3 ms·

By that definition, I think every single human being would describe themselves as "pragmatic libertarian".

by neolefty 9y ago

rwallace 9y ago
Not quite. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism
blattimwind 9y ago
Given the existence and size of anti-liber{tarian, al} movements in today's politics, I very much doubt this.
refurb 9y ago
Yeah, no. A pragmatic libertarian would reach for regulations only when no other option exists. I would say a lot of human reach for regulations as the first option.
- majormajor 9y ago
  What do you see as the "first line" options if a company is behaving maliciously and consumer choice alone hasn't put them out of business? I'd rather have some kind of regulation at that point rather than, say, media shaming - the former is more likely to result in a process that looks at evidence when deciding if enforcement is needed, versus hysteria.
  - djsumdog 9y ago
    When you really start to talk to libertarians, you'll find lots of exceptions. There are concepts like geo-libertarianism (lease land for use in a utilitarian fashion, essentially what countries like Mexico do where you can't own land, but you can get a 99 year lease). Many libertarians will say they support some form of health care, police, fire, etc, etc. I think there's a lot of cognitive dissonance in the views of many (not all) libertarians, and they don't want to acknowledge China and India are pretty much perfect cases of true or extreme versions of that system (more due to the inability to enforce regulations than lack of regulations themselves). High standards are only really enforceable through high socialized systems, like those in the US, EU, AU, Singapore, Japan, etc. You need to have national standards to guarantee food safety, water safety (bottled water is less safe than tap water in developed nations with municipal water regulation, and cost way less or is free), minimum standards for health, doctor certifications (vs quacks selling snake oil), et cetera.

By that definition, I think every single human being would describe themselves as "pragmatic libertarian".

rwallace 9y ago

Not quite. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism

blattimwind 9y ago

Given the existence and size of anti-liber{tarian, al} movements in today's politics, I very much doubt this.

refurb 9y ago

Yeah, no. A pragmatic libertarian would reach for regulations only when no other option exists. I would say a lot of human reach for regulations as the first option.

majormajor 9y ago
What do you see as the "first line" options if a company is behaving maliciously and consumer choice alone hasn't put them out of business? I'd rather have some kind of regulation at that point rather than, say, media shaming - the former is more likely to result in a process that looks at evidence when deciding if enforcement is needed, versus hysteria.
- djsumdog 9y ago
  When you really start to talk to libertarians, you'll find lots of exceptions. There are concepts like geo-libertarianism (lease land for use in a utilitarian fashion, essentially what countries like Mexico do where you can't own land, but you can get a 99 year lease). Many libertarians will say they support some form of health care, police, fire, etc, etc. I think there's a lot of cognitive dissonance in the views of many (not all) libertarians, and they don't want to acknowledge China and India are pretty much perfect cases of true or extreme versions of that system (more due to the inability to enforce regulations than lack of regulations themselves). High standards are only really enforceable through high socialized systems, like those in the US, EU, AU, Singapore, Japan, etc. You need to have national standards to guarantee food safety, water safety (bottled water is less safe than tap water in developed nations with municipal water regulation, and cost way less or is free), minimum standards for health, doctor certifications (vs quacks selling snake oil), et cetera.