Not that temporal longevity has anything to do with being libertarian, but I would conjecture there was a surge of growth from the past year, myself included.
Although much of my actions and thoughts were libertarian, I have really only been one for the past year.
Same here. I really began researching libertarianism in the library last year during study hall. I had to do a Persuasive paper on the Patriot Act for my english class and I talked to my dad about it, and he showed me mises.org. So, after he introduced me to it, I began reading the Daily Articles and viewing the media section. Therefore, I have only been a knowledgeable libertarian for about 1 year too.
...And nobody has ever taught you how to live out on the street, But now you're gonna have to get used to it...
A year and a half now.
Freedom of markets is positively correlated with the degree of evolution in any society...
ViennaSausage: Although much of my actions and thoughts were libertarian, I have really only been one for the past year.
The loosely defined the Cato/Reason type, for awhile. But that perspective is stagnent.
It was only after discovering Rothbard(and the Rothbardians), a little over a year ago, that libertarianism became consistent and meaningful.
Peace
By nature, always. But I didn't take an interest in the intellectual body of work until about 10 years ago. Before that I was more concerned with introspection and pushing the limits of my mind and body (okay, and girls ), and not really interested in politics. When I did take an interest, I came across and gravitated towards Jude Wanniski and his Supply-Side University. Through them, the Austrians. I studied Austrian and neo-classical models during my years at Columbia ("know thy enemy" and all that), then went to Mises U. in 2005 to solidify my Austrian basics and meet everybody. BTW, if you're a student, you should try to attend... you can probably get a scholarship so everything but airfare would be paid for. It was a lot of fun and I learned a lot!
"He that struggles with us strengthens our nerves, and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper." Edmund Burke
I started reading Austrians more than 30 years ago. The Public Choice school headed by Gordon Tullock was another influence.
On the other hand, I've probably been a hater of mankind since I was even younger.
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool."
-- Richard Feynman
A little over a year I do believe.
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Free Software Foundation
I've been a "vulgar libertarian" since 2005, having become utterly disillusioned with republicanism after the 2004 election. Since then I've grown steadily more radical until May 12th, 2007 when I became a market anarchist.
Pro Christo et Libertate integre!
Huh, seems like their was a lot of libertarian conversions about a year ago. Pretty neat.
mr_anonymous: Huh, seems like their was a lot of libertarian conversions about a year ago. Pretty neat.
While I still maintain that a Ron Paul Presidency would be a bad thing in the long run, it is quite clear that he has influenced many thousands of people toward the Austrian economics. A serendipitous result of his candidacy is that there are now more market anarchists than ever before. That, I think, is the only purpose of a political wing to a libertarian movement - getting the word out. Not to sieze the reins of the state.
MacFall: While I still maintain that a Ron Paul Presidency would be a bad thing in the long run, it is quite clear that he has influenced many thousands of people toward the Austrian economics. A serendipitous result of his candidacy is that there are now more market anarchists than ever before. That, I think, is the only purpose of a political wing to a libertarian movement - getting the word out. Not to sieze the reins of the state.
I agree. He has really helped in getting the austrian beliefs out.
The crucial moment, for me, came late '06 & 07, when I eventually discovered RP after swearing off voting for democrats & being in political limbo. Seeing him in the debates sealed the deal, more or less.
I definitley agree that the only real useful political means that libertarians could serve in mainstream politics is education & spreading the word, as, without them (and the communities & political thought they showed the door to), I might not be where I am today, and probably would be an Obama-bot right now. I went from being a soft-paternalist, then civil libertarian, after that, a vulgar libertarian (minarchist, for the past 2), & currently: an apolitical libertarian, w/ market-anarchist, objectivist (very mild; only just starting the virtue of selfishness), & technorealist (douglas rushkoff, howard bloom. e,tc.) influences. Yeah, it's been an interesting 1 1/2 almost 2 years.
"Look at me, I'm quoting another user to show how wrong I think they are, out of arrogance of my own position. Wait, this is my own quote, oh shi-" ~ Nitroadict
mr_anonymous:I agree. He has really helped in getting the austrian beliefs out.
Can someone be an anarcho-capitalist and not an Austrian?
Doesn't the Austrian school imply utilitarianism?
Don't allow leftists to play games with definitions! Some of the libertarian-leaning leftists at this forum will try to redefine "left-wing" back to its original defition (Third Estate, limited government, free-markets, laissez-faire reforms, etc.). Fine! We non-leftists can't stop them from using their own personal definitions; they can use whatever labels they want to describe any concept they want.However, they have the audacity to then use their personal definition of "left-wing" (remember, the original definition, which is no longer valid) to prove that modern leftists are more libertarian than modern rightists! They will say that libertarianism is "inherently leftist" (again, using the original, no longer valid definition), and use that to insist that we should prefer and side with modern leftists over modern rightists.
Question their motives.
From my knowledge, I don't think it implies utilitarianism per se, although I remember reading recently on the forums that Mises had a utilitarian streak to him, but Rothbard wasn't utilitarian by any means, and employed the austrian school, methinks. As for being anarcho-capitalist but not utilizing the austrian school, I wouldn't think you'd be able to be neo-classical & anarcho-capitalist at the same time. I'm not too well informed of other competitng schools aside from keyes, neo-classical & classical, and austrian, though.
No, utilitarianism implies that the end justifies the means, which conflicts with the non-coercive philosophy of the Austrian school.
Yes, but Austrians seem to be non-coercive because it's what works best.
Utilitarianism also violates the principle of methodological individualism since by definition it's concerned with maximizing the happiness of all (justifying offences against individuals on the grounds that "society" is allegedly better off).
You're right, I phrased that poorly; I guess I was trying to say that Austrians don't seem concerned with natural rights.
Keep in mind that I'm too lazy to read about anything, so I'm probably wrong! I didn't even know that anarcho-capitalism had a name until found it by accident on Wikipedia. It was reassuring to find that I wasn't the only one... I thought everyone was in favor of taxes!
I know I have written that I am a minarchist flirting with anarcho-capitalism, but to be honest this forum has given me a lot of new perspectives in the last week or so.
I think ultimately, I might settle in as a Radical Marxist Capitalist Objectivist, or a New Right Libertarian Quasi-Fundamentalist.
Or maybe I'm just kidding myself and I am a Rothbardian Misesian Hayekian Sapien.
liberty student: I know I have written that I am a minarchist flirting with anarcho-capitalism, but to be honest this forum has given me a lot of new perspectives in the last week or so. I think ultimately, I might settle in as a Radical Marxist Capitalist Objectivist, or a New Right Libertarian Quasi-Fundamentalist. Or maybe I'm just kidding myself and I am a Rothbardian Misesian Hayekian Sapien.
Ego: Doesn't the Austrian school imply utilitarianism?
No, it vindicates (natural rights) morality as the supreme form of rationalism.
BWF89: Can someone be an anarcho-capitalist and not an Austrian?
Sure you can, neoclassical an-caps such as Bryan Caplan or David Friedman do exist. It's pretty funny though, to see how they argue for an-capitalism with all those indifference curves, equilibrium maximalisation of utility and stuff like that :)
JonBostwick:No, it vindicates (natural rights) morality as the supreme form of rationalism.
Why should a theory of positive economics imply any moral theory, persay?
It doesn't. Austrian Economics is adhered to by persons ranging from anarcho-capitalist to centre-right conservatives. The Austrian School does have its own political economy/philosophy, though, which is decidedly libertarian, and flows in the natural rights direction.
-Jon
All my life. In between I thought I was a christian fundamentalist, zionist, socialist, liberal, statist, pot smoker, sexist ...[put your favorite ..ist in here]
What I want to say with this is, that you find new concepts on your way through life and all of them seem to be kind of attractive and make sense, on the first glance, but basically you find in all of them some contradiction that thrusts you toward another system. This is called life and learning i suppose. Until you start asking one simple question "qui bono", hence the question is simple but the answer might be very hard to catch.
In the begining there was nothing, and it exploded.
Terry Pratchett (on the big bang theory)
I became pro free-market about three years ago. Right now I am a minarchist.
At most, I think only 5% of the adult population would need to stop cooperating to have real change.
I read Ayn Rand back when I was 15 in high school. I wasen't in the honors class but the same teacher taught both honors AP and the regular college prep classes. She new my political views and my personal views on religion, egoism and such. I had yet to find a philosophy/philosopher that reall spoke to me other than Aristotle. She recommended I read The Fountainhead, the book she was giving the honors students to read. I read it, loved it and picked up everything she wrote. I then discovered the Austrian School when I was about 18 or so, same with Milton Friedman. I go to DC every year for the Model NATO conference in which I participate. I mainly go so I can attend speeches and conferences at the Cato Institute. So I've been libertarian/pro-free market since I was about 15 or 16. I'm 22 now.
Aristotle100:I mainly go so I can attend speeches and conferences at the Cato Institute.
Cato Institute conferences?!? Nurse, get this man 1 week of Mises U., stat!
I have been more or less a libertarian for my entire life interested in policy. However, I hadn't really gone into the depths of libertarian thought (i.e. Austrianism, anarcho-capitalism, etc.) until the past year.
Philosophically, I've been a libertarian since about the time I took my first course in Microeconomics at GMU, which was heavily Austrian. Politically, I've been a libertarian since about a year and a half ago when I learned that there were more political choices possible than just "Republican or Democrat", even though I really couldn't tell the difference between the two. I learned about the LvMI about the same time, amongst other things, and started poking around looking at articles and stuff. Got really hooked into it over the summer and fall.
I first discovered libertarianism back in 1990. That's when I read Ayn Rand's "For The New Intellectual". I went Ancap around '97 or '98.
lol I agree and I would love to go to Mises. However I don't go down south almost ever and I have a guaranteed trip to DC every year and Cato is all I have. Don't get me wrong though I know damn well Mises kicks Cato's ass.