RE: Libertarian left and right
October 24, 2011 at 11:56 am
(This post was last modified: October 24, 2011 at 12:06 pm by Mister Agenda.)
(October 15, 2011 at 5:04 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote:(October 13, 2011 at 11:17 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: You're making me hungry.
I consider myself a 'liberaltarian', left libertarian has a lot of specific conotations. My position is more like 'Freedom Democrat' in a state without any of those actually running or in office.
Right there where you said "in a state" is where you exited left libertarianism. Left Libs do not believe in such constructs as "state".
Sorry, what I was trying to say is that I consider myself a 'liberaltarian' rather than a left libertarian because LL has specific conotations that don't apply to me. I seem to have not been clear enough that I am not claiming to be an LL.
However, the 'state' I was referring to is South Carolina; which I have good reason to believe exists. Even if I were an LL, I don't think that opining that states aren't a good idea doesn't mean they don't exist.
(October 17, 2011 at 11:21 am)reverendjeremiah Wrote: The syndicate would come together to ensure basic services kept flowing. It would no longer be done for money or profit, which means that the trades would take their time and ensure a quality product. In this money driven market, quantity ALWAYS takes presedence over quality. Slap it together, put a price tag on it and roll it out. human life and work is cheapened by money. In this situation not only would you receive your HRT for free, but you would not have to put up with the social stigma, as the Syndicate is all about "live and let live". Most of the laws in a society such as that would be more based on trade standards (safety rules, measurement standards, language standards for technology, etc..), and little to no social laws. Why steal when you own an equal share of the pie? Money makes it easier for people to steal.
How do you reconcile the fact that, for instance, automobiles last twice as long and require half the maintenance that they did thirty years ago with your stance that the market produces inferior quality?
In the interest of neighborliness, it occurs to me that under both LLs and RLs the other would be able to construct their society: that is, the Syndicate wouldn't stop a nearby communtiy from doing market-based economics and the anarcho-capitalists wouldn't prevent a Syndicate co-op from being formed. So there should be peace between your houses.
