What Colour is Libertarianism?
Labour are Red, Tories are Blue, LibDems are Yellow, Greens are Green, UKIP is Purple, So what are we?
What suggestions do you have for a colour to signify Libertarianism? And why?
Some suggestions and ideas can be found at this Wiki article.
-
1
May 12, 2012 at 08:08 -
personally, * stares at newly painted wall with some satisfaction* , a rich and fruity little Burgandy number !
-
2
May 12, 2012 at 09:03 -
We’re colourblind (pun).
-
3
May 12, 2012 at 09:58 -
I think there should very specifically not be one. Colour makes an association with too many unforseen political connections and restricts useage. I suggest a very clear symbol or logo which can become immediately and absolutely recognised but which can be used in various colours and styles. by different groups, and indeed different political leanings.
The same background concept as the olympic one but exactly not like it in detail. For example a simple outline of an orator to symbolise the most basic libertarian concept, that of free speech.
Even Anonymous have made theat specific mask an internationally recognised symbol of revolt without even trying!-
4
May 12, 2012 at 12:13 -
Agreed Woodsy.
Those colours are to signify membership of a tribe or team in the political game and no more. Those rosettes you see on election day just look more and more ridiculous as time goes by.
The notion that a set of ideas has a particular colour ascribed to it is pretty daft when you take a step back. It’s just that at some point in time the major political outfits have chosen to adopt one colour or another – aren’t the republicans red and the democrats blue across the pond?
-
5
May 12, 2012 at 14:23
-
-
-
6
May 12, 2012 at 11:06 -
Surely the only appropriate ‘colour’ is ‘transparent’..?
-
7
May 12, 2012 at 11:50 -
Although transparent would be ideal, that’s a bit tricky for published material.
Maybe Brilliant White should be the shade – it’s bright, clean, untainted and offers clarity of contrast.
Can’t see anyone getting upset about the term ‘brilliant white’, can you ?
-
-
8
May 12, 2012 at 14:49 -
Gold – pure gold – like transparent glass?
-
9
May 12, 2012 at 15:29 -
Can someone tell me what a Libertarian is? I seem to have missed this somehow..
-
10
May 13, 2012 at 11:36
-
-
11
May 12, 2012 at 15:54 -
Plain black and white. No frills or fancy ‘presentation’.
Black for the writing or printing; white for the paper or background.
-
12
May 12, 2012 at 19:17 -
Agreed.
As the MSM have already decided we are spawn of the devil the only choice is black.
Welcome back Daz, hope your team get the job done.
-
13
May 14, 2012 at 16:41 -
Black – the absence of colour – seems appropriate and has, in any case been traditional amongst anarchists for a fair while (Henry Rollins/Black Flag for example, although the use of a black flag predates that by a good century or so).
Also, an excellent counterpoise to the white flag of surrender.
-
-
14
May 12, 2012 at 16:36 -
The colour of nicotine stains?
-
15
May 12, 2012 at 16:56 -
Do you have to be a smoker to have libertarian sympathies?
-
-
16
May 12, 2012 at 19:36 -
Magnolia obviously.
It is the cheapest colour, nothing flash, nothing extra, the economically.sensible answer, bland & efficient.
Exactly what I.need from a politician & government.
-
17
May 12, 2012 at 20:11 -
The answer is, or should be, sea green. This was the colour of the libertarian radicals, so-called levellers, and was first used as a political symbol during the funeral of a soldier named Robert (?) Lockyer, where very many attendees wore ribbons of that colour. He had been shot for mutiny and proclaimed a martyr by the radicals.
The colour originated from its association with the Rainsborough family, of whom Thomas was probably the highest-ranking radical in the army, prior to his treacherous murder. Had he lived, history may have been quite different, as he was the one man who could have challenged the aristocratic Oliver Cromwell.
-
18
May 13, 2012 at 09:03 -
TT, your balll not mine but weren’t the Levellers proto-commies not libertarians?
-
19
May 13, 2012 at 13:40 -
Wash your mouth out with soap!
They most certainly were not. They were libertarians including in economic matters. They were labeled levellers by their enemies.
You may be thinking of the Diggers, who called themselves the True Levellers, led by Gerard Winstanley, and wanted to make the earth a ‘common treasury for all’, but their experiment didn’t last long.
I’m talking about John Lilburne, William Walwyn, Richard Overton (and dear old Trooper William Thompson, although I’m not sure how much of an economist he was!) One of the main complaints against Charles I was his granting of monopolies, which, at the stroke of a pen, put anyone in the particular sector out of business, if they weren’t party to the monopoly. The abuse of monopolies had also been a bone of contention in Elizabethan times, and Charles had revived it to make money without the need to call Parliament. It was one of his scams that ended with his head being separated from his body. So, in protesting these abuses, they can be shown to be in favour of economic liberty, as well as religious liberty, limited government in line with Magna Carta, and a much-widened franchise etc. This last part was what Cromwell baulked at, as he figured, if common people got the vote, they’d likely vote for socialism. No proper agreement was found in these matters before the war broke out again (I’m talking 1647-1648), and once that was over, the opportunities for reform were much lessened by the blood that had been spilled.
-
-
-
22
May 13, 2012 at 22:36 -
Black! In a Libertarians world you can say ‘black’ without looking over your shoulder.
Comments on this entry are closed.
Previous post: The advance of technology
Next post: Archbishop Cranmer and the ASA Holes
{ 22 comments }