3 ms·

Charity.

• jedberg 10y ago
  So yes, that is the standard Libertarian answer. But the problem is that it is in direct opposition to the philosophy of looking after oneself. How can you give charity if you're looking after yourself? Charity in fact would deny someone else the ability to look after themselves, which would be denying them rights. So charity doesn't really fit with the morality of Libertarianism. http://atlassociety.org/commentary/commentary-blog/4271-charity http://atlassociety.org/commentary/commentary-blog/4271-char...
  • tertius 10y ago
    Objectivism isn't libertarianism. And no, giving charity does no deny another a right. They can choose to forego their rights. And I would suggest not giving to those who do so out of choice. Charity is a choice, not an obligation enforced through violence. As such it is the correct answer. Whether we live in such a society or not, charity exists and provides for those who cannot or cannot yet provide for themselves. It works pretty well. Is it in my interest to give to another? If I am free to make that choice then yes.
  • zo1 10y ago
    >"So yes, that is the standard Libertarian answer. But the problem is that it is in direct opposition to the philosophy of looking after oneself. How can you give charity if you're looking after yourself?" I'm not sure who or what has been creating a vilified image of the Libertarian for you. Libertarianism has nothing to do with "looking after oneself", and you're probably just dressing up the word "selfish" by stating that. It has everything to do with consent, and freedom from coercion. Now, what kind of world we choose to make after those principles dictates what kind of society we are in right now. Also, what the other person said. You're posting a link that is making commentary about Objectivism, not Libertarianism.