Ya that was one of Molyneux's worst debates, I don't know what he was thinking the whole time.
Oddly enough, I've never checked out anything by David Friedman. I'll have to get into his stuff when I'm through with Dawkins and all the evolution stuff.
Could you explain what you mean here?
Sure. I was saying that I'm opposed to people running for office with the goal of limiting government, and based on the principle that limited government is valuable and a desirable end. But I'm not necessarily opposed to people running for office with the express intention of dismantling government based on the principles that government is wrong, impractical, and uneconomic—in other words reducing government as a means toward the end of abolishing it. I don't claim to think anyone like that would get elected, but I won't support anyone on other grounds.
I'm gonna get into Friedman next with reservations, starting with Machinery of Freedom. He's kinda positioned himself as the counterpoint to Rothbardian libertarianism. But, Chicago school and utilitarian ethics...? Doubt he can convince me into those camps.
I don't claim to think anyone like that would get elected,
@ Hashem
As I said, would it not be fraud to state that you will defend the Constitution when you have anarchist intentions at heart?
Check out this video to determine whether or not you'd like to go further by reading The Machinery of Freedom.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2YfgKOnYx5A
How in the hell do you post a video on here? The typical embed doesn't work. The type of embed YouTube wants you to use doesn't work. Posting the regular URL doesn't work. How does one do it?!
square-bracket
view:
space
full youtube link
close bracket.
Hit 'quote' on this post and you can see how I've setup this video:
@ Hashem - What if their express purpose is reducing government? Also, do you like the Anarchist politician who does nothing for you, and has no audience with which to spread his ideas? Or the Minarchist politician who manages to reduce government and gains an audience to which he preaches truth?
The Anarch is to the Anarchist what the Monarch is to the Monarchist. -Ernst Jünger
I don't like the idea of political activism, so I'd point out the false dichotomy. I respect people who build talent at expressing ideas in socially acceptable ways about the value of mutually voluntary exchange to people they can actually influence—friends, cooworkers, family, people they meet at various events, people within online communities. In that regard, I look up to Stefan Molyneux. He's spot on with the idea that you shouldn't back politicians but you should influence the people in your sphere, and more importantly he's outwardly a fine example of the kind of language and posture required to present sophisticated, outrageous ideas about peace to normal people. You could call me a decentralist in that context, that is, I support the idea of everyone acting in his own self interest over the idea that everyone should try to back one superhero who necessarily has to water his message down to some common denominator.
If someone's express purpose is to reduce government, great, so long as he doesn't blab about how such a goal is synonymous with liberty. I don't support minarchist politicians. As Molyneux has pointed out, small governments are the worst—and that's not even to mention the twisted ideology that such rhetoric plants in the minds of otherwise critically thinking people, the idea that limited government is a positive value.
Okay, thank you!
hashem, watch this video to decide whether or not you want to go further into David Friedman's works.
I'm not against political action if you use your own money for that. But living at the expense of the tax payers I think should be problematic for libertarians.