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.
Wanted to note on your comments t hat Volob's post was in response to mine and he/she was not/did not answer my specific inquiry.
Instead he went into a...I'll be honest, the typical Libertarian spiel about everyone being a statist or thinking that I was advocating for government when I was not.
I never said the bold above - I said that all people are a combination of good and bad and that we are neither saints nor savages - just people.
The basis of my questions, of which you nor Volob answered is the fact that discrimination is inherent to humans, that I agree people have the right to their discriminatory views/opinions; however, in most cases in a society discriminatory thoughts will be acted upon. That they are usually acted upon by all who "buy into" an ideology or philosophy (i.e., the basis of their society).
I asked specifically if Libertarians consider the fact that people rationalize away the rights of other people. I asked specifically what defines a "human" and do Libertarians all agree that "race" is not biological when it comes to humans. I asked very specific things that you and he/she did not answer and instead reverted to the typical language that is used when someone asks a Libertarian "tough questions" so to speak.
Will note, I've shared with you before that I am not religious either -this is due to the fact that religious leaders and people I knew and still know cannot answer my questions and only want me to buy into a particular belief system by faith. I'm not a "faith" type of person. I think a lot and ask a lot of questions (as a kid this got me into a lot of trouble lol). Even though I do not think that Libertarianism is a religion (obviously IMO) I do think that Libertarians would require a similar "buy in" of the populace where no one can question your ideology; which itself would create an opportunity for discriminatory actions - people who chose not to buy into the non-aggression principle or other tenets of Libertarianism would be subject to be victimized by the Libertarian masses due to being perceived as "different." This is typical human behavior.
To some degree, yes. We wouldn't view it as a valid opinion that it's okay to violate the NAP or property rights (although it should never be "settled", like science shouldn't be). I also wouldn't call it victimization, because by definition it wouldn't be. You're not victimizing a murderer by stopping them from killing someone, for example. They're the aggressor trying to victimize someone else, and we're responding to prevent it.
But your thinking and asking questions is definitely a good characteristic. I'm the same way...need to understand why before I accept something.
I
To your credit you admitted to being a supporter of violence which is more than nearly all the other statists have done here. I respect your candor and your position as a human being even if I think you are knowingly harming others...which (and no offense) makes me sick to my stomach.
So simplistic...
We know that modern mankind (US, for example) has real problems with committing violence against other human beings. Here is a reading assignment for you:
Some basic points. Until recently, most of the infantry (in WWI and WWII and even Korea) would intentionally miss (shoot over the heads of the enemy). Even in Vietnam, it was something like 50 to 100K bullets per enemy soldier killed....people who enjoy violence certainly don't need to shoot that many bullets.
So, as with all misunderstandings, you are right in some sense and wrong in another.
You are wrong that we were "evolved from peaceful beings". However, evolution has provided us with the weapon we call empathy and compassion. Scientists guess this is why we developed a more clear eye than our ancestors...others could tell how you felt, and therefore "feel for you"...
Industrial war, which has been fought for 100's of years, uses various methods to get around our current "natural state of peace". Starvation or threat of death and punishment...or peer pressure....or, best of all, the ability to kill from afar.
You will find that most of the pilots and others who killed thousands from afar don't suffer the agony (PTSD) that a guy who had to bayonet a single soldier does.
As the book details, they had to come up with special modern methods - which are used today - to allow people to easily kill. All these methods work...and they are then combined with self-preservation and also the horror of seeing something happen to your buddy who was there one moment, and then gone in a flash of fire and blood.
Summary. We are all mostly peaceful beings. But given our numbers (7+ billion) it is impossible for most pipe dreams to come true. I think, if you actually measure it, violence against others is a low in history...by a far cry...when measured by percentages. If this is true, then it shows that the "statist" system is working, right? After all, metrics are really the only way we can move forward.
So the ruse that "people were once naturally peaceful" that a former post claims.....doesn't break the toy? I noticed it wasn't addressed or answered.
The facts show that we have a "natural right" of violence...since and before the first humanoid. If "your toy" is built on alternative facts and ignoring evolution, then it's a fantasy game.
Which brings me around to the question of why the "this one works" crowd doesn't satisfy themselves with playing SimCity and SimEarth, etc.
Those types of "toys" will introduce you to something we call "the real world", which consists of much more than words and cheating on your taxes.
I don't know anything about this claim of people once being naturally peaceful.
You'd have to quote it before I expanded my thoughts on it.
On this, I actually do understand how ideas and philosophy shape society, which is why I don't view Libertarianism as superior to any other sort of idea or philosophy when it comes to society.
The center of all of these conversations/exchanges is the fact that we are speaking of human beings. We grow and change and we disagree. None of us completely agree ever, at all.
If Libertarianism is a moral philosophy (alluding to another comment) then why have people created a political party with the same name....
Doesn't make any sense to me. There is no "Democrat" moral philosophy. There is no "Republican" moral philosophy. The idea that "Libertarian" is a moral philosophy, when it is a political philosophy/ideology is just trying to place it on a pedestal of moral superiority IMO.
Libertarians today are a political party, which is why the spiel many of them spout is in regards to "collectivists" and railing against "government" and "statist." They speak of free markets and property much moreso than a moral code of conduct or exercising morality on others - they speak of the "rights" people have. I doubt you all can even agree on your principle of non-aggression (is aggression only, direct, physical aggression or indirect for instance)
All of the bold above you describe are either religious or political philosophies, not moral.
This is the oddest idea of all IMO considering the idea that Libertarianism is "moral." Libertarianism is no more or less moral than liberalism or conservatism or socialism or Marxism, or even Christianity or Islam, or Buddhism. None of these are moral philosophies, they are political - intended to be exerted upon the populace via a government (including Libertarians - they want a Libertarian, limited government, if not that then what is the end goal here...and why are there Libertarians running for office for government positions....) or via the pulpit/temple/mosque, etc.
People call themselves a lot of things, and language can change, or words switch meaning. The libertarian philosophy is the NAP and property rights. Whatever label is used, someone exerting their will offensively upon the populace is not aligned with the libertarian philosophy, and I don't support it. They're doing the opposite.
The great tragedy of history is the failure of so many beautiful ideologies.
Why can’t such beautiful ideologies succeed? Why does ugly reality have to keep getting in the way?
A foolish belief if I may say so.
communal work based off of individual rights and voluntary participation not only has worked before, it only ended when the capitalist bombed them to smithereens.
Nonetheless it is happening again. Your brutal reality of capitalism has only been dominate over a short period of human history. With each new political system offering more in-depth solutions to our problems at hand.
In places in the rust-belt where both corporate and state authorities have left the workers have taken the freedom back into their own hands creating a stable society with prosperous SOCIAL development rather than the gdp based growth of the past. A free city-state model based off of free and voluntary participation is growing and soon your archaic capitalism will fall on your own baseless defense that it is the reality.
Feudalism was reality at one point in time and anyone who questioned it was considered obscene. Now capitalism, like all systems, is in its twilight years despite all the capitalists and government statist who are desperate want to keep control.
Even company models are being developed even with less access to free resources (as all resources should be)-
Once someone commits violence against another they have broken the NAP. I have no idea what any of this means.
You can't protect the NAP without force to back it up, it is a moral dictate not a magical ward against evil. A smaller force cannot defeat a more powerful force(note this is a holistic view of force including tactics, tech, etc not just numbers). In your anarchy, the first person to consolidate the majority of force can turn the NAP into a fine red mist.
That person then becomes the defacto government, only instead of being planned ahead of time like say the US, it just goes to the first charismatic malignant sociopath who can talk a good game.
People call themselves a lot of things, and language can change, or words switch meaning. The libertarian philosophy is the NAP and property rights. Whatever label is used, someone exerting their will offensively upon the populace is not aligned with the libertarian philosophy. They're doing the opposite.
And with SOME form of force consolidation (aka government) you can say, hey you cut that out or we are going to put some tanks up you a$$. But with NO force consolidation, they say "yea, so what?" shoot you in the head and take all your s**t. In order to be able to consolidate force there is always going to be some trade off, hence the failure of pure non compromising black and white ideologies.
Just to further elaborate on the tribalistic stuff.
Say that for you the non aggression principle really is #1 most important thing, the overriding belief you live your entire life by.
So you start talking to people and spreading your beliefs.
As a part of your spiel, you harp on the NAP about 75% of the time, 15% of the time is about how anarchy is the way to go, and 10% of the time is spent deriding/insulting the "statists".
As a result you spread your beliefs to 1000 people, BUT WAIT! It is not that simple.
People tend to take away what they are predisposed to want to hear, so there is never a guarantee that YOUR message will become THEIR message.
So your real focus reaches lets say 500 people and they are just all about that NAP. Man oh man they love them some NAP, eat sleep s**t NAP all day every day.
Another 300 people just love them some anarchy so that becomes their focus. Like, we don't need your "government" man!
And the last 200 people just really HATE who they like to portray as "statists", which for clarification - don't actually have to be statists at all, but rather could be anyone they don't like. Now they just have a convenient new label for them. Some of these people probably came into your movement from the start INTENTIONALLY trying to hijack it into a hammer to use against people they don't like. In any large enough movement you are going to see some of this.
That last 200 people, maybe they don't "get" the NAP, maybe they just don't care about it. But now they are fired up and its time to for them to BBQ some statists. Maybe after they talk to 1000 of their friends, YOU the person who originally was spreading your ideals based on NAP are now a "statist" and on the bonfire you go. Since there was never a power structure in place in your society in the first place to protect the NAP, there is no recourse, you die in flames, the organized group of haters purge the unlike minded and you end with a totalitarian hellhole.
You can't protect the NAP without force to back it up, it is a moral dictate not a magical ward against evil. A smaller force cannot defeat a more powerful force(note this is a holistic view of force including tactics, tech, etc not just numbers). In your anarchy, the first person to consolidate the majority of force can turn the NAP into a fine red mist.
That person then becomes the defacto government, only instead of being planned ahead of time like say the US, it just goes to the first charismatic malignant sociopath who can talk a good game.
Completely true. The problem with anarcho-capitalists is they want to let power as defined by resources and subjugated labor to fall into the hands of private citizens who will then abuse their over sized powers against others.
An individual has a right to ones own labor both physical and mental and NOTHING else.
This is in reference to pure anarchist views not a libertarian inspired state, and the way that pure anarchies are an unstable state. State in the physics sense, like a short half life radioactive element, not state in the politics sense.
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.
