Political Theory

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

John Ess — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 17:20:44 GMT

I don't know anyone with a worse reputation than the Koch brothers. Most people seem to have an aversion to them. So Cato Institute is pretty much promoting the idea that libertarianism is a form of class warfare. It's a double standard that George Soros doesn't have this reputation, except with conservatives, but there you go. It's a whole other type of bad PR than what you get from hacks like Bob Barr and Wayne Allen Root.

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

Autolykos — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 15:46:17 GMT

Ricky James Moore II:
Well, I am a social rationalist, as Mises was, I just believe that most people have no coherent ideas; thus they tend to go with whatever they see other people doing.

Good to have you back, Edmund Carlyle.

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

Ricky James Moore II — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 06:37:12 GMT

Not to step on Esuric's turf (this is usually something he says... and he's absolutely right), but read Prices & Production.

I have. Easily the best work by Hayek I have read. His work on the pricing process has nothing significantly objectionable, and I will certainly give him that. As an economist he has merit, it is as a philosopher and social thinker that he goes awry.

Naturally, this weakest points are what Hayek concentrated on for the entire latter part of his career. Chalk one up for the law of Rothbard.

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

Jonathan M. F. Catalán — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 06:35:49 GMT

Not to step on Esuric's turf (this is usually something he says... and he's absolutely right), but read Prices & Production.

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

Ricky James Moore II — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 06:32:34 GMT

How are these two ideas compatible?

'Spontaneous order' is uselessly vague. Government is a spontaneous order.

Still, I am not saying Hayek was wrong on everything. I just don't find anything in him that isn't found elsewhere, better articulated and followed through.

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

AdrianHealey — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 06:20:28 GMT

Ricky James Moore II:

Kind of ironic that you make a Hayekian point contra the Misesian/Rothbardian view.

Well, I am a social rationalist, as Mises was, I just believe that most people have no coherent ideas; thus they tend to go with whatever they see other people doing.

How are these two ideas compatible?

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

Ricky James Moore II — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 05:58:54 GMT

Kind of ironic that you make a Hayekian point contra the Misesian/Rothbardian view.

Well, I am a social rationalist, as Mises was, I just believe that most people have no coherent ideas; thus they tend to go with whatever they see other people doing.

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

AdrianHealey — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 05:53:39 GMT

Ricky James Moore II:

Five centuries ago people were generally slaveholders. I think there is such a thing as an "evolution in the consciousness of freedom".

And its devolution. I believe that free societies depend more on general habits than on ideology. Europe was free because no Empire arose in its place, Iceland was freer because there Germanic tribal law was the only recognized authority. In neither case did individuals read the works of Rothbard or even Epicurus; and if they had they probably would have been apalled, even if their actions confirmed the theory.

Kind of ironic that you make a Hayekian point contra the Misesian/Rothbardian view.

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

Ricky James Moore II — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 04:20:16 GMT

Five centuries ago people were generally slaveholders. I think there is such a thing as an "evolution in the consciousness of freedom".

And its devolution. I believe that free societies depend more on general habits than on ideology. Europe was free because no Empire arose in its place, Iceland was freer because there Germanic tribal law was the only recognized authority. In neither case did individuals read the works of Rothbard or even Epicurus; and if they had they probably would have been apalled, even if their actions confirmed the theory.

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

EmperorNero — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 04:15:19 GMT

This is not about strategy, this is about using words in a meaningful way.

You are absolutely correct about that of course.

Also, 'pragmatism' accomplishes nothing. Nothing will give us a libertarian society because people are genetically socialists.

Five centuries ago people were generally slaveholders. I think there is such a thing as an "evolution in the consciousness of freedom".

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

EconomistInTraining — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 04:09:25 GMT

I only have one thing to add to this discussion, I think Tyler Cowen is totally awesome and that he's extremely intelligent and very often insightful. SometimesI wish Tyler Cowen were my next door neighbour, so I could go over pretending to borrow his lawnmower only to get into a deep discussion about whatever interested me.

I think if people were more like Tyler Cowen the world would be a far better place. That is all.

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

Ricky James Moore II — Tue, 08 Feb 2011 04:10:56 GMT

One of the things that annoys me about libertarians is that they are unwilling to be pragmatic.

Will you people stop arguing with a straw man? This is not about strategy, this is about using words in a meaningful way.

Also, 'pragmatism' accomplishes nothing. Nothing will give us a libertarian society because people are genetically socialists.

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

Bardock — Mon, 07 Feb 2011 17:45:38 GMT

"Btw, I believe David Boaz is an anarcho-capitalist. I know for certain that Tom Palmer is an anarcho-capitalist. In fact, a large percentage of the Cato Institute's upper executives are anarcho-capitalists."

He's either an anarcho-capitalist, or in the same school of thought as Ayn Rand and her followers who believe that government should be run on voluntary donations. Boaz does oppose all forms of taxation.

As you stated Tom Palmer is an anarchist, and Jason Kuznicki is probably one as well. He believes that anarcho-capitalism can work, but rather focus on short term goals than worry about the end game.

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

mikachusetts — Mon, 07 Feb 2011 17:31:52 GMT

DD5:
We can also celebrate the fact that anyone can redefine 'slavery' as 'freedom' and 'coercion' as 'voluntary', but what shall we do when this anyone supports action that enslaves and coerces us in the name of his redefined 'freedom' and 'voluntarism'?

The attitude in the OP is very very healthy! You just wish this was an argument over semantic freedom. Wishful thinking.

Look, I essentially agree with the OP that beltway libertarians are not libertarians so far as I apply the term and understand its meaning. My issue was with the attitude (that you call healthy) which says "Where do these people get off calling themselves libertarians" and can be translated into "where do these people get off acting in a voluntary manner which I disagree with." I'm not so sure where I even stand on this issue, I was mostly throwing out ideas that I thought were interesting.

Re: Where Do These People Get Off Calling Themselves Libertarians?

Jonathan M. F. Catalán — Mon, 07 Feb 2011 16:45:59 GMT

Btw, I believe David Boaz is an anarcho-capitalist. I know for certain that Tom Palmer is an anarcho-capitalist. In fact, a large percentage of the Cato Institute's upper executives are anarcho-capitalists.