4 ms·
No, it's compatible with libertarianism. I'd also remove unmarried men and Rolex owners from the eligibility list, myself.
by SamReidHughes 7y ago
No, it's compatible with libertarianism. I'd also remove unmarried men and Rolex owners from the eligibility list, myself.
- monocasa 7y agoI fail to see how giving some the vote but not others based on whether you think they'll agree with you or not is a libertarian position.
- SamReidHughes 7y ago"Compatible with X" != "Is (or isn't) an X position"
- monocasa 7y agoFor ideologies attempting to be totally internally consistent, it is.
- SamReidHughes 7y agoSo then, what's the internally consistent libertarian position on the Eagles vs. Seahawks game?
- monocasa 7y agoAre you truly making the argument that disenfranchisement of groups based on demographics has as little to do with libertarianism as the results of a sports game?
- SamReidHughes 7y agoThe idea behind the NFL game example was to highlight the distinction between the notion of completeness with that of consistency. The connection (or lack thereof) between Libertarianism and the NFL game, or with enfranchisement, is a matter of logic, not some distance metric based on whether it's in the realm of politics.