You and me Monkeys! Libertarianism or bust...!

[_KimberlyAnn]

I will NOT get embroiled in a lengthy political discussion here (I'm saying that as a mantra in the hopes that it will make itself come true); but I'd like to express my opinion that American libertarianism (right libertarianism, as opposed to European libertarianism--left libertarianism) amounts to basically the worship of The Free Market.

Oh, I see. You're not going to get embroiled in a lengthy discussion like you weren't going to get embroiled in a lengthy discussion on Tarski's consciousness thread. :P

As instrumental as the market is in producing widespread prosperity, promoting republican government, and breaking down racial and religious prejudices, the market doesn't always place the right values on things and often creates problems as great as those it solves. The problem of public goods, for instance, is one the market can't fix, and one where it requires repeated government intervention even to keep the market itself working effectively.

The reason the market (within some constraints) is a good thing is that it does much to promote human welfare. This being the reason it's good, where the market doesn't promote human welfare, its raison d'etre is violated, and it requires intervention from outside the market.

The trouble with right libertarians, and with Ayn Randian "Objectivists" in particular, is that they assume that great good done by the market in many areas of human life means that the market is good and right in itself and makes no mistakes--I.e., that it always places the proper value on things, as if it were an omniscient Deity. Such slavish devotion to the market as a moral arbiter makes the market one's God and capitalism one's faith.

Don

Though I disagree with you about the Mormon scouting program and whether or not the Mormon church is a cult (or at least cultish), I do agree with you about Randian philosophy, Don. See? I'm really quite reasonable and not silly at all.

KA

[_Ren]

Oh shoot. You just agreed with him. That means you'll keep after me?

Heh :)
What Don has pointed out (quite accurately in my opinion) is that you probably see Libertarianism quite differently to me. That's probably no big shocker in and of itself. But I think what he's hit on is the reason why.

Let me put it this way:
If the huge majority of a given population voted for a communist goverment, I would not see that as a non-Libertarian goverment. The goverment is simply 'distributing the wealth' in a way that the inhabitants agreed to. That's what they wanted -so where is the assult on 'civil rights'?

But I would still see it as against Libertarian principles in the sense that I don't belevie it would last. I beleive that human nature itself rebels against that extreme form of socialism, and in the end the people will rebel against the principle.

I don't see Libertarian philosophy just in relation to 'deciding what is right to do'. I also see it as an accurate indication of general human nature. Wanting to have everybody as well off as everybody else isn't in and of itself an 'evil' - assuming everybody decides that they want to work towards that goal. In fact, I can easiely see great nobility and good will in the idea - depending on the person.
...but Libertarian philosophy tells us that human nature simply doesn't accept this state of affairs in the long run. People desire freedom - even if they forget for a time!

...We were looking to tie this to Mormonism somehow. Well - I'd say look no further than the communist 'experiments' early LDS embarked on as cases in point...

The elderly in my community have decided that they really do not want to fund schools anymore and that should be left up to parents that actually have children in the school. What say you?

Hmm. Well, my first impulse is to say that if these elderly people are drawing pensions, then it's probably fair to say that they've already contributed their fair share to society - so I see their point to be honest...

[_barrelomonkeys]

Oh shoot. You just agreed with him. That means you'll keep after me?

Heh :)
What Don has pointed out (quite accurately in my opinion) is that you probably see Libertarianism quite differently to me. That's probably no big shocker in and of itself. But I think what he's hit on is the reason why.

I think that is accurate. Is that why you get in a tizzy when I say Libertarians here (and I mean in the US) are full of people that are social Darwinists?

Let me put it this way:
If the huge majority of a given population voted for a communist government, I would not see that as a non-Libertarian government. The government is simply 'distributing the wealth' in a way that the inhabitants agreed to. That's what they wanted -so where is the assult on 'civil rights'?

Well I would see it differently. I would say that if the minority was forced into communism by the majority that this would be an infringement on their rights. That's actually what I most admire about the constant flux of politics in America is that it's the constant back and forth of protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority.

But I would still see it as against Libertarian principles in the sense that I don't belevie it would last. I beleive that human nature itself rebels against that extreme form of socialism, and in the end the people will rebel against the principle.

Well I agree with that.

I don't see Libertarian philosophy just in relation to 'deciding what is right to do'. I also see it as an accurate indication of general human nature. Wanting to have everybody as well off as everybody else isn't in and of itself an 'evil' - assuming everybody decides that they want to work towards that goal. In fact, I can easiely see great nobility and good will in the idea - depending on the person.

I've mentioned to you before that I am not very optimistic about human nature for the most part. I appreciate your optimism though. I've mentioned to you that I have no problem with Libertarians. I just am no longer one. It didn't work for me.

...We were looking to tie this to Mormonism somehow. Well - I'd say look no further than the communist 'experiments' early LDS embarked on as cases in point...

Well I know very little about LDS history, so that was news to me!

See you in 6 months?

[_Mercury]

What you have is a great society. The Buhdists can stay in their walled gardens, the white supremacists can do their thing in their "Burbclave" and generally, us geeks make a killing in the information and currency exchange business.

So who in history would you say, ROP/Book of Mormon, is the most famous individual to hold the ideals of a true Libertarian without the trappings of a Statesman?

[_DonBradley]

Though I disagree with you about the Mormon scouting program and whether or not the Mormon church is a cult (or at least cultish), I do agree with you about Randian philosophy, Don. See? I'm really quite reasonable and not silly at all.

OK, maybe only a little bit silly. :-P

Don

[_DonBradley]

but I'd like to express my opinion that American libertarianism (right libertarianism, as opposed to European libertarianism--left libertarianism) amounts to basically the worship of The Free Market.

Hey Don.
Interesting observation. And now that I think about it, this makes a lot of sense. This probably explains why it's being expected of me to whole-heartedly deny all ideas of welfare if I am a Libertarian.

Here in the UK, we have a mix bag. Obviously, we are deeply capitalist in many ways - and that to me is right.
But we also have significant socialist leanings. The NHS, and various other services that are still handled directly by the goverment. When you consider the notion of 'positive rights' within Libertarianism, I beleive one can easiely argue the Libertarian case for national health case - for example.
What good is freedom when you have nothing to eat? Or you have no shelter? Or you die? Does anybody choose these outcomes?!

...I do think there is a bit of a cultural divide here. It's a good observation...

Hi Renegade,

I had actually forgotten you were in the UK, and that's why I assailed right libertarianism--I thought that's what you were championing. Left libertarianism I quite like, and I have some leanings in that direction. Like you, I accept the market as a remarkable and necessary mechanism but also believe that persons have positive rights the market often fails to secure.

Americans who self-identify as "left libertarian" would include Noam Chomsky.

by the way, would Christopher Hitchens be considered libertarian, or libertarian-leaning, in the UK?

Don

[_barrelomonkeys]

Renegade,

I can't believe you've been fussing at me for months about NOT being a Libertarian when we weren't working with the same definition. That explains sooo very much!

:D

[_barrelomonkeys]

What you have is a great society. The Buhdists can stay in their walled gardens, the white supremacists can do their thing in their "Burbclave" and generally, us geeks make a killing in the information and currency exchange business.

So who in history would you say, ROP/Book of Mormon, is the most famous individual to hold the ideals of a true Libertarian without the trappings of a Statesman?

I know when I was in the zone I loved Ayn Rand, Hobbes, Locke... They're sorta famous to me. :)

[_DonBradley]

I'm with ya on this.
I am a tiny bit of a "left libertarian" but usually identifiy myself as essentially a moderately liberal progressive.

That's actually about how I'd describe myself. I'm a moderate progressive. The goals I would have government pursue are largely "progressive" goals. But the means I would have government use would be largely determined by what works, including--if that really is what works in particular cases--market-based solutions to social ills. I see this as moderate; and I'm also moderate in the sense of believing that change should usually be incremental rather than sudden and sweeping.

That said, I find myself inspired by many of the ideals of left libertarianism, and would like to see society evolve in the direction of freedom and community, on the lines of the left libertarian vision, with the caveat that I think such an evolution should be incremental, so that changes can be tested and, if necessary, reversed.

To add a final twist to my political views, which no one asked me to offer, I've lately come to regard myself as something of a cultural conservative. This doesn't mean I want anti-sodomy laws enforced, theocratic principles enshrined in government, or any of that sort of nonsense. It means I find value in having shared tradition and a shared national culture. I think, again, that change should generally be incremental and initially reversible. And I value Western culture and the many moral, philosophical, legal, governmental, literary, and other traditions, and think that laying the world's problems at the feet of Western culture is absurd.

Western culture invented the ideas of democracy, human rights, and equality. It has been more successful than any other culture in meeting human beings' material and medical needs. It also gave us modern science.

While many debunk science as the cause of our environmental problems, this view is short-sighted and threatens to throw the baby out with the bath water. How do we know we have problems like global warming, holes in the ozone layer, probable large-scale extinctions, toxins in our streams, and the like? Because--and only because--science tells us so! And how do we know what must be done to solve these problems? Science again! Science, unlike the postmodern philosophy that seeks to undermine it, has self-correcting mechanisms. Science can alert us to the very problems we've created with the products of science, and show us how to resolve them. So much for science as the demon who's killing Gaia.

In short, I find a great deal in our cultural heritage, Western and American, worth preserving, and am reluctant about radical schemes to throw most of it out and start over. So, I'm a moderate progressive with leanings toward left libertarian ideals and cultural conservatism.

Don

[_KimberlyAnn]

I knew you couldn't stay off this thread, Don Bradley!

What was that limerick I wrote about you and your on-line quarrels...?

At any rate, I agree with you about maintaining our Western culture. I'm getting less silly by the minute, aren't I?

Oh, and I'm glad, Book of Mormon, that you're not into the Randian stuff any more. It's so cultish, in my opinion.

KA