Tales from LibertarianLeftandia

 

Mean Hardhearted libertarian JJ:

Sounds remarkably similar to the straw men built by random statists: "You libertarians don't give a shit about anyone.  You think people should be left dying in the streets because they don't have health care.  And you want poor people to be your wage slaves.  You basically want to return to feudalism."

But don't you think people should be left dying in the streets because they don't have health care?  Don't you want to exploit the poor to become your wage slaves?  If you don't support the state, then you must be for chaos.

Le thanks!

Quick Tips:

1) Left Wingers of this stripe probably don't care about: Intellectualism, antintellctualism, science, nihilism, egoism, science, humanity, society, collectivism, wealth distribution, the working class, the proletariat, alienation from work and land, actually violently opressed people, etc.  They care about leftists and leftism and how to be a good and sucessful leftist.

To go one step further in speculating: Nowadays they probably care more about topics of: language constructs, what to call rich white women, rights for typically middle class/rich people, student rights, how to make minorities conform to leftist views, how cool your art is, what organic foods to eat, animal rights, going green, attending the "right" college, and how to exclude non cool people who are not left wingers.

 In other words leisurely topics for a bored and leisurely bourgoise class.

2)  Menger, etc are sociologists.  Right or wrong in their practice, they are in the business of "caring".  Unfortunatley it is a disciplin. to try to responsibly think and talk about the actual factual world within a specific context.  Unfortunately because one is trying to be responsible and disciplined it does not leave room for chincy sentimentalism or empty sloganing.

3) How you feel about trespessaing etc is a personal affair / ethic.  The Mises forum is not a personal entity, and let Block concern himself with Block

4) Everything I say is probably irrelevant when actually engage with a far leftist.  It is a task for Sisyphus to talk to these people

These guys better not show up on my lawn.

Vive, you sound like a neocon there :P

I'll take a different angle from Vive's, which I regret to say is only half-comprehensible to me once again.

Anyway, ALL user Noor referred to people in the Mises forums advocating violence for trespassing. Noor doesn't seem to be distinguishing aggressive violence from defensive violence. If a trespasser refuses to leave, why should the property owner let him remain? I think it's justified for the property owner to forcibly remove the trespasser, as long as the property owner uses only as much force as is strictly necessary to remove him. I don't think killing a trespasser is ever strictly necessary to remove him, so I consider that to be a case of murder.

To not be allowed to forcibly remove trespassers is to essentially allow any and all entrance onto any and all property. Maybe that's the left-libertarians' point.

Well, here's a paraphrase of Block's flagpole situation:

You live on the 13th floor of a building, and a man on the roof slips and falls, and is now hanging for his life on the flagpole outside of your window.  Can you lawfully stop that person from entering your window?  His conclusions is yes.

Block doesn't actually advocate that you (the apartment owner) do one thing or the other.  Its not like he says "use a broomstick to knock the guy off the pole" or even "don't let the man climb through you window."  If you decided to let him in your window, Block is still cool with that.  He's just saying "look, the law can't require that you allow people to climb through your window.  It can't punish you from denying access to your home."

But its easy to see why this situation would make the average person (or left lib) uneasy.  I think most people would be pretty upset if something like this ever happened -- an old curmugdeon letting someone fall to their death and not facing legal consequence.  But this is Block, and he has a super narrow conception of law that is not shared by everyone at the LvMI.

Also, its at least worth pointing out that even IF Bock's version of libertarian law every became reality, and this kind of thing happened, there would probably be serious non-legal sanctions against the apartment owner. 

(Disclaimer:  I am not a fan of Block, at all.  But I think everyone needs to have their arguments presented properly.) 

Vive, you sound like a neocon there 

lol, if there is one thing I have in common with both Ayn Rand and neocons, people who  I usually don't associate myself with, it is a distaste for dirty hippies

If I remember correctly when I was taking the position that a couple did the right thing in shooting a trespassing drunk teen most people on here disagreed, and many believe that "defense" of property should not exceed retaliation (and the Mises forum is not one entity anyways). I agree that Block is pretty wacky on some issues and seems to be a propertarian, but that's not a reflection of all "right" libertarians.

 but that's not a reflection of all "right" libertarians.

 

Which I can see as a major problem.  Too many people I have seen seem to automatically associate everything with a sensationalistic  version of Rothbard / Hoppe / Block, and just throw out slogans after that.