4 ms·

Let me know when libertarianism achieves any more than attracting bears - https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21534416/free-state-project-new-hampshire-libe

by Nursie 4y ago

Let me know when libertarianism achieves any more than attracting bears - https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21534416/free-state-project-new-hampshire-libertarians-matthew-hongoltz-hetling https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21534416/free-state-... Personally I enjoy my government roads, schools, fire service and all the rest. Perhaps when you’ve grown emotionally, you’ll understand that government is people working together to achieve a common good. It’s flawed and easy to get wrong, it oversteps and overspends, but I’ll take that over "fully realised" adults living in a bear-ridden trash heap because they “took responsibility” for their own garbage disposal.

Chris2048 4y ago
> Perhaps when you’ve grown emotionally, you’ll understand This is arrogant, and condescending, not kind.
- Nursie 4y ago
  This is a quote from the post I replied to, which is why I said it, as a mirror to the arrogance of the material I responded to. The post I responded to posits that those in favour of governments and collective action are not emotionally grown. If it is not kind, then neither is the original.
  - Chris2048 4y ago
    > posits that those in favour of governments and collective action are not emotionally grown I didn't read it like that - I read it as the ability to self-govern requires great individual responsibility and emotional control. Whether this is the only way forward is up for debate, but I agree it requires an (unlikely?) level of public competence.
mynameishere 4y ago
all the rest You might want to make at least a few exceptions.
luxuryballs 4y ago
Whooosh you totally didn’t get the point, the government is also just a bunch of individuals.
- Nursie 4y ago
  The point that governments and money are superstitions and that people need to "grow emotionally and take responsibility" rather than believing in such things? No, I'm pretty sure I got the point there. I agree, government is just a bunch of individuals, and collectively we empower them to take action on our behalf, and they achieve things that without such cooperation would be hard to impossible. I don't believe the poster I replied to would concur, in fact a brief glance down their posting history shows this person believes governments should not exist.
  - manofmanysmiles 4y ago
    If you're talking about me, I believe that when people are ready for it, "governments" as such will cease to be relevant. To put this another way, I am NOT advocating for getting rid of governments, because a) they already don't exist, and b) right now, if we "got rid of government", let's say by somehow stopping all political, police, military and other activity, there most likely would be chaos, as many people like being told what to do, and maybe do need a imaginary father figure to make decisions for them and punish them if they do "bad" things.
    - Nursie 4y ago
      Wow, this is bordering on delusion. People will never be 'ready' to stop abusing and taking advantage of others, without cooperative measures (governments) to restrict such activity, what you have is a recipe for mass violence and a return to warlords and feudalism as those who can raise the largest mob take the lions share of resources for themselves.
  - int_19h 4y ago
    Do you seriously believe that you (even collectively) empower governments to take action of your behalf?
manofmanysmiles 4y ago
Show me a common good, and I’ll listen to you. I only see people. Every time we generalize it results in violence and conflict. I am 100% supportive of people working together.
- badpun 4y ago
  With your people-working-together model, modern civilization would not be possible. There would just be too much friction in a world where every interaction and every boundary must be voluntary and previously agreed upon. It would sorta work fine for sparsely populated pre-modern times, like the XIX century American West [1], which I believe is the origin source for a lot of such fantasies. [1] Except for the fact that the West rugged self-sufficiency was only possible because the pioneers could call in cavalry to exterminate groups of people who posed a threat they couldn't handle themselves.
- drdeca 4y ago
  “Superstition” is just as much an abstraction over a general pattern of things happening as “government” is. You say “show me a government and I’ll listen”; I say “Show me a superstition (and an explanation for in what sense you have shown me one), and I’ll show you a country (in the same sense).”
WalterBright 4y ago
> Let me know when libertarianism achieves any more than attracting bears My pleasure. The United States was founded on libertarian principles (excluding allowing slavery to continue, this was fixed in 1865). The result was the rise if poor people to the most successful nation in the world, and the greatest rise in the wealth of those poor people. This did not happen in, say, South America, that was discovered and colonized at the same time. The Antebellum South also did not prosper under slavery and was crushed by the free economy of the North. Other countries which embraced libertarian principles also experience a surge in their economies, like the German Miracle after WW2, same for Japan.
- Nursie 4y ago
  > The United States was founded on libertarian principles It certainly wasn't based on modern libertarian principles, or there would not have been much of a government in the first place. It certainly pays lip service to freedom, but pre-dates the modern libertarian obsession with contract and property law as supreme above all others.
  - WalterBright 4y ago
    The US government in its first century wasn't the all-powerful government it evolved into. > libertarian obsession with contract and property law as supreme above all others Contracts are always superceded by government laws under libertarianism.
    - Nursie 4y ago
      Then you've been talking to different libertarians than I have over the last couple of decades.
      - WalterBright 4y ago
        I'm glad you're finally talking to an actual one. Many people call themselves one who haven't actually thought much or read much about it. If you want a book written by another actual libertarian, "Free to Choose" by Milton Friedman is a good start. The neato thing about libertarianism is it doesn't have to be perfect in order to work. Since nothing about human societies can be perfect, this is fine feature. The more libertarian a country is, the better it runs.

by Nursie 4y ago

Chris2048 4y ago

> Perhaps when you’ve grown emotionally, you’ll understand This is arrogant, and condescending, not kind.

Nursie 4y ago
This is a quote from the post I replied to, which is why I said it, as a mirror to the arrogance of the material I responded to. The post I responded to posits that those in favour of governments and collective action are not emotionally grown. If it is not kind, then neither is the original.
- Chris2048 4y ago
  > posits that those in favour of governments and collective action are not emotionally grown I didn't read it like that - I read it as the ability to self-govern requires great individual responsibility and emotional control. Whether this is the only way forward is up for debate, but I agree it requires an (unlikely?) level of public competence.

mynameishere 4y ago

all the rest You might want to make at least a few exceptions.

luxuryballs 4y ago

Whooosh you totally didn’t get the point, the government is also just a bunch of individuals.

Nursie 4y ago
The point that governments and money are superstitions and that people need to "grow emotionally and take responsibility" rather than believing in such things? No, I'm pretty sure I got the point there. I agree, government is just a bunch of individuals, and collectively we empower them to take action on our behalf, and they achieve things that without such cooperation would be hard to impossible. I don't believe the poster I replied to would concur, in fact a brief glance down their posting history shows this person believes governments should not exist.
- manofmanysmiles 4y ago
  If you're talking about me, I believe that when people are ready for it, "governments" as such will cease to be relevant. To put this another way, I am NOT advocating for getting rid of governments, because a) they already don't exist, and b) right now, if we "got rid of government", let's say by somehow stopping all political, police, military and other activity, there most likely would be chaos, as many people like being told what to do, and maybe do need a imaginary father figure to make decisions for them and punish them if they do "bad" things.
  - Nursie 4y ago
    Wow, this is bordering on delusion. People will never be 'ready' to stop abusing and taking advantage of others, without cooperative measures (governments) to restrict such activity, what you have is a recipe for mass violence and a return to warlords and feudalism as those who can raise the largest mob take the lions share of resources for themselves.
- int_19h 4y ago
  Do you seriously believe that you (even collectively) empower governments to take action of your behalf?

manofmanysmiles 4y ago

Show me a common good, and I’ll listen to you. I only see people. Every time we generalize it results in violence and conflict. I am 100% supportive of people working together.

badpun 4y ago
With your people-working-together model, modern civilization would not be possible. There would just be too much friction in a world where every interaction and every boundary must be voluntary and previously agreed upon. It would sorta work fine for sparsely populated pre-modern times, like the XIX century American West [1], which I believe is the origin source for a lot of such fantasies. [1] Except for the fact that the West rugged self-sufficiency was only possible because the pioneers could call in cavalry to exterminate groups of people who posed a threat they couldn't handle themselves.
drdeca 4y ago
“Superstition” is just as much an abstraction over a general pattern of things happening as “government” is. You say “show me a government and I’ll listen”; I say “Show me a superstition (and an explanation for in what sense you have shown me one), and I’ll show you a country (in the same sense).”

WalterBright 4y ago

> Let me know when libertarianism achieves any more than attracting bears My pleasure. The United States was founded on libertarian principles (excluding allowing slavery to continue, this was fixed in 1865). The result was the rise if poor people to the most successful nation in the world, and the greatest rise in the wealth of those poor people. This did not happen in, say, South America, that was discovered and colonized at the same time. The Antebellum South also did not prosper under slavery and was crushed by the free economy of the North. Other countries which embraced libertarian principles also experience a surge in their economies, like the German Miracle after WW2, same for Japan.

Nursie 4y ago
> The United States was founded on libertarian principles It certainly wasn't based on modern libertarian principles, or there would not have been much of a government in the first place. It certainly pays lip service to freedom, but pre-dates the modern libertarian obsession with contract and property law as supreme above all others.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  The US government in its first century wasn't the all-powerful government it evolved into. > libertarian obsession with contract and property law as supreme above all others Contracts are always superceded by government laws under libertarianism.
  - Nursie 4y ago
    Then you've been talking to different libertarians than I have over the last couple of decades.
    - WalterBright 4y ago
      I'm glad you're finally talking to an actual one. Many people call themselves one who haven't actually thought much or read much about it. If you want a book written by another actual libertarian, "Free to Choose" by Milton Friedman is a good start. The neato thing about libertarianism is it doesn't have to be perfect in order to work. Since nothing about human societies can be perfect, this is fine feature. The more libertarian a country is, the better it runs.