Political Theory

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

Stephanie Bond — Wed, 13 May 2009 14:10:03 GMT

Cork:

Without a doubt, the legal system/courts. Just do a search on the topic here and you can see no one seems to agree with each other. It was my hang up on becoming a full ancap for years.

Agreed, the ancap legal system is kind of hazy and theoretical. Easy for a minarchist to attack.

But dammit, minarchism is just too boring. Lacks any edginess at all.

Edginess?

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

Charles Anthony — Wed, 13 May 2009 12:18:18 GMT

In our current state of affairs, I believe that libertarians should treadly lightly on the "open borders" debate because we do not have true sovereignty over their own land -- the government does. So, both sides of the debate are equally correct (or wrong, depending on how you want to look at it) -- while will live under government.

Effectively, we libertarians are answering the question: "What should government be doing with the borders?" We will invariably get into a trap no matter what our answer is.

Personally, I am all for open borders. If you want the benefits of living along a coast, you deal with its protection.

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

Thedesolateone — Wed, 13 May 2009 11:34:28 GMT

GilesStratton:

It's a shame that doesn't follow, otherwise you'd be correct.

It does.

The poor do benefit from an increase in the supply of labour.

Individual people may not benefit, but in general "the poor" do. Of course, we're talking "open borders" in the libertarian sense - i.e. they have to actually be invited onto the property they're coming onto.

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

hayekianxyz — Wed, 13 May 2009 09:36:08 GMT

It's a shame that doesn't follow, otherwise you'd be correct.

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

Consultant — Wed, 13 May 2009 01:09:35 GMT

Byzantine:

Can you articulate to the working class why open borders that increase the supply of working class labor is in their best interest?

Taking the argument of closed borders to its logical conclusions, why don't the people that believe in it stop trading with everybody that is poorer than them?

Surely they are better of buying their stuff, and that's most of what poor people buy, from people that make at least as much as them.

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

wombatron — Sat, 09 May 2009 03:18:03 GMT

Vichy:

lol, congratulations you found a link between me and my ex-roomate.

*singing* It's a small world after all!

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

Vichy — Sat, 09 May 2009 02:19:44 GMT

How does one do that ? I only use the plain text editor and add all tags myself. I'm guessing that the html editor has some built-in quoting styles or something ?

You can do a regular quote-tag (or use a quote button), the indentation/italics style is more akin to a journal or article.

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

Josiah Schmidt — Sat, 09 May 2009 02:19:36 GMT

Juan:
Thedesolateone:
I think the way they quoted was a dead giveaway - so distinctive.
Wait. That's true. Indented italics. How does one do that ? I only use the plain text editor and add all tags myself. I'm guessing that the html editor has some built-in quoting styles or something ?

Yup.

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

Juan — Sat, 09 May 2009 02:05:11 GMT

Thedesolateone:
I think the way they quoted was a dead giveaway - so distinctive.

Wait. That's true. Indented italics. How does one do that ? I only use the plain text editor and add all tags myself. I'm guessing that the html editor has some built-in quoting styles or something ?

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

Vichy — Sat, 09 May 2009 01:47:09 GMT

lol, congratulations you found a link between me and my ex-roomate.

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

Thedesolateone — Sat, 09 May 2009 01:24:02 GMT

Juan:
GilesStratton:
Anybody else see the similarity between this poster and a certain other, here too,
Both are self-described 'amoralists' - that's all. Thinking they are the same person is unwarranted IMO. Besides Moore was sympathetic to free markets.

I think the way they quoted was a dead giveaway - so distinctive.

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

Angurse — Fri, 08 May 2009 19:38:40 GMT

Brainpolice:
I would say "self-ownership" - precisely because it cannot be defended, since it's false.

Meaning "self-ownership" is misleading or false because people don't have individual sovereignty ?

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

Spideynw — Fri, 08 May 2009 19:33:14 GMT

liberty student:

Spideynw:
I do not know about strongest, but I would definitely agree that it is the weakest. Ron Paul believes in immigration laws. Lew Rockwell thinks nuclear proliferation is bad. Judge Napolitano believes in the Constitution.

Those are value judgments. Of course different people have different opinions and values.

Has Lew proposed that force be used against people who develop nuclear weapons? Is Ron Paul's immigration stance just a populist spin on property rights? I can't address the Constitution. Those who want to follow it, should. But it has no authority as a social contract upon others.

I am just saying that the "leaders" of libertarianism do not even agree on the issues, let alone the rest of us.

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

Juan — Fri, 08 May 2009 18:34:43 GMT

GilesStratton:
Anybody else see the similarity between this poster and a certain other, here too,

Both are self-described 'amoralists' - that's all. Thinking they are the same person is unwarranted IMO. Besides Moore was sympathetic to free markets.

Re: Weakest aspect of libertarianism?

liberty student — Fri, 08 May 2009 17:38:52 GMT

Spideynw:
I do not know about strongest, but I would definitely agree that it is the weakest. Ron Paul believes in immigration laws. Lew Rockwell thinks nuclear proliferation is bad. Judge Napolitano believes in the Constitution.

Those are value judgments. Of course different people have different opinions and values.

Has Lew proposed that force be used against people who develop nuclear weapons? Is Ron Paul's immigration stance just a populist spin on property rights? I can't address the Constitution. Those who want to follow it, should. But it has no authority as a social contract upon others.