3 ms·

> "As for arrogance, I think "live and let live" is the least arrogant political philosophy one can hold, and that's the defining ethos of libertarianism. I thi

> "As for arrogance, I think "live and let live" is the least arrogant political philosophy one can hold, and that's the defining ethos of libertarianism. I think that lack of pretence/arrogance in this ethos is what draws people to libertarianism. Any non-libertarian political persuasion will advocate for all manner of government measures that use force against peaceful people to force compliance with a larger social plan." If you were talking about the original socialist libertarianism, then you would have had a point. Unfortunately libertarianism today is more of a "live and let die"-type ideology, where those who cannot support themselves must fail, as they provide "no value". It is social darwinism writ large. Regulations exist for a reason and the effects of gutting for instance the EPA has massive consequences, irreparable damage to the environment and to people's health. Or do you think the people in Flint, Michigan should just move somewhere else? We absolutely cannot trust powerful people and corporations to do the right thing, since they do not feel the consequences themselves and thus actively do not care, because that would eat into their profits. Voluntarism doesn't work, for that exact reason. Hence why regulations and laws are needed.

CryptoPunk 6y ago
>>Unfortunately libertarianism today is more of a "live and let die"-type ideology, where those who cannot support themselves must fail, as they provide "no value". It is social darwinism writ large. Altruism is completely orthogonal to libertarianism. The only consistent property of libertarian policies is that they protect and preserve the right to voluntary interaction. How people choose to voluntarily associate is in no way a concern of what's defined as libertarianism. In other words, one can believe and promote a society based on compassion, sharing and collectivism, or a society based on self-sufficiency and only profit-motivated interaction, and be equally libertarian. >>the effects of gutting for instance the EPA has massive consequences, irreparable damage to the environment and to people's health. Or do you think the people in Flint, Michigan should just move somewhere else? There are a multitude of types of regulations, and not all of them violate the non-aggression moral principle that libertarianism holds as inviolable. Environmental regulations generally do not violate the right to free association, and can indeed protect rights, so are generally consistent with libertarianism. Moreover, regulations have a multitude of effects, and not all of them positive. To quantify their net effect on human welfare requires far more evidence than the single data point you've provided. It requires a comprehensive and methodological accounting of their entire impact. >>Voluntarism doesn't work, for that exact reason. Hence why regulations and laws are needed. Voluntarism does not imply a lack of laws. Voluntaryism can only be enforced with laws and a state to back it. There is a distinction between laws that protect people's right to their life, liberty and property, and laws that violate it.
- KozmoNau7 6y ago
  Define the NAP, please. Put it in no uncertain terms. It always boils down to "doing something I agree with", defining any perceived violation of ultimate personal freedom as aggression, leading to any retaliation to be "justified" as self defense, which is utterly morally bereft. The pure and simple truth is that a society based solely on voluntary interaction is no society at all. Along with the benefits of being part of a society, there will always be obligations. You can act as if that doesn't apply to you, but someone always has to pick up the bill or do the work and you can't count on there always being a volunteer. Libertarianism is a pie-in-the-sky utopian thought experiment ideology.

CryptoPunk 6y ago

>>Unfortunately libertarianism today is more of a "live and let die"-type ideology, where those who cannot support themselves must fail, as they provide "no value". It is social darwinism writ large. Altruism is completely orthogonal to libertarianism. The only consistent property of libertarian policies is that they protect and preserve the right to voluntary interaction. How people choose to voluntarily associate is in no way a concern of what's defined as libertarianism. In other words, one can believe and promote a society based on compassion, sharing and collectivism, or a society based on self-sufficiency and only profit-motivated interaction, and be equally libertarian. >>the effects of gutting for instance the EPA has massive consequences, irreparable damage to the environment and to people's health. Or do you think the people in Flint, Michigan should just move somewhere else? There are a multitude of types of regulations, and not all of them violate the non-aggression moral principle that libertarianism holds as inviolable. Environmental regulations generally do not violate the right to free association, and can indeed protect rights, so are generally consistent with libertarianism. Moreover, regulations have a multitude of effects, and not all of them positive. To quantify their net effect on human welfare requires far more evidence than the single data point you've provided. It requires a comprehensive and methodological accounting of their entire impact. >>Voluntarism doesn't work, for that exact reason. Hence why regulations and laws are needed. Voluntarism does not imply a lack of laws. Voluntaryism can only be enforced with laws and a state to back it. There is a distinction between laws that protect people's right to their life, liberty and property, and laws that violate it.

KozmoNau7 6y ago
Define the NAP, please. Put it in no uncertain terms. It always boils down to "doing something I agree with", defining any perceived violation of ultimate personal freedom as aggression, leading to any retaliation to be "justified" as self defense, which is utterly morally bereft. The pure and simple truth is that a society based solely on voluntary interaction is no society at all. Along with the benefits of being part of a society, there will always be obligations. You can act as if that doesn't apply to you, but someone always has to pick up the bill or do the work and you can't count on there always being a volunteer. Libertarianism is a pie-in-the-sky utopian thought experiment ideology.