My problem with them isn't that they're moderate or anything (though I'm not), my problem is that they usually haven't done their homework and haven't fully thought about issues before advoating a role for the state. Many libertarians still can't seem to get rid of the statist bias.
Some *libertarian* i was talking too was advocating laws against racial and gender discrimination and didn't really make a very good case. He seemed to be totally unaware of the work of people like Gary Becker and Walter Block on the subject.
I don't think that libertarianism is perfect or exempt from criticism but I really wish that people would stop pointing out supposed flaws of libertarianism and pretending as though no one has attempted to address them or anything.
Would you like to provide some examples about these moderate libertarians, who "haven't fully thought about issues before advoating[sic] a role for the state"?
I think that part of the problem - at least for me is that there is a whole lot of stuff to read. And a lot of different authors.
And then the various "libertarian" writers don't nessiccarialy agree with each other 100%.
From what I understand Hoppes anti-eglatarianism anti-multiculturalism natural order is a different vision from Rothbards ideal of a stateless ancap society.
Which one is the one true way?? How many have really read the works of both in thier entierty?
If the guy seemed to be totally unaware of the work of Gary Becker and Walter Block, he probably was. It's not like these guys are front and center in the bookshelves or at the top of a search on amazon.
Not every libertarian hangs out at LVMI either.
Look in the comments section on some of the daily articles - plenty of disagreement there to go around as well.
And do you have to be a total stateless ararchist to call yourself a libertarian? Is being what people around here call a minarchist acceptable?
Who makes these calls and what makes them right?
I don't think people pretend as though no one has attempted to address various critisisms, they probably honestly just don't know.
If you find answering them frustrating, just cut them a little slack, and say go read so and so he answers your questions...
Actually yes I would. I did a post on Michael Shermer advocating gun control after the Colorado shooting based on faulty logic and he did it again in another post recently on tax fairness. He basically said that he's strongly in favor of laws against discrimination and then said no more than that. I don't wanna seem like I'm just picking on one guy though. I've encountered this attitude elsewhere on many forums and elsewhere.
Part of the reason why I am making Liberty HQ. So I can educate libertarians.
There's a lot of work to be done before even getting close to think about abolishing anti-discrimination laws (I am all for getting rid of them, but for very different reasons). Once we'll get there we'll think about it: in the meantime let's concentrate on the points we all agree upon.
Wheylous: Part of the reason why I am making Liberty HQ. So I can educate libertarians.
I'd like to see something like that, but in a less traditional format. Maybe as like a game, or a question-and-answer session or choose-your-own-adventure style format that combines story and libertarian ideals with the gotcha of right and wrong gaming and consequences.
If that makes any sense :P
Accessibility and dryness, I think, are one of the issues libertarian education faces.
When do we see libertarian children's books? >_>
When do we see libertarian children's books?
Maybe that's something I will make for my kids, since I plan on homeschooling. Any suggestions on topics/lessons for such a thing?
The only one worth following is the one who leads... not the one who pulls; for it is not the direction that condemns the puller, it is the rope that he holds.
I do not recognise a "libertarian" as legitimate if they do not accent to the principles all legitimate authority derives from consent and thou shalt not initiate agression against thy fellow Man.
Beyond that I could care less about anything because everything is a matter between consenting parties as it should be.
Phi est aureum: When do we see libertarian children's books? Maybe that's something I will make for my kids, since I plan on homeschooling. Any suggestions on topics/lessons for such a thing?
The moral lessons of popular folk tales are generally pretty awful. People acting badly are often rewarded. They preach implicit morals. Take Goldilocks and the 3 bears. The lesson, you can break into people's houses, use their stuff, and if you're blond and pretty you can get away with it.
Now, I hear the original version had a moral that actually said something like don't break into people's houses and use their stuff. But the modern one completely muddles that moral and subverts it, probably by removing some bit of violence done to Goldilocks for her transgressions.
Goldilocks's fate varies in the many retellings: in some versions, she runs into the forest, in some she is almost eaten by the bears but her mother rescues her, in some she vows to be a good child, and in some she returns home... Tatar points out that the tale is typically framed today as a discovery of what is "just right", but for earlier generations, it was a tale about an intruder who could not control herself when encountering the possessions of others.
Goldilocks's fate varies in the many retellings: in some versions, she runs into the forest, in some she is almost eaten by the bears but her mother rescues her, in some she vows to be a good child, and in some she returns home...
Tatar points out that the tale is typically framed today as a discovery of what is "just right", but for earlier generations, it was a tale about an intruder who could not control herself when encountering the possessions of others.
The formula is pretty simple. Decide what moral principle you want to elaborate. Create a character that violates that principle. Have something bad and surprising happen to them. Mix with equal parts dream-state so wacky things can happen, thus creating a fairy-tale.
It's a whole genre to itself really. And if mastered, could become quite popular. Currently the whole field of children's books it being hoarded by developmental experts, sociology and psychology PhDs whom think they know what children need. There's a huge target for a book outside the mainstream to come disrupt that equilibrium. Maybe digital publish it.
If you're disappointed it means you had your expectations set too high. Only trust moderates as far as you can throw them.
If you're disappointed it means you had your expectations set too high.
Says Seneca...