Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

We are NOT born Libertarian!

rated by 0 users
This post has 60 Replies | 7 Followers

Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat Posted: Wed, Nov 7 2012 2:36 AM

"I think the problem is actually more insidious than that. In my view, every human is born a libertarian. We don't even need "cradle-to-grave propaganda" to convince people to be libertarian. They're born that way. The propaganda is required to sustain the statist quo."

- Clayton

 

I felt like this needed its own thread. 

Okay, look, this whole top-down interpretation of historical progression is inane. It's popular because it feeds into the same pathology that zeitgeist and alex jones feed into of fear of some controlling, top-down state power, when the reality is that force, tribalism, culture and the 'state' are EMERGENT.

The major assumption is that there are "The Powers That Be"(whatever the hell that means) that 'rig' the democracy through all of this supposed corporate corruption and/or meddling to somehow guide the socio-political direction of the country. 

This is BULLSHIT. Money doesn't buy elections. 

Using Repeat Challengers to Estimate the Effect of Campaign Spending on Election Outcomes in the US House:http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/LevittUsingRepeatChallengers1994.pdf

And anyone that comes in here to suggest that people (particularly children) are being 'brainwashed' by propaganda established by the 'elite' to accept this statism is just stupid. This system was founded for the people, BY THE PEOPLE. It is people bickering at one another, and eating one another, sucking the life out of one another, because that is what they do - they're humans, it's innate. 

The establishment does indeed represent 'THE PEOPLE'. It is a giant tribe, and it is completely natural. 

If the people want it, then they'll get it. 

We are NOT born Libertarian. We are born human, and as humans, we are tribalistic, violent, and collective thinking. 

 

 

 

 

 

  • | Post Points: 125
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 2:48 AM

You're right, my bad. History is unfolding exactly as we are told that it is unfolding. There are no dirty games going on behind the scenes and we are witnessing the End of History.

Okay, look, this whole top-down interpretation of historical progression is inane. It's popular because it feeds into the same pathology that zeitgeist and alex jones feed into of fear of some controlling, top-down state power, when the reality is that force, tribalism, culture and the 'state' are EMERGENT.

What I said is not "top-down interpretation" - had you bothered to ask, you would know that. There is no global, Satanic conspiracy. There is no single pyramid.

The major assumptio, is that there are "The Powers That Be"(whatever the hell that means)

The phrase comes from the Bible (Romans chapter 13) and is a euphemistic way of describing the stature of our rulers - they just are. Right and wrong has nothing to do with it.

that 'rig' the democracy through all of this supposed corporate corruption and/or meddling to somehow guide the socio-political direction of the country.

This is BULLSHIT. Money doesn't buy elections.

Using Repeat Challengers to Estimate the Effect of Campaign Spending on Election Outcomes in the US House:http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/LevittUsingRepeatChallengers1994.pdf

The point is that you don't need to buy the election if you've already bought both candidates. In the case of Presidential elections, I think there is a qualitative difference between the level of shenanigans that go on versus other kinds of elections.

And anyone that comes in here to suggest that people (particularly children) are being 'brainwashed' by propaganda established by the 'elite' to accept this statism is just stupid. This system was founded for the people, BY THE PEOPLE.

The system = the Claw?

It is people bickering at one another, and eating one another, sucking the life out of one another, because that is what they do - they're humans, it's innate.

The establishment does indeed represent 'THE PEOPLE'. It is a giant tribe, and it is completely natural.

If the people want it, then they'll get it.

That is ominous.

I've never disputed that government is a reflection of human nature. What else could it be? The problem is that it's bad for society in the same sense that cancer is bad for the body. Sure, both are simply "the unfolding processes of Nature" but that doesn't mean we cannot distinguish between the situation when a process is unfolding in homeostasis (like a healthy body) or not (like a cancerous body).

Your false assumption is that the government is the only way that human nature can express itself in social organization. This is demonstrably false.

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,118
Points 87,310
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

TronCat, do not be profane. Thanks!

 

To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 2:54 AM

We are NOT born Libertarian. We are born human, and as humans, we are tribalistic, violent, and collective thinking.

This guy:

... would be a libertarian by any measure, if we could magically time-transport him to the present. That is the human being in his natural habitat... what evolutionary psychologists call the Ancestral Environment.

While we would have a hard time explaining the benefits of specialization and the division-of-labor to him, he would instinctively understand the basic ideas of property rights, homesteading, voluntary exchange, non-aggression and justifiable violence.

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 2:55 AM

Your false assumption is that the government is the only way that human nature can express itself in social organization. This is demonstrably false.

I never made that assumption. All I am saying is that it is one way that human nature can express itself, and those that pretend like it's not human nature are stupid. 

I believe it will always exist to some degree. It is a symptom of our nature.  

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 2:58 AM

 

... would be a libertarian by any measure, if we could magically time-transport him to the present. That is the human being in his natural habitat... what evolutionary psychologists call the Ancestral Environment.

While we would have a hard time explaining the benefits of specialization and the division-of-labor to him, he would instinctively understand the basic ideas of property rights, homesteading, voluntary exchange, non-aggression and justifiable violence.

Yeah, that's before his tribe reaches a maximum (according to Dunbar's Number) of about 150 people, and then it'll begin running into some problems. 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 3:09 AM

it is one way that human nature can express itself

Then we are in agreement. Now, let's get down to some good, old-fashioned social criticism.

"The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable."

- H. L. Mencken

We can lay aside my hankering for conspiracy theories (I just enjoy reading about and hatching my own paranoid conspiracy theories, what can I say?) for now and let's focus on whether modern government makes sense.

Please, explain to me what problems - not of government origin - were solved by the creation of the EU. The UN. Why should political systems be aggregated more and more? Why should political systems never be disaggregated? What is the sanctity and wisdom of ever-greater scales of government?

Let's say Alice lives in a commune consisting of 20 people. Let's say Bob lives in a commune of 2,000 people. Who do you think has greater say in the policies, rules, norms and culture of their commune, Alice or Bob?

Do you think your vote in the city and county elections has more effect on the outcome of those elections or your vote in the Presidential election?

I live in the State of Oregon. To protest Bush's polices or Obama's policies, I have to buy plane tickets costing over $1,000 and pay $200/night for a hotel. To protest the policies of my State government, I have to drive an hour's distance.

So, why do I pay 5x as much in taxes to the Capitol that I can't afford to protest that I pay to the Capitol that I can afford to protest? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Shouldn't my money stay near the economy where I live, where it can help the people around me and where I have some reasonable expectation to actually have a say in how that money gets used?

The current population of the State of Oregon is roughly the population of England in 1800. Now, I understand see the reasoning behind giving people a vote so they can have a say in how things are run, but how does it follow that if the man in England had a vote in 1800, he'd have more say than he had under the King in 1800 so, therefore, I have more say in how things are run by the US government than the man in England had in 1800 under the King? It's not apples-to-apples because the scale is completely different. Because my voice is drowned out by hundreds of millions of other voices, I have no more say in how things are run in the US government than the average London pauper had in the affairs of England in 1800.

People's egos are boosted up from the time they are 3 feet tall into thinking they can 'change the world' and by the time they are adults, they are just too damn proud to face the fact that they are truly powerless. But it's a fact all the same. 

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 3:18 AM

Please, explain to me what problems - not of government origin - were solved by the creation of the EU. The UN. Why should political systems be aggregated more and more? Why should political systems never be disaggregated? What is the sanctity and wisdom of ever-greater scales of government?

You ask this of me as if you think I am in support of bigger government. 

The intention of this thread was to point out that concepts such as violence, tribalism, culture, race, and the state are NOT simply social constructs, or 'irrational' (as one bald Canadian philosopher likes to put it), they are biological constructs, and it is how we express our nature. It is the primacy of the gene. 

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 639
Points 11,575
cab21 replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 3:36 AM

we are all conceived with the knoledge of legitmate property rights and homesteading. it's so innate we have to read it from books or hear it from others.

it's also so inate libertarians have debates about what legitmate property rights are.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,551
Points 46,635
AJ replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 3:44 AM
I think TC and Clayton are both right: humans are not born with statist instincts (hence they are born libertarian in one sense), but they are born with tribal instincts (hence can easily be persuaded to support states, being extremely large "tribes" - the state is emergent).

The state is a cancer born of our evolutionary maladaptation to tribes of size greater than Dunbar's number, just as the modern obesity epidemic is partly born of our evolutionary maladaptation to cushy lifestyles, processed food, and perhaps grains and other stuff. The cure in both cases is to note these maladaptations, counteract them, and educate others so that they will want to do the same.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Posts 881
Points 15,030
banned replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 4:05 AM

TronCat:
We are NOT born Libertarian. We are born human, and as humans, we are tribalistic, violent, and collective thinking.

 

Man thinks autonomously. Are you meaning to imply that man has an innate fetish towards what he percieves within his own faculty as a collective will? Because that claim seems wholly unsubstantiated by your post.

Aside from that, this thread could definitely use some No Treason.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 4:11 AM

Man thinks autonomously. Are you meaning to imply that man has an innate fetish towards what he percieves within his own faculty as a collective will? Because that claim seems wholly unsubstantiated by your post.

Man has an innate tendency toward tribalism. Here is my other post on the subject: http://mises.org/community/forums/p/32316/502141.aspx#502141

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 205
Points 2,945

The people doesn`t always agree, so all the people don`t get what they want, weventhough they want it.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590

TronCat/MissMapleLeaf, do you really think that (all) libertarians are morally opposed violence per se?

Aside from that, tribes are basically just extended families writ large. But I think a state is more than just a tribe writ large. The core idea of statism seems to be that parents own their offspring. That idea is in no way a necessary part of tribalism.

I think what Clayton is talking about when he says that every human is born a libertarian is that everyone is essentially born believing in freedom - at least for himself. I'm not sure if reciprocity is something inborn, or something learned, or partly both.

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:01 AM

Who the fuck is 'MissMapleLeaf'? 

 

And people aren't born 'believing in freedom', they're born believeing in themselves, and their tribe. 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590
Autolykos replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:10 AM

TronCat/MissMapleLeaf:
Who the fuck is 'MissMapleLeaf'?

Who do you think she is? Oh and didn't Daniel Muffinberg tell you to not be profane? Maybe I struck a nerve.

TronCat/MissMapleLeaf:
And people aren't born 'believing in freedom', they're born believeing in themselves, and their tribe.

Perhaps you'd like to substantiate that. All I'm seeing from you are a ton of bare assertions.

Let me ask you this: what do you think is the difference between "believing in freedom for oneself" and "believing in oneself"?

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:15 AM

Perhaps you'd like to substantiate that.

http://mises.org/community/forums/p/32316/502141.aspx#502141

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590
Autolykos replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:16 AM

That's not a substantiation. Try again.

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:24 AM

Yes it is. Ignore it all you want, but we are tribal. Get over it. 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590
Autolykos replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:25 AM

"Get over it" huh? Why don't you make me. Come on.

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:27 AM

Eh, you'll come to some day. 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590
Autolykos replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:28 AM

So you can't make me "get over it"? I didn't think so. wink

Now explain just what you mean by "come to" and prove that I'll necessarily do so someday.

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:33 AM

You'll one day realize that we are innately tribal by nature, and that there are distinct differences among the races (and how assimilation breeds chaos).  

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590
Autolykos replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:35 AM

What's your definition of "tribal"?

What's your definition of "race"?

What's your definition of "assimilation"?

What's your definition of "chaos"?

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:37 AM

Lol, I'm done with you. I encourage you study into this on your own. 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590
Autolykos replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:40 AM

You may be done with me, but I'm not done with you. Now answer my questions.

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:48 AM

I will only give you my definition of 'race'. The others you can define yourself. 

Race: The variance of genetic clusters (or 'groups') as a result of evolution. 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590
Autolykos replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 10:53 AM

TronCat:
I will only give you my definition of 'race'. The others you can define yourself.

No, you'll give me the others as well.

TronCat:
Race: The variance of genetic clusters (or 'groups') as a result of evolution.

How are "genetic clusters" determined, exactly?

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 11:01 AM

Look into 'heritability' and go from there. I'm not doing this for you, lazy ass. 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590
Autolykos replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 11:03 AM

You're not going to explain to me what you mean by certain words? And you call me lazy? Apparently you expect me to be a mind-reader though.

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 11:36 AM

I think TC and Clayton are both right: humans are not born with statist instincts (hence they are born libertarian in one sense), but they are born with tribal instincts (hence can easily be persuaded to support states, being extremely large "tribes" - the state is emergent).

Of course people are tribal. They're also familial (something that never gets mentioned by leftists, for some reason). But TronCat isn't merely noting that human beings are tribal, he's asserting that they're born collectivists. This is ridiculous on its face. He hasn't cited any science to back up such an amazing claim. Pray, tell, what was collectivist about the alpha male in a tribal hunting party 10kya?? I suppose the tribal elders were exactly the same as a Russian communist Soviet? After all, it's a group of people making decisions. Groupthink. Collectivism. Proof! This is pathetic.

The state is a cancer born of our evolutionary maladaptation to tribes of size greater than Dunbar's number, just as the modern obesity epidemic is partly born of our evolutionary maladaptation to cushy lifestyles, processed food, and perhaps grains and other stuff. The cure in both cases is to note these maladaptations, counteract them, and educate others so that they will want to do the same.

Exactly. Unfortunately, the cure to the cancer of the State is a pill too bitter for most people to swallow, IMO. What is it?

  • Being a decent, upstanding person who isn't an asshole to people and doesn't have low reputation and shitty morals
  • Maintaining good standing with your family, in particular, your parents and grandparents
  • Viewing family assets as fundamentally inter-generational
  • Passing on the inheritance in male primogeniture thus rationalizing management of the household and keeping time-preferences low
  • Joining together in association with other, non-loser families into private organizations (call it a religion, a fraternity, a tribe, a clan, whatever) that:
  • Provide a genetic pool from which to select mates
  • Provide a large, trusted community from which to engage in division-of-labor for high-trust products, such as family advice, legal advice, financial advice, security, etc.

Basically, the Elites really are more competent than the general public and the only way out is to become more like them in the ways that they are virtuous. Unfortunately most of them have joined into this system of purposefully weakening the rest of humanity, rather than either staying neutral (the most rational option) or actively helping them. This is their chief vice and it is also sowing the seeds of their own destruction.

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 12:16 PM

But TronCat isn't merely noting that human beings are tribal, he's asserting that they're born collectivists.

Nope, never said humans are 'born collectivist'. I was implying that the collectives we see are a symptom of our nature ,not that it's the only way, but it IS a natural way, and isn't purely dictated by an 'elite' - people seem to want collectivism. If the 'elite' exists, they're giving the people what they want. 

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590
Autolykos replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 12:20 PM

The question is, how much of what they want is inborn vs. learned?

Along with that, what's your definition of "collectivism"? Because if it's something like "living in groups", then I'd say this is non-controversial in the extreme. It's obvious to everyone that human beings are highly social animals. This in no way constitutes a counter-argument against libertarianism in general, let alone anarcho-capitalism/voluntaryism in particular.

I now repeat my demand for you to define the other terms I mentioned previously.

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,255
Points 80,815
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

it's also so inate libertarians have debates about what legitmate property rights are.

So what? The concept of property is both innate and inherent in existence.

 

BTW the concept of race and a propensity to propagate one's own genes does not imply the utilisation of collectivist means to achieve it. Sadly a lot of libertarians let the past political associations of racialism interfere with the biology behind it. They're distinct matters.

Freedom of markets is positively correlated with the degree of evolution in any society...

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 12:31 PM

I pretty much defined 'tribalism' in my other thread. 'Assimilation' in this context would be like all different cultures and races coming together, as like a 'melting pot'. 'Chaos' is some degree of conflict among individuals or groups of individuals that could escalate to violence.  

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 372
Points 8,230

Most people are tribalistic, what are you trying to prove with this dazzling revelation? If anything, humans' tribal tendency is an excellent reason to oppose the state and to be in favor of localism and communitarianism.

"Nutty as squirrel shit."
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 12:43 PM

This wan't necessarily about tribalism, it was to debunk two things: 

1. We are born Libertarians 

2. That socio-political direction of America (or any country for that matter) is driven by an 'elite' 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 12:52 PM

TronCat:
Nope, never said humans are 'born collectivist'.

TronCat:
We are born .. collective thinking

Please, explain the distinction between collectivism and collective thinking.

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,505
TronCat replied on Wed, Nov 7 2012 12:55 PM

'Collective thinking' was a stupid way to put it, I simply meant that people desire to be part of a group, or a tribe of some sort. 

  • | Post Points: 20
Page 1 of 2 (61 items) 1 2 Next > | RSS