political party or comprehensive political philosophy associated with civil libertarianism. It has a single, undisputed meaning. It even contains the word "libertarianism," so the redirect page should have it. Anarchism's connection to libertarianism is less clear to me, mostly because I don't understand it as well. They all seem to vary only in how they think society would be organized in the absence of a state, and somehow, without coercion, they prevent the growth of another state. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MutantPlatypus (talkcontribs) 08:59, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure that the fact that articles have the term "libertarianism" in their title necessarily means they should be on the disambiguation page. The criterion, as I understand it, is whether "libertarianism" would be a plausible title for the page, or (which is more-or-less a different way of saying the same thing), whether the page is likely to be the one somebody is looking for if they look for "libertarianism." So "Libertarianism (metaphysics)" is good, because this is a separate concept which is also referred to by the term "libertarianism"; "Anarchism" is also good because "libertarianism" has sometimes been used as a synonym for anarchism. But articles on specific varieties of libertarianism are less good candidates for the disambiguation page - presumably, if somebody is specifically looking for a variant of libertarianism, they will either use a more specific term, or be able to get to this more specific variant via the general "libertarianism" page. "Civil libertarianism" is also not a great candidate for inclusion here, at least IMO, people who are looking for information on civil liberties are unlikely to do so by searching for "libertarianism"; anyone looking for that topic will include the "civil" part already, I think (though I could be wrong about this). VoluntarySlave (talk) 09:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
I agree. I've come around, and think that these three are fine. I agree that civil libertarianism shouldn't be here, because I've never heard of anyone using just the word libertarianism in that sense. MutantPlatypus (talk) 03:02, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
However, if that's how the disambiguation page works, then unqualified libertarianism article should be mostly about minarchism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MutantPlatypus (talkcontribs) 03:05, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Reminder, as I wrote above:
Please read WP:Disambiguation which reads:
Disambiguation in Wikipedia is the process of resolving conflicts in Wikipedia article titles that occur when a single term can be associated with more than one topic, making that term likely to be the natural title for more than one article. In other words, disambiguations are paths leading to different articles which could, in principle, have the same title'
I needed reminding of that myself, so let's not just freely speculate :-) CarolMooreDC (talk) 14:41, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Inaccuracy/Bias Tag[edit]

I have tagged this article for being contested as inaccurate/bias, because of the inclusion of "anarchism" has an alternative title to libertarianism, and the inclusion of the assertion that the terms are used synonymously. I genuinely do not believe that this assertion remotely resembles a good-faith accepted view on this subject. Moreover, this exact point is being hotly contested here: talk:Libertarianism. Perhaps this tag should remain until this issue is resolved. What is the consensus? 71.161.243.67 (talk) 18:43, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I think the problem is more inaccurate language. More accurate language (for all varieties of libertarians) would be:
  • Anarchism, an anti-state philosophy often advocated by individuals professing "libertarianism."
CarolMooreDC (talk) 00:38, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
It's not that "anarchism" is an alternative title to libertarianism; it's more the other way around. The word "libertarian" sometimes (usually, in Britain an America at least) means what the Libertarianism page discusses, i.e., a small-to-no-state, broadly classical liberal, political philosophy; in this sense, although some libertarians are anarchists, many (probably most) aren't. However the word "libertarian" is also used in a different sense, as a straightforward synonym for "anarchist" (see for instance George Woodcock's classic history of anarchism, which is titled Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas, and which uses the terms interchangeably throughout). That is why it is appropriate for anarchism to be included in this disambiguation page - anarchism is a separate subject from the subject of the Libertarianism article, but the anarchism article could also, in principle, have the title "Libertarianism." If we can phrase this more clearly on the disambiguation page, we should do so; but I don't think Carolmooredc's suggestion is right, because it misses out the fact that anarchism and libertarianism are two separate things that can have the same name.VoluntarySlave (talk) 07:46, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Frankly, I don't understand your point. In today's usage many left anarchists call themselves libertarians (like Woodcock) and many right/pro-property/free market libertarians call themselves anarchists (many refs could be supplied). And there are left anarchists who do NOT want to be confused with minimal state or anarchist "pro-capitalist" libertarians and reject the word altogether. (And I'm sure I could find a few refs for that.) There is not one single definition as you seem to be assuming. CarolMooreDC (talk) 17:13, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
What I mean is, when someone like Woodcock calls themselves "libertarian," they mean they are an anarchist - no connection with pro-property/free-market/minimal-state libertarians is intended. Meanwhile, when someone like Nozick calls themselves a "libertarian," they mean that they are part of a specific pro-property/free-market/minimal-state tradition - no connection with anarchism is intended. The reason for including anarchism on this disambiguation page is not that some libertarians happen to be anarchists, which is what you wording seems to imply; if that were the case, it would make sense to include classical liberalism and communism here too, because some (right) libertarians are classical liberals and some (left) libertarians are communists. What justifies inclusion on a disambiguation page is not just overlap - rather, in the usage of someone like Woodcock, "libertarian" and "anarchist" are synonyms. Everyone who is a libertarian in Woodcock's sense is also an anarchist, and everyone who is an anarchist is, in Woodcock's sense, a libertarian.VoluntarySlave (talk) 18:32, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
OK, I get your point. However, I also think others would just put it back in again (this debate has happened repeatedly before) unless you can clearly show that Wikipedia:Disambiguation forbids it. At the very least it is a "Related subject/term." In either case to change the language slightly I'd suggest: Anarchism, an anti-state philosophy for some use the term "libertarianism" synonymously. CarolMooreDC (talk) 19:37, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Problems with August 12 & 18 edits[edit]

  • It's not clear what is dubious about Geolibertarianism. Please explain so problem can be solved.
  • There is no possible policy justification for replacing Libertarian party, the broader link with one of its sub-categories, which is LPUS. Libertarian Party of Canada or Libertarian Party of Russia would be just as inappropriate.
  • Putting these three together [add later: while deleting separate libertarian socialist listing and description] - is a WP:OR/SYNTH attempt to define the terms here [in a POV fashion]. It should go back to Left libertarianism and libertarian socialists. Free-market anarchist is either a variety of anarchist or anarcho-capitalism and doesn't really belong here. And might as well stick in "Right-libertarianism" belongs back there too. which is some definitions is barely libertarianism at all. Please stop trying to force your POV from Libertarianism on to this disambiguation. CarolMooreDC (talk) 17:17, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
My objections to the edits are similar to CarolMooreDC's. BigK HeX (talk) 17:30, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I put an edit warring tag on Darkstar's talk page. One of several he has. CarolMooreDC (talk) 18:47, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
so if that was aimed at me, i didnt point to the lpusa. Darkstar1st (talk) 21:52, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

geolibertarianism, pro-property except for land[edit]

what is the difference between a geo, and left-libertarian? —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

That's for the article to explain. The point is there is an article and this should redirect to it. CarolMooreDC (talk) 11:43, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
if the article is unable to explain, then they should be merged. Darkstar1st (talk) 12:48, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
The disambiguation structure is better without your suggestion. BigK HeX (talk) 12:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
wp:idontlikeit, please reread and modify your comment Darkstar1st (talk) 13:00, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
wp:te, please reread it and modify your behavior BigK HeX (talk) 13:35, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
ok, sorry. now that i have and agreed to not te anymore, would you explain how the structure is better? Darkstar1st (talk) 13:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
They aren't the same thing .... that's why the structure is better. Your suggestion is roughly like saying minarchism should be subsumed by the link to right-libertarianism or something weird like that. The suggestion doesn't really make much sense, given the subject matter. BigK HeX (talk) 13:45, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
ah, i see the confusion. i meant to ask, how are they different?, not if they were the same. Darkstar1st (talk) 13:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
The article talk page isn't a forum for tutoring. If you don't know about the subject matter, then suggesting changes is unproductive. BigK HeX (talk) 13:59, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
ok, i will merge until we both have a better understanding of the difference between. Darkstar1st (talk) 14:11, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
So, you plan to make edits based on your admitted ignorance. I do not recommend that. BigK HeX (talk) 14:13, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
You seem to have an extraordinarily warped view of how editing Wikipedia works. YOU want changes, so YOU need to come to use with an informed argument. Not "I'm going to make this change unless someone tutors me on the stuff I refuse to educate myself on." BigK HeX (talk) 14:16, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
well after researching both, i have found no differences, therefore, merge is justified. my purpose here was to discuss the change prior to editing, a practice several have suggested you adopt. Darkstar1st (talk) 14:25, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Fair enough. I am discussing now my change of reverting any such "merge" prior to performing the revert. I plan to revert it as uninformed nonsense, and unjustified destruction of non-contentious material. Anyone have comments on this proposed edit? BigK HeX (talk) 14:30, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

no such WP:uninformednonsense article exist, perhaps it should be your 1st attempt at authoring an article. a milestone every editor should attempt. btw, if you have the differences yourself, why are you asking others, instead enlighten us here, in the correct forum. Darkstar1st (talk) 14:35, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
With regards the content of the articles, rather than this disambiguation page, I'd suggest WT:LIBERTARIANISM as a better forum. Skomorokh 14:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
What? I'm not "asking" anyone about any "differences". I don't bother educating you because: A) this is WP:NOTAFORUM, B) you would ignore it find some new rationale to be disruptive, and C) it's almost certain that your "research" was insincere, and D) based on what I've seen, if I did decide to expend any serious typing on you, then it's far more likely that it would be on an WP:RFC/USER. BigK HeX (talk) 16:28, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
noted, bigk against, unable to support why. @Skomorokh, well said, i'll get to the project page next. Darkstar1st (talk) 16:53, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
This is exactly the type of tendentiousness that has me about to pull the trigger and start an RFC/USER. NOWHERE did I say I was "unable to support why." And, moreover, it is for YOU to support why, as YOU are the one trying to make a change to something that no even minimally-informed and reasonable editor would argue to do. BigK HeX (talk) 16:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
apologies, i did not mean to upset you. after the 10 post you have made in this section, all 10ish are telling me who to be a better editor, thank you. but use my talk page please. unless you have a source supporting your claim the 2 are different, please excuse yourself here, and use the rfcuser, or better yet my talk page, your critique is welcome there. Darkstar1st (talk) 17:03, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
RE: "unless you have a source supporting your claim the 2 are different, please excuse yourself here"
You have got to be trolling. I will put it so that there's no doubt: YOU are the one who needs to show they are "the same." If you make an edit to this page based on what appears to be ignorant speculation, with absolutely ZERO evidence that there are reliable sources to affirm your position, I very well will take you up on your suggestion above. BigK HeX (talk) 23:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
  • geo: all land is a common asset to which all individuals have an equal right to access.
  • left: "wilderness" is commonly owned by all the people in a given area.
  • Geo: Geolibertarians generally advocate distributing the land rent to the community via a land value tax.
  • Left: private appropriation is taxed to compensate those who are excluded from natural resources.
  • geo: ...geolibertarians fervent advocates of free markets.
  • left: free markets,...taken to their logical conclusions,...support strongly anti-corporatist, anti-hierarchical, pro-labor positions in economics, anti-imperialism in foreign policy. Darkstar1st (talk) 04:50, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Cool story, bro. Now WHERE ARE THE RELIABLE SOURCES THAT SUPPORT YOUR SUGGESTION THAT "GEOLIBERTARIANISM IS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME THING AS 'LEFT-LIBERTARIANISM'", which would make a convincing case that the two concepts shouldn't be separate in the disambiguation. Why does it seem like the fact that you should be presenting reliable sources is some kind of newfangled concept for you in this thread???? Baffling..... Anyways, I'm done here. Next move about the geolibertarianism issue is yours. I hope you edit wisely. Cheers. BigK HeX (talk) 05:39, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
i pulled the above material from the wp pages on each topic. the sources all looked legit, but if you say they are flawed, i will remove them from the 2 articles. Darkstar1st (talk) 05:45, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

agorism a synonym for anarchism[edit]

what is the difference between an agor and anarch? Darkstar1st (talk) 21:50, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

That's for the article to explain. The point is there is an article and this should redirect to it. CarolMooreDC (talk) 11:43, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
did the article explain it to you, if so, would you tell me what it said the difference was? if not, would you support combining the two here? Darkstar1st (talk) 11:12, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Libertarianism which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 20:45, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

This is a confusing proposal. I have come to believe that this page is not particularly necessary. There should just be the libertarianism article with a note directing people to [[Libertarianism (metaphysics) and we can just mention every thing that WP:RS says calls itself libertarianism in the article. So what we need is a deletion proposal on this page. CarolMooreDC (talk) 17:37, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Your confusion is noted. I hope the explanation I just posted at Talk:Libertarianism helps. --Born2cycle (talk) 18:14, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
There would still be a need for separate articles on libertarian socialism and American-style libertarianism, as they are quite distinct in history and content and are the primary meanings of the term "libertarianism" in different parts of the world. Skomorokh 09:25, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm not disagreeing with the need for separate articles, but in what English-speaking part of the world is "libertarian socialism" the primary topic for libertarianism? I know it's not the UK, as UK's Libertarian Alliance refers to the so-called "American-style libertarianism" ("promote free-market economics and civil liberties"). And it's also not in Australia, for the Australian Libertarian Society also refers to the so-called American-style libertarianism since their own website states the ALS "supports free-markets, individual liberty and the promotion of peaceful, voluntary interaction between people." --Born2cycle (talk) 15:27, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
And... those quote snippets prove that it's "American-style libertarianism"? BigK HeX (talk) 15:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes. Unless "American-style libertarianism" is defined significantly differently from what is implied by those two quotes (if so, I have no idea what that definition might be). Most notably, "libertarian socialism" is clearly excluded from these conceptions. --Born2cycle (talk) 17:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Delete disambiguation entirely?[edit]

I didn't get a response yet on this on Libertarianism talk page. Obviously the flawed proposal to turn the libertarianism article into a disambiguation page is opposed and won't happen. However, there is merit in getting rid of the Libertarianism (disambiguation) page entirely It seems to go through cycles of growing and diminishing in size, depending on various people. I've usually just asserted it should be minimally inclusive or very inclusive, having a problem with POV inclusion/exclusion. I'm pretty tired of the cycle and have come to believe that this page is not particularly necessary. There should just be the libertarianism article with a note directing people to Libertarianism (metaphysics) on top. And then we can just mention every thing that WP:RS says calls itself libertarianism in the article, in proportion to its relevance. (With a few things not relevant to existing sections only listed under "See also.") So what we need is a deletion proposal on the disambiguation page, once this one is sufficiently buried. CarolMooreDC (talk) 17:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Agree. Normally disambiguation pages are created when there are different subjects with the same name and no agreement that one topic should have priority. For example, lots of people are called John Smith and it is not obvious that any one should have priority. TFD (talk) 17:19, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Disambiguation pages are usually created when there is more than two articles whose topics are known by the same (or very similar) term. That seems obviously to be the case here. Skomorokh 17:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Skomorokh. --Born2cycle (talk) 17:55, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
The one reason I see to keep it is if a particular article with that topic gets deleted from Libertarianism. I guess both will remain battle grounds as long as individuals are focused more on economic differences (mostly voluntary) than other similarities. Sigh. CarolMooreDC (talk) 21:59, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Beyond libertarianism (metaphysics) and libertarianism, what other articles does this page really need to cover? The libertarianism article already covers, or should cover, all the other articles. So, with respect to Skomorokh's mention of WP:2DAB, I support CarolMooreDC's initial suggestion. KLP (talk) 20:30, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Right-, left-, and geo-[edit]

From MOS:DAB#Examples_of_individual_entries_that_should_not_be_created:

On a page called Title, do not create entries merely because Title is part of the name (see Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Partial title matches).

Common examples:

  • Title City
  • Title Hospital
  • Title University

The above does not apply if the subject is commonly referred to simply by Title.

I'm sure that people use the word "libertarianism" to refer specifically to the things mentioned in the libertarianism, libertarian socialism and libertarianism (metaphysics) articles, but it seems doubtful to me that the same is true for right-libertarianism, left-libertarianism or geolibertarianism especially. Can anyone vouch that this is the case? Skomorokh 17:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Libertarian socialism is considered to be left-libertarian.... (And actually geolibertarianism is considered left-libertarian as well.) There are reliable sources that describe them as an understanding of the philosophical ideology of Libertarianism. BigK HeX (talk) 17:59, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
"Now WHERE ARE THE RELIABLE SOURCES THAT SUPPORT YOUR SUGGESTION THAT "GEOLIBERTARIANISM IS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME THING AS 'LEFT-LIBERTARIANISM'", which would make a convincing case that the two concepts shouldn't be separate in the disambiguation. Why does it seem like the fact that you should be presenting reliable sources is some kind of newfangled concept for you in this thread????" bigk, when did you change your mind, does this mean you will stop opposing my efforts to combine them?? Darkstar1st (talk) 19:37, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Never changed my mind. Some may think they've found some sort of contradiction on my part, but others moredeeply educated on the matter would likely notice the error still lies in your thinking. BigK HeX (talk) 17:42, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
"I'm sure that people use the word "libertarianism" to refer specifically to ... libertarian socialism"

Really? How many pages of google page results of a "libertarianism" search do you have to go through before you find even a single use of just the term libertarianism that refers specifically to the concept more precisely known as "libertarian socialism" (or "left-libertarianism")? 10? 100? 1,000? How many pages? I can't find one at all. --Born2cycle (talk) 18:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Given your comments above, it's not even clear you'd recognize it when you saw it, since your comments indicate that you think free markets and libertarian socialism are somehow incompatible. BigK HeX (talk) 18:05, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
When reliable sources refer to the philosophy or concept of libertarian socialism they use the term "libertarian socialism" or "left-libertarianism"; they do not use (just) the term "libertarianism". It's a separate concept from the philosophy/concept referred to as just "libertarianism". --Born2cycle (talk) 18:04, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
That's a pretty bald assertion. Got a source for that?? BigK HeX (talk) 18:05, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
I can't produce a source of the non-existent. If I'm wrong, you should be able to easily find a source that refers to the concept of social libertarianism as just libertarianism. --Born2cycle (talk) 18:07, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, free markets and libertarian socialism are incompatible. If there is no private property for the means of production, then there can't be a market at all, much less a free one. --Born2cycle (talk) 18:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
To Born2cycle, yes I am absolutely sure that the term "libertarianism", along with "libertarian socialism" and "anarchism", has long been used to refer to anti-authoritarian socialism in Europe. This is very easy to verify, even through English language Google, awash as it is with the contemporary American meaning; search for "libertarianism" with the names of major lib. soc. thinkers like Proudhon, Bakunin, Malatesta. McKercher's Libertarian thought in nineteenth century Britain (ISBN 082400826X) might also be enlightening. Skomorokh 18:24, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
To BigK HeX, I'm not contesting that these are considered or described as libertarian, but whether they are literally called "libertarianism", i.e. to use the MOS wording quoted above, whether the subjects of those articles are commonly referred to simply by "libertarianism". Skomorokh 18:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Or, to put it in terms that matter in WP, if someone is looking for information about libertarian socialism how likely is it that that person will type in just "libertarianism" in the search box? I suggest it's bloody unlikely, and sufficiently unlikely to be handled more than adequately with a hatnote link at the top of the Libertarianism article.

I do think it's very likely, almost certain, that anyone looking for the concept commonly associated with "right-libertarianism" will type in just "libertarianism" in the search box. About the only time "right-libertarianism" is used to refer to libertarianism is in a context in which differentiation from libertarian socialism is desired, which is not the context in which someone is doing a Wikipedia search for libertarianism. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:03, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

As long as people want a disambigutation page, it should not pick or choose in a POV what goes in and out. (Especially leaving out Left Lib and Lib party, both of which highly relevant.) OH, yes, and Civil libertarianism should go back too. Maybe indents for varieties of political philosophies is way to go. CarolMooreDC (talk) 16:05, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
No-one is picking and choosing in a POV way which goes in and out; you're confusing disambiguation with navigation (i.e. {{Libertarianism sidebar}}). Born2cycle above captures what the purpose of this page is supposed to be – showing readers searching for the term "libertarianism" the articles they are likely to be looking for. No-one is going to type "libertarianism" when they mean geolibertarianism rather than libertarianism simpliciter. Skomorokh 16:16, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Why would they be more likely to be looking for libertarian socialism than Libertarian party, given the misconception that Libertarian party is what libertarianism all about? Isn't it more likely they'd be looking for that? In fact, type in libertarian party to google and you get 679,000 hits; type in libertarian socialism and you get 195,000. So which are people more likely to be looking for?? CarolMooreDC (talk) 17:50, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Agree with Skomorokh that specific varieties of libertarian political theory (left-, right-, geo-) shouldn't be on the disambiguation page; these are specific examples of one general concept (libertarian political theory), not alternative meanings for a term. "Libertarian socialism" is a bit of a gray area, as it can be seen as a variety of libertarian political theory, but one much more distinct historically and conceptually than left-, right- and geolibertarianism. I'm not sure that civil libertarianism should be on the page, either; I don't think anyone ever uses the word "libertarian" on its own to mean support for civil liberties specifically (rather than as part of a broader political philsophy, viz, libertarianism), do they? But I tend to agree with Carolmooredc that Libertarian party should be here - party names are often used without the word "party," as in "Mr So-and-so, the Libertarian candidate," so it seems reasonable that someone looking for "libertarian" on its own might be interested in the political party (and I note that Labour, which is a disambiguation page, and Conservatism (disambiguation) include reference to the political parties named such).VoluntarySlave (talk) 18:38, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Note that in the main Libertarianism article Left libertarianism is the main section with Libertarian socialism included in it, even though refs show that Lib socialism gets many more hits. I think they both should have their own sections because of various differences, but heads up to anyone who cares. CarolMooreDC (talk) 20:27, 12 September 2010 (UTC) "Libertarian" is habitually used in contemporary Australian English—see the news media of your choice—to refer to civil libertarianism. Fifelfoo (talk) 05:25, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

List expansion[edit]

Earlier today I expanded the list under "Libertarian" to include a number of libertarian organizations to complement the reference to libertarian political parties. The list is not complete, but it's a good start. If the list already exists, a link to it would be fine here. But this list was reverted with the odd comment of, "don't edit to make a point, whatever it is; categories exist for different subgroups". This editor's confusion is indicated by the "whatever it is" clause. I was not trying to make a point. I was trying to make the dab page more useful.

Thankfully and rightfully that revert was reverted, but I thought I would start a discussion just in case there is still any confusion. --Born2cycle (talk) 22:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

FYI, wikilinks are not considered "sourced text." And link to list of libertarian organizations obviously more comprehensive (though needs additions and re-checking). Just picking out a few would be considered POV. CarolMooreDC (talk) 03:13, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but your words and actions are simply incomprehensible to me. The first sentence seems to be a complete non sequitur to me - I have no idea why you think that statement is relevant in this discussion. The second sentence is not even a sentence but a fragment; not a complete thought. Again, no idea what you mean. The last sentence makes sense and I don't disagree; thanks for you help in improving the list. --Born2cycle (talk) 05:06, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Libertarianism/Archive 22 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 08:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

This was roundly opposed and archived. Please ignore bot message. CarolMooreDC (talk) 11:25, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Social vs. moral libertarianism[edit]

Tibor R. Machan, a libertarian, makes a distinction between metaphysical libertarianism, social libertarianism (namely political libertarianism), and moral libertarianism (Libertarianism Defended, 2012, p. 243). --Omnipaedista (talk) 12:30, 7 January 2015 (UTC)