How libertarian leaning is this forum?
-
@Kilgore said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
@jens @Hando-Jin Are libertarians actually looking at most people today and thinking, "These people are capable of self-governing"?
That is precisely the fatal error in libertarianism. It is projection of one's perceived self-sufficiency on the population at large. Worse, often this perception of self-sufficiency is not even justified.
-
@Ecstatic_Hamster said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
@Sugar completely support people in their rights to do anything that does not hurt others. Drugs prostitution etc all should be legal completely.
How could engaging in drugs and prostitution not hurt others?
-
@TheSir why would it hurt others? If I take a drug now, you have no idea and it’s not your business. It’s never anyone else’s business what a person does or takes into his body. The only thing that is other people’s business is aggressions against them. Taking a drug or practicing some type of sex that others find objectionable is nobody’s business.
I believe in freedom from coercion and compulsion. I suggest you read Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt, and perhaps The Road to Serfdom by Hayek. Anything bu Murray Rothbard as he was a fantastic historian and a very good writer and storyteller.
-
@Ecstatic_Hamster Though we abide by individualism, as individuals we do not exist in absolute isolation nor can our actions be separated from the living fabric of the society. Where the 'fine until it harms somebody' line of reasoning falls short is in not acknowledging that the behaviors justified by such rhetoric more often than not characteristically lower the individual's potential to positively contribute to the surrounding society. Since deliberately diminishing the growth potential of an entity is almost universally regarded as harmful, it would be fair to assert that letting the individual harm themselves in the name of pleasure will be indirectly harmful to everyone in the society by lowering the individual's ability to contribute to societal growth. In other words, in 'fine until it hurts somebody', the somebody has to not merely refer to bystanders, but the subject himself too, if we are to truly be mindful of the harmful consequences of our choices. The question thus becomes: why should the society harm itself by allowing its inhabitants to harm themselves?
-
BTW There is already a similar thread https://bioenergetic.forum/topic/730/why-is-the-ray-peat-community-so-far-right/
-
@Kvirion that isn't anyone else's business. My contribution to society is my business and nobody else's. There is no such thing as "society". There are ONLY individuals. Society is just another concept used to justify coercion and compulsion.
-
@Ecstatic_Hamster said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
There is no such thing as "society". There are ONLY individuals.
LOL! This statement above is against all valid scientific knowledge...
-
Humans act to achieve desired ends. That is all society is, acting individuals. A distinction between isolate and collective activities are a bit redundant to the matter, unless we're talking about forced collectivization...which means humans are no longer free to act in the pursuit to achieve desired ends.
-
I recommend reading Ludwig von Mises's Human Action. It's an indispensable read for anyone wanting to understand the subjective nature of humans.
-
@Ecstatic_Hamster You say there are only individuals by using a collective form of communication. Language itself is developed through society. Matthew Raphael Johnson discusses this topic in this video.
Furthermore, what you do is everbody's business as you are using up scarce resources, and our forefathers sacrificed for this moment. You have a God given moral duty to be good. You have a duty to your brothers and sisters to be your highest self.I think we should adpot the libertarian view that big goverment is wasteful at best, and destructive in most instances. Moreover we should judge the goverment by what it is and does, and not by how it suistain itself powerwise(Rothbard). That being said, we should be conservatives/socialist in terms of morality. We should not legalize drugs. Pornography should only be available to adults. Prostitution should be legal, taxed, not discussed, and hidden from society at large.
-
@Norwegian-Mugabe Who is this god you speak of? You have a god given moral duty if you choose voluntarily to accept the word of god as valid. But the separation of church & state is the only thing that prevents our nation from devolving into another dark age. There is a world where religious zealots can be just as dangerous as drag queens to our children. Emotional cultural biases have no place in determining our liberties...our forefathers specifically fought and died to prevent that as well. Also taxation is theft, and regulation is anti-market, so in a way I agree with you we shouldn't be "legalizing" drugs. I should be able to open a lemonade stand and sell fentanyl to whoever wants it.
-
@Mulloch94 said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
Ludwig von Mises's Human Action.
It's outdated, mostly incorrect, and...
BTW New Science says:
“Selfishness beats altruism within groups. Altruistic groups beat selfish groups. Everything else is commentary.” ― David Sloan Wilson, Edward O. Wilson -
@Norwegian-Mugabe this is why I don't usually participate in these discussions.
Your values are that coercion and compulsion are okay. Mine are they are not.
There is no reconciling. And I'll never change anyone's mind.
I've done a great deal of reading on political economy and I'm happy to answer sincere questions but I have no interest in debating someone who fundamentally is okay forcing people to do things in the name of some collective concept. That is very abhorrent to me.
-
@Mulloch94 The German-speaking countries between 1770-1830 were the best period in history, and it was built upon Christianity. The Renaissance was also Christian. In other words, the peaks of mankind were fueled by the correct Christian beliefs. Christianity is reasonable and also our tradition, so we should try to build great Christian societies again. The marriage institution is the first thing that needs to be fixed. We should not allow no-fault divorce, and we should incentivize marriage much more than we do today in terms of tax breaks and more child support ETC.
Moreover, all policies in all societies without exception are based on morality. You cannot get away from forming society on moral grounds. Anarcho-capitalism and communism are also chosen on moral grounds.
@Kvirion That's one of the best quotes I have ever read. Thank you for sharing it.
@Ecstatic_Hamster There are good reasons for why certain things should be allowed, while other things should be either banished or decentivezed. Pornography, prostituion, and recreational drugs for the most part all leads to a worsening of people and the fabric between people. Our policies should lift both individuals and society towards greater heights. If you do not want to debate, then get the hell out of political posts like this. We create these post to share points of view. Stendhal adviced us to enter society with a duel. That's what I support.
-
@Ecstatic_Hamster said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
Society is just another concept used to justify coercion and compulsion.
In that case, why submit to it? Why pay taxes to it and benefit from its tax-produced products and services? I don't believe you are really against the idea of a society. Rather, you just want rights without duties. Yet duties are necessary for the perpetuation of your rights. Unless you are an anarchist, wanting to enjoy individualism while disregarding how to best serve the society that is making your individualism possible is the attitude of a parasite. Is it not so?
-
@Mulloch94 said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
I should be able to open a lemonade stand and sell fentanyl to whoever wants it.
Why?
-
@Ecstatic_Hamster said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
I have no interest in debating someone who fundamentally is okay forcing people to do things in the name of some collective concept
Do you go to work everyday? Would you rather be doing something else? All economic systems involve coercion, capitalism is probably the worst.
-
@Hando-Jin How is capitalism the worst? You can elect what to do as Haidut, Ray, and Danny all have done. To succed in free-markets you should have high empathy. Identify a service or product that people want, and then provide it to them. We need more of free-markets and less of stateism. Schooling is a great example of where more choices and freer markets would be better. Voucher schemes and a greater variety of schools would have been great.
-
@jens said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
@Hando-Jin said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
current social order
. That being said, what about government regulation is preventing people from creating healthy communities, social structure, and engaging in meaningful work?
Chaining us to the medical system, banning/regulating certain useful therapies, no guarantees of income or housing have to be some the primary problems.
I saw in one of the UBI experiments in California a guy was able to ditch his blood pressure medication. It's awful what they do to us.
-
@Kvirion said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
@Mulloch94 said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
Ludwig von Mises's Human Action.
It's outdated, mostly incorrect, and...
BTW New Science says:
“Selfishness beats altruism within groups. Altruistic groups beat selfish groups. Everything else is commentary.” ― David Sloan Wilson, Edward O. WilsonThat tweet doesn't even accurately described Misesian economic models. There are no assumption based models in Austrian economics. So that person is referring to post-keynesian schools of thought...or it may simply be they're too ignorant to have thoughtful discourse in the matter. Either way, acting individuals make society possible. Without them, society ceases to exist.
@Norwegian-Mugabe said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
The German-speaking countries between 1770-1830 were the best period in history, and it was built upon Christianity. The Renaissance was also Christian. In other words, the peaks of mankind were fueled by the correct Christian beliefs. Christianity is reasonable and also our tradition, so we should try to build great Christian societies again. The marriage institution is the first thing that needs to be fixed. We should not allow no-fault divorce, and we should incentivize marriage much more than we do today in terms of tax breaks and more child support ETC.
I'm not sure what that has to do with ending the war on drugs. If you want to start a family based on strong christian moral convictions you're free to do so. But wielding the legislative branch to force everyone to be like you is no less authoritarian than what the progressives are doing right now.
@Norwegian-Mugabe said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
Moreover, all policies in all societies without exception are based on morality.
True, but out of my own rational self-interest. I need no higher authority to draw upon to realize it's in my own best interest to act in diplomacy and rational mutual partnerships to obtain the ends for which I act upon. Religious conviction is not the moral barrier that compels people to pay for good and services rather than stealing and killing for them. Rational sane actors do that regardless, and irrational or otherwise mentally ill people will engage in malevolent behavior regardless of those convictions.
@TheSir said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
@Mulloch94 said in How libertarian leaning is this forum?:
I should be able to open a lemonade stand and sell fentanyl to whoever wants it.
Why?
To meet the demand of something with an adequate supply.
