I consider myself a libertarian, btw. A rational one. Though I criticize those who quickly defend corporate monopoly shit, like you are doing now, but never lift a finger for humanitys team.
We have short memories if you imagine I cannot find a quote from mises or the official libertarian platform on gmo labeling or chicken cruelty.
First example that came to mind:
In 2008, CA, Proposition 2 required that each chicken be able to extend its limbs fully and turn around freely.
“These are small wire cages where about 95 percent of laying hens spend their entire lives,” wrote Farm Sanctuary’s Bruce Friedrich in the Huffington Post. “Imagine spending your entire life in a wire cage the size of your bathtub with four other people. You wouldn’t be able to move, so your muscles and bones would deteriorate. Your feet would become lacerated. You would go insane. That’s precisely what happens to laying hens.”
Libertarian Party Position: "Competitive free markets and property rights stimulate the technological and behavioral changes required to protect animals. " arguments included:
"If it passes, egg supply will go down and egg prices will go up."
"If chickens are not in cages, they are more vulnerable to attacks by predators, including other chickens;"
"If egg companies don't want to deal with the new regulations, they can move to other states or Mexico, taking their benefits to local economies with them."
"The cost of producing eggs would increase by 20% or more."
In 2010 California voters agreed with Friedrich’s position on animal welfare and passed Proposition 2, mandating chicken cages to nearly double in size.
MO later sued CA citing the commerce clause.
There are thousands of examples of libertarians rallying against gmo labeling.
My point is not that they are right or wrong. My point is they are too often empty fucking vessels that show up when a monopoly requires useless idiots to get a word in.
Does one really care about the lost revenue, or other externalities, apple will incur by this?
I would hope they spend their time championing something that really matters instead of being a corporate teet sucker.
Can you pay a reference to the libertarian party being opposed to proposition 2?
There are thousands of examples of libertarians rallying against gmo labeling.
Libertarians don't oppose GMO labeling, they oppose government compelling certain speech. You either support the government forcing you to say or write something or you don't. There's no in-between.
Seems silly that youve aptly identified the LP opposition of government forcing companies to label food, while uncertain that they would also reject government forcing farmers to raise food a certain way.
Does that come as a surprise?
All of those quotes I cited previously are published here:
https://dev.ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_2,_Standards_for_Confining_Farm_Animals_(2008)
(Link down now but perhaps it will be back up by the time you read it.)
Specifically, here is a reference that discusses "proposition 2 was opposed by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the Libertarian Party of California, the Oakland Tribune, the Sacramento Bee , the Orange County Register , and the San Diego Union Tribune."
Source:
https://www.ebar.com/story.php?ch=news&sc=&sc3=&id=239465&pf=1
The root cause how libertarians justify it can be best explained by Machan here
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2000/07/tibor-r-machan/the-myth-of-animals-rights/
And best described by Rothbard here:
https://mises.org/library/rights-animals
If you need exact prop2 quotes then check out bibliography from the first link.
It boils down to "government shouldn't interfere with free market."
Which, again, is probably correct , but I digress...
Apple, and the rest of the conglomerate monopolies (propped up by soulless libertarians), can suck a giant dick.
Seems silly that youve aptly identified the LP opposition of government forcing companies to label food, while uncertain that they would also reject government forcing farmers to raise food a certain way.
Compelled speech is not the same thing as compelled respect of basic rights. You're trying to argue that using violence to force somebody to say something you want them to say is the same as using violence to force someone not to torture others. If you really believe that you have a muddled mind that needs a lot of work. Be careful, that kinds of inability to grasp fundamental principles leads to progressivism.
All of those quotes I cited previously are published here
I can't find any quotes from the libertarian party.
The root cause how libertarians justify it can be best explained by Machan here
You mean in the article where they write:
There are many ways human beings can be guilty of mistreating animals. Perhaps even the law should make some provisions to ensure that wanton torture and mistreatment of animals are minimized.
(post is archived)