Things about libertarianism I don't understand
March 13, 2013 at 2:28 pm
(This post was last modified: March 13, 2013 at 2:29 pm by Tea Earl Grey Hot.)
I'm focusing on what I guess would be philosophical issues of libertarianism, not pragmatic.
Libertarians posit that everyone has an absolute right to life and the property they own. Any instance of infringing on these two rights is wrong.
Libertarians generally describe government as a "necessary evil" that protects these rights. Under this view, libertarians think that a land with no government is ideal but that the free market wouldn't be reliable enough to secure the rights of its people. So, libertarians allow the existence of government only to have control over the justice and protection of its citizens and perhaps for handling public transportation. Everything government does is still "evil" but it's allowed because it's the only practical alternative. However, the completely "free" society free of government is still the ideal thus government should be as small as it practically can be.
This distinction however between government and the "free market" seems to me to be an artificial distinction. If goverment is monopolistic control over justice and protection over a certain area, then any property owner, any business, any HOA etc in the hypothetical completely free market scenario is a goverment. But libertarians have no problem in principal with for instance an aparment complex owner establishing rules for how it's occupants can behave. There's nothing "evil" about apartment managers.
What's the essential difference aside from size between government and an apartment manager?
As far as I can tell, most Western democracies aren't infringing on libertarian's rights. A modern Western country such as the US, is just basically an enormous HOA governed neighborhood. If "wrong" is infringing on your right to self or property, there's nothing truly wrong with say government restricting the lightbulbs you can buy, banning guns, taking your home away to build a freeway, etc., because you never truly had an absolute right to self and property in the first place. You gave that up by virtue of being in the country. These are no different than the HOA saying you can't paint your house orange, or the apartment manager saying you can't have pets.
Libertarians posit that everyone has an absolute right to life and the property they own. Any instance of infringing on these two rights is wrong.
Libertarians generally describe government as a "necessary evil" that protects these rights. Under this view, libertarians think that a land with no government is ideal but that the free market wouldn't be reliable enough to secure the rights of its people. So, libertarians allow the existence of government only to have control over the justice and protection of its citizens and perhaps for handling public transportation. Everything government does is still "evil" but it's allowed because it's the only practical alternative. However, the completely "free" society free of government is still the ideal thus government should be as small as it practically can be.
This distinction however between government and the "free market" seems to me to be an artificial distinction. If goverment is monopolistic control over justice and protection over a certain area, then any property owner, any business, any HOA etc in the hypothetical completely free market scenario is a goverment. But libertarians have no problem in principal with for instance an aparment complex owner establishing rules for how it's occupants can behave. There's nothing "evil" about apartment managers.
What's the essential difference aside from size between government and an apartment manager?
As far as I can tell, most Western democracies aren't infringing on libertarian's rights. A modern Western country such as the US, is just basically an enormous HOA governed neighborhood. If "wrong" is infringing on your right to self or property, there's nothing truly wrong with say government restricting the lightbulbs you can buy, banning guns, taking your home away to build a freeway, etc., because you never truly had an absolute right to self and property in the first place. You gave that up by virtue of being in the country. These are no different than the HOA saying you can't paint your house orange, or the apartment manager saying you can't have pets.
My ignore list
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
