3 ms·
The state is compatible with liberty in so far as it acts to secure the liberty of its citizens. Again, liberty here meaning, basically, freedom from violence b
by thegrimmest 5y ago
The state is compatible with liberty in so far as it acts to secure the liberty of its citizens. Again, liberty here meaning, basically, freedom from violence by other people. A state which acts to protect its citizens liberty is legitimate (in my view) regardless of how its members come to authority. Democracy (in one form or another) seems to be the least-worst option for administering this state (defining the process, etc.), but to me, is it not the source of its legitimacy.
- wbsss4412 5y agoYou just said that interference with private transactions was by definition a violation of liberty, so any outside action of the state would be at best a violation of liberty to secure liberty, somehow. Which, is somewhat nonsensical. There is no well defined liberty math.
- thegrimmest 5y ago> a violation of liberty to secure liberty You've pretty much got it. These are the only legitimate violations of liberty. Doesn't seem nonsensical to me.