4 ms·

How is this hard to understand: If the coal plants are proven to be harming the populace, they are aggressors. However, I don't think coal-fired plants necessar

by lhnn 15y ago

How is this hard to understand: If the coal plants are proven to be harming the populace, they are aggressors. However, I don't think coal-fired plants necessarily kill the planet (or people).

jshen 15y ago
It certainly harms people (http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/coalvswind/c02c.html http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/coalvswind/c02c.html) But you didn't really answer the question. How would a libertarian society deal with them? Would such a society ban all coal fired plants, and if so how would it be enforced? Would someone weigh the pros and cons, if so who and how? Would such a society every establish a regulatory body to actively monitor plants and limit their pollution?
- lhnn 15y ago
  I'm not a politician or a philosopher. My guess, however, is that pollution of air and flowing waters can be controlled through Libertarians' concept of property rights, since the pollution thereof has an effect on other peoples' private properties. Therefore, regulation seems likely and moral, though it isn't necessarily the only option.
  - jshen 15y ago
    Isn't regulation the government using forces to collect taxes which it then uses to use force to have inspections? My problem with libertarianism is that it always turns into a lot of hand waving from the libertarian. They start off saying that government force is a great evil, then I bring up something like pollution and suddenly the argument is much more nuanced, "well of course we'd have to use force". Exactly, of course you have to use force. Once we admit this, what does libertarianism mean? How is it different from what we have today?
    - lhnn 15y ago
      Well, libertarians I speak to tend to acknowledge the need for some government. You're setting up a false dichotomy.
      - jshen 15y ago
        No I'm not, the problem is that libertarians talk in circles. "It's never acceptable to use force!!!". What about xyz. "Well of course you use some force". Ok, so what does libertarianism mean? "taxation is violence!!!". Um, but don't you need taxes to pay for that government you said we needed a minute ago. "Well of course :confused look:". So what does libertarianism mean again?
        dantheman 15y ago
        Many people think that voluntary arrangements can be made to provide police actions. That way the police defend the people and treat them well, since that's who pays their salary. It would quickly lead to end of all victimless crimes, as no one would pay for that type of enforcement & those being targeted would be able to hire their own protection forces. Am advocating something like this for the entire united states - of course, not. But I'd be very interested in seeing these ideas tried voluntarily by willing participants.
        jshen 15y ago
        I'm highly skeptical. Weren't lynchings in the south a voluntary "police action". Who would be held accountable for such actions, and how? Let's also be clear that you are advocating the use of force. No one has yet explained how the NAP could possibly work in real life. I made a thread on yakkstr, I'd love to discuss in detail. http://yakkstr.com/posts/6923-Libertarianism http://yakkstr.com/posts/6923-Libertarianism
        dantheman 15y ago
        I'd prefer to talk here, merely because I remember to check this, but I posted over there too. The key to this experiment is not that it will be perfect, but that it will be more stable and more reliable overall -- there will still be problems, nothing is perfect -- all we want is better. As for lynchings and other mob behavior, that can happen with police too. For example, see the rise of the Black Panthers in response to oakland california police abuse. And the subsequent introduction of gun legislation to strip the citizens of their defense against abusive police. Or, to godwin myself, look at the nazis. When it comes to mob violence the governments of the world surely outnumber private instances. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party#Origins http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party#Origins As for the philosophical underpinnings, there are quite a few good books: Nozick's Anarchy State and Utopia lays out a framework, he makes some deductions that result in a monarchist state -- but that is in no way guaranteed from his premises. David Friedman's Machinery of Freedom addresses this: http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Libertarian/Machinery_of_Freedom/MofF_Chapter_29.html http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Libertarian/Machinery_of_Freed... More on private defense agencies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_defense_agency http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_defense_agency Here's Rothbard on self-defense http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics/twelve.asp http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics/twelve.asp Rothbard on private defense agencies - http://mises.org/rothbard/mes/chap13.asp http://mises.org/rothbard/mes/chap13.asp and finally Hoppe on the same issue: http://mises.org/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_2.pdf http://mises.org/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_2.pdf I'll do my best to address any questions/objections/etc you may have :) None of these works are perfect, and these ideas are relatively recent and haven't been tried so who knows what would really happen :) This is a fair amount of reading, but it's way more thorough than anything I can quickly type up :)

by lhnn 15y ago

How is this hard to understand: If the coal plants are proven to be harming the populace, they are aggressors. However, I don't think coal-fired plants necessarily kill the planet (or people).

jshen 15y ago

It certainly harms people (http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/coalvswind/c02c.html http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/coalvswind/c02c.html) But you didn't really answer the question. How would a libertarian society deal with them? Would such a society ban all coal fired plants, and if so how would it be enforced? Would someone weigh the pros and cons, if so who and how? Would such a society every establish a regulatory body to actively monitor plants and limit their pollution?

lhnn 15y ago
I'm not a politician or a philosopher. My guess, however, is that pollution of air and flowing waters can be controlled through Libertarians' concept of property rights, since the pollution thereof has an effect on other peoples' private properties. Therefore, regulation seems likely and moral, though it isn't necessarily the only option.
- jshen 15y ago
  Isn't regulation the government using forces to collect taxes which it then uses to use force to have inspections? My problem with libertarianism is that it always turns into a lot of hand waving from the libertarian. They start off saying that government force is a great evil, then I bring up something like pollution and suddenly the argument is much more nuanced, "well of course we'd have to use force". Exactly, of course you have to use force. Once we admit this, what does libertarianism mean? How is it different from what we have today?
  - lhnn 15y ago
    Well, libertarians I speak to tend to acknowledge the need for some government. You're setting up a false dichotomy.
    - jshen 15y ago
      No I'm not, the problem is that libertarians talk in circles. "It's never acceptable to use force!!!". What about xyz. "Well of course you use some force". Ok, so what does libertarianism mean? "taxation is violence!!!". Um, but don't you need taxes to pay for that government you said we needed a minute ago. "Well of course :confused look:". So what does libertarianism mean again?
      - dantheman 15y ago
        Many people think that voluntary arrangements can be made to provide police actions. That way the police defend the people and treat them well, since that's who pays their salary. It would quickly lead to end of all victimless crimes, as no one would pay for that type of enforcement & those being targeted would be able to hire their own protection forces. Am advocating something like this for the entire united states - of course, not. But I'd be very interested in seeing these ideas tried voluntarily by willing participants.
        jshen 15y ago
        I'm highly skeptical. Weren't lynchings in the south a voluntary "police action". Who would be held accountable for such actions, and how? Let's also be clear that you are advocating the use of force. No one has yet explained how the NAP could possibly work in real life. I made a thread on yakkstr, I'd love to discuss in detail. http://yakkstr.com/posts/6923-Libertarianism http://yakkstr.com/posts/6923-Libertarianism
        dantheman 15y ago
        I'd prefer to talk here, merely because I remember to check this, but I posted over there too. The key to this experiment is not that it will be perfect, but that it will be more stable and more reliable overall -- there will still be problems, nothing is perfect -- all we want is better. As for lynchings and other mob behavior, that can happen with police too. For example, see the rise of the Black Panthers in response to oakland california police abuse. And the subsequent introduction of gun legislation to strip the citizens of their defense against abusive police. Or, to godwin myself, look at the nazis. When it comes to mob violence the governments of the world surely outnumber private instances. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party#Origins http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party#Origins As for the philosophical underpinnings, there are quite a few good books: Nozick's Anarchy State and Utopia lays out a framework, he makes some deductions that result in a monarchist state -- but that is in no way guaranteed from his premises. David Friedman's Machinery of Freedom addresses this: http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Libertarian/Machinery_of_Freedom/MofF_Chapter_29.html http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Libertarian/Machinery_of_Freed... More on private defense agencies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_defense_agency http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_defense_agency Here's Rothbard on self-defense http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics/twelve.asp http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics/twelve.asp Rothbard on private defense agencies - http://mises.org/rothbard/mes/chap13.asp http://mises.org/rothbard/mes/chap13.asp and finally Hoppe on the same issue: http://mises.org/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_2.pdf http://mises.org/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_2.pdf I'll do my best to address any questions/objections/etc you may have :) None of these works are perfect, and these ideas are relatively recent and haven't been tried so who knows what would really happen :) This is a fair amount of reading, but it's way more thorough than anything I can quickly type up :)