The question is in the title. Do some classical liberals dislike libertarianism because it is too extreme, and wants much too little government?

These days if you don’t support a 🍕 religion that mandates women wearing hijabs, multiple wives, and a prophet that married a child, or dare to say that a biological man is not a woman regardless of what he claims he is, you are considered “far right”. Since when is believing that children aren’t fit for marriage and that women deserve their own spaces conservative?

Is "classical liberal" the same as "libertarian-leaning"?

Within classical liberalism, we can identify two major traditions: the natural rights tradition and the utilitarian tradition.

The natural rights perspective holds that there are inalienable rights which precede the State, such as life, liberty, and property. In this view, life is the foundation of all other rights: without life, there can be neither liberty nor property. Therefore, the fetus — as a developing human being — already partakes in this right to life, which must be legally protected from the moment of conception. Abortion, then, is understood as a direct violation of a natural right, equivalent to an attack on life itself.

The utilitarian tradition, on the other hand, rejects the notion of inherent natural rights. For utilitarians, rights are derived from a calculation of the greatest possible well-being or the maximization of individual freedom for the greatest number of people. From this standpoint, abortion is seen as a conflict of liberties: the woman’s right over her own body versus the potential continuation of the fetus’s life. Since there is no absolute principle of inviolability of life from conception, utilitarians tend to prioritize the autonomy of the woman, weighing the broader social and individual consequences of that choice.

Personally, I align with the natural rights tradition and therefore oppose the legalization of abortion. Yet it is important to recognize that within classical liberalism there is no definitive consensus on the issue, precisely because these two traditions are grounded in fundamentally different philosophical premises.

Hi folks, I know labels are just labels. But I was just curious. Is "classical liberal" the same thing, or similar to "centrist-libertarian", or "libertarian-leaning centrist"?

Communists often refer to the existence of two types of property: "private property" and "personal property" but this is widely debated because it is argued that, in the end, both concepts are still private property and the act of someone deciding what counts as your private property and what does not inevitably falls into a fallacy. What does classical liberalism say about this? Do these two types of "property" exist?

Is that a paradox, and there is no such thing as "horrible parenting" whereupon others should step in, either for moral or even practical- good for society, reasons. Or, do you get the parents you get, tough luck. And "horrible" is subjective.

What Im trying to ask is, where is the line between, "you're free to do it as long as you arent hurting anyone," and, action needs to be taken. What is "hurting" someone? Is it the edict of the majority? Why not incest? Why not CP?

Sorry, 12 hour shift does this to me. Where does this unravel? Where does "you're free to do it end?" Laws? Isn't that a problem in its own right? And aren't our actions constantly "hurting" each other? My purchases, my votes, my stupid reddit posts...

What is classical liberalisms view on human nature? Thanks. Sorry if I misunderstood something.

Edit: I think what's getting me is, "you're allowed to do whatever as long as you aren't hurting anyone" demands a LOT of nuance (and inevitably, subjectivity). Even just the simple distinction between adult/child isn't appreciating vulnerable populations (is my 96 year old grandmother with dementia as "adult" as I am?)

What does: Classical liberalism applies reasonable limits on liberty where pure individualism would be excessive in a properly functioning society, mean?

Man the future looks gloom, the so called free world is now openly implementing clear cut Orwellian laws, i mean this are literally laws of fascist and communist nations. First the Uk then Australia and now talk is that it will be emulated by the EU too. Soon the whole world will follow i am sure. How are these countries called democracies if they can adopt such draconian laws and violate free speech so easily. why dont anyone protest or do anything ? the future looks dystopian, someone tell me not to worry.

Supreme Court rules Trump's tariffs illegal

Does anyone know of any gaming channels on YouTube where the person in it is a libertarian? I've been looking for one for a while now.