Social Libertarianism: Difference between revisions

'''Social Libertarianism''', clipped to '''SocBert''', is a civically libertarian, economically variable (ranges from [[File:CLeft.png]] Center-Left to [[File:Cright.png]] Center-Right) ideology that leans culturally left. It advocates for a robust decentralized government and social welfare. SocBert believes that both negative liberty (i.e. freedom to do stuff) and positive liberty (i.e. freedom from forces such as poverty, bad health, and pollution) are equally important and therefore libertarian ideology should be reformed to view liberty & justice as being free from all forms of domination instead of only freedom from the state. Socbert tends to agree with libertarianism on most issues, but disagrees on economics and welfare, believing that a welfare state (ideally through [[File:UBI.png]] universal basic income or a [[File:NIT.png]] negative income tax) and some forms of regulation are needed to guarantee positive liberties. Social Libertarians either support regular [[File:Socdem.png]] [[Social Democracy|social democratic]] economic polices ([[File:LibSocDemIcon.png]] Libertarian Social Democracy) or [[File:Soccap.png]] [[Social Capitalism|social capitalism]] ([[File:Yang2020.png]] Yangism), depending on which variant.

Furthermore, most SocBerts are against [[File:Necon.png]] [[Neoconservatism|foreign intervention]]. However, that isn’t always true, with [[File:Yang2020.png]] [[Technoliberalism|Andrew Yang]] advocating for interventionists like [[File:Christie.png]] [[Neoconservatism|Chris Christie]] or [[File:Dean Phillips.png]] [[Technoliberalism|Dean Phillips]]

Social Libertarians believe that Negative liberty and Positive liberty are equally important; through this philosophy an ideal Social Libertarian government should provide basic necessities to guard people from domination whether that would be from Poverty or damages to the Environment. This would be done through implementing regulations which would prevent corporations from violating a persons liberty and protecting them from unfair domination, however regulations which if were not present would not violate a persons individual liberty are deemed unnecessary.