7 ms·

"They're a class of abstract thinkers stuck in an imperfect world where their theories will always be unapologetically shattered by complex and unpredictable re

"They're a class of abstract thinkers stuck in an imperfect world where their theories will always be unapologetically shattered by complex and unpredictable realities." First, this is a blanket ad hominem about an entire group of people. Second, it's bullshit. There's nothing wrong with being a pragmatic libertarian. In fact, that's the way it's supposed to work. It's the purists on all sides of issues that present the most problems for civil discourse. Yes, you can find lots of crazy talk in libertarian circles: people owning their own nuclear bombs and such. But hell, you can find a lot of crazy talk in any political movement -- it becomes a matter of whether you are looking for reasons to dis-empower an entire group or not. This type of "people of political group X _say_ this thing, but when push comes to shove they're really like this" can be applied to any group you'd like. It's completely generic. Arguments like this have no value except as an attempt to persuade listeners not to hear what somebody is saying. If I could downvote you a dozen times I would. People of all political persuasions are generally intelligent, well-meaning, and acting on the world as best as they understand it. Why not try to treat them that way? We don't need to assume they're unused to practicality or intelligent observation and reflection simply because their opinions are divergent from our own.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
qdog 14y ago
Most people I've met who claim to be Libertarians seems to be very confused about how the world works. Usually, they have a pet idea (guns, pot, taxes, property rights, police forces, something) they are very hot about and fail to extend their logic out to the endpoint, ie: get rid of all law enforcment some magic is going to happen and criminals won't be criminals (I suspect life would be a lot like the show Deadwood, not really my ideal life). There might be some enlightened Libertarians out there sure, but I haven't met one that I can recall. Btw, I'm a Federalist. Zombie Washington/Hamilton in 2012!
- bjorn2404 14y ago
  "get rid of all law enforcment..." Are you confusing libertarianism with anarchism?
  - cobrausn 14y ago
    It's a fine line. As an example, ESR, often called 'libertarian', is really an anarchist. From what I can tell, there is 'little-l' libertarian, in which someone seeks to keep government small to prevent abuse of freedoms and rights by said government, and 'big-L' Libertarian, in which someone thinks that corporations working via free market principles can solve all/most societal problems and government just gets in the way. I don't really buy the second, though I have some respect for the first.
    - mindcrime 14y ago
      From what I can tell, there is 'little-l' libertarian, in which someone seeks to keep government small to prevent abuse of freedoms and rights by said government, and 'big-L' Libertarian, in which someone thinks that corporations working via free market principles can solve all/most societal problems and government just gets in the way. At least in the USA, the breakdown between "big L Libertarian" and "little l libertarian" is usually positioned as whether or not somebody is a member of the Libertarian Party and/or registered to vote as Libertarian, versus simply holding to generally libertarian principles. The distinction you're talking about, if I understand you correctly, sounds more like the distinction between "minarchist libertarians" and "anarchist libertarians" (or "anarcho capitalists"). Minarchists support some (very small) government for functions where it seems to make sense to share the responsibility communally (commonly cited examples are national defense, law enforcement, highway construction, etc.) where the more radical libertarians want to banish essentially all "government" (at least as we know it today).
  - clavalle 14y ago
    Anarcho-capitalism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism which a lot of libertarians subscribe to.
leot 14y ago
Generalizations have their place. A big problem many have with right-wing libertarians is that, unlike other political philosophies, libertarianism seems more like an elaborate, and status-reinforcing, justification for one's own socioeconomic position. To believe otherwise -- i.e., to believe that merit is largely a fiction, albeit a highly adaptive one -- would mean giving up far too much.
- hindsightbias 14y ago
  The day a libertarian realizes the world is not comprised of sets of well meaning rational actors is the day they get a clue.
  - nazgulnarsil 14y ago
    the day a liberal realizes the government is not comprised of sets of well meaning rational actors is the day they get a clue. I can play this game too! You should maybe try one day a week where you don't act like a condescending prick. You might find it liberating.
    - guelo 14y ago
      Why a liberal? Conservatives also believe in government.
      - sp332 14y ago
        Actually, I think the idea is that conservatives are distrustful of government and are keen to limit its power and influence in their lives.
        nazgulnarsil 14y ago
        unless the head honcho is wearing a jesus t-shirt. Sorry, I don't actually mean to be so snarky, I just hate democracy so much.
        14y ago
Retric 14y ago
The problem with saying your a pragmatic X is X becomes meaningless, your just pragmatic 98% of the time. It's only the 'meaningless' edge cases where you revert to whatever X is. See: How the 'communist party' deals with the Chinese economy. PS: For a US example compare how law enforcement deals with impoverished areas vs wealthy areas in the same state.
- mkramlich 14y ago
  > PS: For a US example compare how law enforcement deals with impoverished areas vs wealthy areas in the same state. I see this pattern in actual experience: "PS: For a US example compare how law enforcement deals with [crime-ridden, lack-of-self-control-prone] areas vs [peaceful, quiet, classy] areas in the same state."

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

qdog 14y ago

Most people I've met who claim to be Libertarians seems to be very confused about how the world works. Usually, they have a pet idea (guns, pot, taxes, property rights, police forces, something) they are very hot about and fail to extend their logic out to the endpoint, ie: get rid of all law enforcment some magic is going to happen and criminals won't be criminals (I suspect life would be a lot like the show Deadwood, not really my ideal life). There might be some enlightened Libertarians out there sure, but I haven't met one that I can recall. Btw, I'm a Federalist. Zombie Washington/Hamilton in 2012!

bjorn2404 14y ago
"get rid of all law enforcment..." Are you confusing libertarianism with anarchism?
- cobrausn 14y ago
  It's a fine line. As an example, ESR, often called 'libertarian', is really an anarchist. From what I can tell, there is 'little-l' libertarian, in which someone seeks to keep government small to prevent abuse of freedoms and rights by said government, and 'big-L' Libertarian, in which someone thinks that corporations working via free market principles can solve all/most societal problems and government just gets in the way. I don't really buy the second, though I have some respect for the first.
  - mindcrime 14y ago
    From what I can tell, there is 'little-l' libertarian, in which someone seeks to keep government small to prevent abuse of freedoms and rights by said government, and 'big-L' Libertarian, in which someone thinks that corporations working via free market principles can solve all/most societal problems and government just gets in the way. At least in the USA, the breakdown between "big L Libertarian" and "little l libertarian" is usually positioned as whether or not somebody is a member of the Libertarian Party and/or registered to vote as Libertarian, versus simply holding to generally libertarian principles. The distinction you're talking about, if I understand you correctly, sounds more like the distinction between "minarchist libertarians" and "anarchist libertarians" (or "anarcho capitalists"). Minarchists support some (very small) government for functions where it seems to make sense to share the responsibility communally (commonly cited examples are national defense, law enforcement, highway construction, etc.) where the more radical libertarians want to banish essentially all "government" (at least as we know it today).
- clavalle 14y ago
  Anarcho-capitalism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism which a lot of libertarians subscribe to.

leot 14y ago

Generalizations have their place. A big problem many have with right-wing libertarians is that, unlike other political philosophies, libertarianism seems more like an elaborate, and status-reinforcing, justification for one's own socioeconomic position. To believe otherwise -- i.e., to believe that merit is largely a fiction, albeit a highly adaptive one -- would mean giving up far too much.

hindsightbias 14y ago
The day a libertarian realizes the world is not comprised of sets of well meaning rational actors is the day they get a clue.
- nazgulnarsil 14y ago
  the day a liberal realizes the government is not comprised of sets of well meaning rational actors is the day they get a clue. I can play this game too! You should maybe try one day a week where you don't act like a condescending prick. You might find it liberating.
  - guelo 14y ago
    Why a liberal? Conservatives also believe in government.
    - sp332 14y ago
      Actually, I think the idea is that conservatives are distrustful of government and are keen to limit its power and influence in their lives.
      - nazgulnarsil 14y ago
        unless the head honcho is wearing a jesus t-shirt. Sorry, I don't actually mean to be so snarky, I just hate democracy so much.
      - 14y ago

Retric 14y ago

The problem with saying your a pragmatic X is X becomes meaningless, your just pragmatic 98% of the time. It's only the 'meaningless' edge cases where you revert to whatever X is. See: How the 'communist party' deals with the Chinese economy. PS: For a US example compare how law enforcement deals with impoverished areas vs wealthy areas in the same state.

mkramlich 14y ago
> PS: For a US example compare how law enforcement deals with impoverished areas vs wealthy areas in the same state. I see this pattern in actual experience: "PS: For a US example compare how law enforcement deals with [crime-ridden, lack-of-self-control-prone] areas vs [peaceful, quiet, classy] areas in the same state."