Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Isn't that where the state becomes convenient? How is there private property if there's no state to declare one's assets? If a citizen can't afford to hire a private security firm, he/she is out of luck. Mobsters would only take advantage of her and confiscate what's left of what she owns.
I am not one, but I have read enough about this philosophy to tell you that it basically boils down to guns and a magical free market place for law.
They believe that a market place for law will spring up (which probably will). However, where they go wrong is claiming that market forces will keep the law pure, much more than a government.
They believe that a good judge will get a good reputation and a bad judge will get a bad reputation. Therefore, the bad judge will go out of business, leaving only good judges left.
This begs the question on how do you really bring someone to court and how do you enforce the judge's ruling.
Isn't it cute the way he tries to lump in Libertarians, who believe in government, with Anarchists, who don't, as though they were one and the same?
A typical diversion by those who hate what the Libertarians say but cannot refute them.
You do know that "Mr. Libertarian," Murray Rothbard and many other libertarians have worked out their own visions of an anarcho-capitalist society in which there would be a privately-run justice system and a privatized military, yes? If you subscribe to libertarian principles, why in the world would you not believe that private entities could do a better job providing those services than those evil government bureaucracies, most especially the biggest boondoggle/government bureaucracy in the world, the U.S. military?
I am not one, but I have read enough about this philosophy to tell you that it basically boils down to guns and a magical free market place for law.
They believe that a market place for law will spring up (which is probably will). However, where they go wrong is claiming that market forces will keep the law pure, much more than a government.
They believe that a good judge will get a good reputation and a bad judge will get a bad reputation. Therefore, the bad judge will go out of business, leaving only good judges left.
This begs the question on how do you really bring someone to court and how do you enforce the judge's ruling.
Libertarians always paint progressives as Utopians, but they don't even see the wishful thinking in their ideology.
I take it that when discussing a preference for political ideology, Libertarian is a good place to start. When posters start conflating Libertarianism with bad ideas then I take it they're really like mice trying to escape a liberal maze.
You do know that "Mr. Libertarian," Murray Rothbard and many other libertarians have worked out their own visions of an anarcho-capitalist society in which there would be a privately-run justice system and a privatized military, yes? If you subscribe to libertarian principles, why in the world would you not believe that private entities could do a better job providing those services than those evil government bureaucracies, most especially the biggest boondoggle/government bureaucracy in the world, the U.S. military?
Exactly, if you follow libertarian arguments all the way through, it leads to anarchy.
It is funny watching libertarians cry about being lumped together with anarchists.
They are essentially buffet-style anarchists, and therefore lack a backbone.
Libertarians always paint progressives as Utopians, but they don't even see the wishful thinking in their ideology.
The best they have to support their case is Medieval Iceland and Celtic Ireland.
They are delusional enough to believe that a modern day economy, especially densely populated urban areas could operate by the same norms and laws as those historical societies.
Exactly, if you follow libertarian argument all the way through, then it leads to anarchy.
It is funny watching libertarians cry about being lumped together with anarchists.
They are essentially buffet-style anarchists, and lack a backbone.
Non-anarchist libertarians will argue oh so strenuously against the state having a monopoly of force and all the evils that flow from it...except when it comes to the justice system or the military. Then it's not only perfectly fine, but good. After all, we couldn't trust the "free market" in those areas, could we? But if we put the state in the health care industry, well, that's communism and evil. You gotta love 'em.
I take it that when discussing a preference for political ideology, Libertarian is a good place to start. When posters start conflating Libertarianism with bad ideas then I take it they're really like mice trying to escape a liberal maze.
That or they're five steps ahead of you.
Did you hear that "whizzzzz" over your noggin just now?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
