Political Theory

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

Wheylous — Thu, 01 Sep 2011 16:43:41 GMT

That is a very very dangerous road, my friend.

That is true. I shall look into those these days.

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

John James — Thu, 01 Sep 2011 11:50:29 GMT

Wheylous:

What do you base the NAP on, if not property rights?

Common sense?

That is a very very dangerous road, my friend.

But besides that, I am not well-read enough on property rights to tell you whether I agree with you or not.

You should look into it. While there are plenty of objections to Hoppe's argumentation ethics, it offers a pretty decent foundation...See here.

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

Wheylous — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 23:25:02 GMT

What do you base the NAP on, if not property rights?

Common sense? But besides that, I am not well-read enough on property rights to tell you whether I agree with you or not.

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

James — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 19:55:29 GMT

The thing is that the NAP isn't well qualified, as it includes aggression against property rights, which some people don't completely believe in. So you can believe in NAP and the state... as long as you don't believe in firm property rights.

What do you base the NAP on, if not property rights?

All rights are property rights, or derivatives of property rights. Ownership is the ultimate, unlimited real right from which any other kind of right under law must logically derive. All rights concern the legitimate expectation, under law, of the authority to dispose of scarce resources. One's body is a scarce resource, hence a legitimate expectation under law that you won't have your body assaulted or imprisoned must either come from a property right you have in your own body, or a personal right granted against someone else's property right in you.

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

Neodoxy — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:22:45 GMT

Wow, I guess that voluntary collective action doesn't exist...

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

Wheylous — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:15:28 GMT

The thing is that the NAP isn't well qualified, as it includes aggression against property rights, which some people don't completely believe in. So you can believe in NAP and the state... as long as you don't believe in firm property rights.

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

James — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 13:54:53 GMT

This feels somewhat like bringing an AT-AT to a destruction derby, but how about this: http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-i-am-not-libertarian.html

Uh... I think the non-aggression principle is really the lynchpin of libertarian thought. If you respect the NAP, you are libertarian. If you don't, you are in favour of the state, regardless of how you want to structure it, justify it, and euphemistically refer to it.

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

Smiling Dave — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 12:22:13 GMT

Praetyre:

This feels somewhat like bringing an AT-AT to a destruction derby, but how about this: http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-i-am-not-libertarian.html

Meh.

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

Praetyre — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 10:03:29 GMT

This feels somewhat like bringing an AT-AT to a destruction derby, but how about this: http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-i-am-not-libertarian.html

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

ZimAnarchy — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 07:57:39 GMT

Statists never fail to underwhelm me with their "critiques" of Libertarianism. Jesus guys, I'm begging for a decent rebuttal.

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

Wheylous — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 05:42:09 GMT

All a government does is make a claim that says people should obey them; nothing more, nothing less.

What less could it want? :P

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

Eric080 — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 04:57:49 GMT

That's absolutely ridiculous to say that you need government to demarcate property. All a government does is make a claim that says people should obey them; nothing more, nothing less. People need to get away from the idea that if the government says something, it somehow gets this magical property of being "official." They are just people acting in the same fashion as you or me.

His point about property being a "social" phenomena isn't actually a bad point, he just draws the incorrect conclusion from it. Of course if the relevant subjects around you don't believe in property the way you do, they can take it from you with an air of legitimacy. If nobody around me thinks I own my computer, they can take it by sheer force or threat of force. But this is all beside the point as this is a descriptive and not a normative definition of what property is.

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

Wheylous — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 04:28:00 GMT

Yeah, that's what caused my "corporation" question.

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

John James — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 04:26:09 GMT

Here's the Molyneux video:

(Please visit the site to view this media)

Re: A wonderful debunking of libertarian ideology

John James — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 04:01:58 GMT

Thanks for the summary :) You've saved me at least 10 minutes of life.

"6. In fact, right now no one can even get a job, because all capital goods are owned. That's why we have high unemployment."

hmm...this sounds vaguely familiar...