• Congratulations to the Class of 2024 on your results!
    Let us know how you went here
    Got a question about your uni preferences? Ask us here
SylviaB

SylviaB

Just Bee Yourself 🐝 From Lidcombe
Joined
Last seen
Viewing page Home
Messages
6,909
Reaction score
2,348
Points
113

Profile posts Latest activity Postings About

  • S
    Maybe i just have teenaged depression then and dont want to do anything
    S
    i read ron paul's book in 2008, before the teaparty movement picked up to what it is

    i started reading for a new liberty but never finished it.
    S
    are there any examples of anti state politicians?
    S
    I dont' know anything about ethics, no.

    Do you think Thatcher was anti state?
    S
    "
    But this doesn't mean that "oh well we'll never be stateless so we might as well get people to be minimal statists", because even if you convince them, they'll still feel comfortable with some state existing, and as long as some state exists it will always grow into more state."

    I agree with this point, it probably lies in the cultural values of the people to keep this freedom. Liberty exists moreso in the attitudes and cultural beliefs of the people than it does through elaborate constitutions. We need only look at the constitutions of Russia and Zimbabwe to see this.

    The most we can hope for in our current day and age is a conviction politician that questions the legitimacy of their government to reform spending and change attitudes despite them being unpopular; instead of banning small pork barrel projects while implementing widespread structural reforms that pale in comparison and set ourselves up for an entitlement system we cannot manage.
    S
    As for not justifying myself as a deontological libertarian, liberal philosophy tells us that the core components of state action are life, liberty and property and any action beyond this is moralistic and abritrary. Thus, i don't need to create arguments over which government action provides more liberty because it's already been spelt out which does or doesn't.

    A consequentialist libertarian would say that government funded healthcare is necessary becauase it results in a net increase in freedom whereas a deontological person would say it violates the right for someone to keep their property so the additional arguments regarded the freedom of those to live longer are erroneous.
    S
    while i agree that democracy isnt a central tenet of liberalism (after all limited government does away with the ability of one group to vote themselves free - or another into slavery for that matter), it does play a role in helping us reform our government when those boundaries HAVE in fact been crossed, which they will inevitably always be at some point.
    S
    I don't intend on having you support all of my views and the particular brand of libertarianism i believe in, but telling me my rationale is a load of shit is just your opinion.

    Are there any examples of anarcho capitalist societies ? Social organisation before the state was basically the organisation of the catholic church and religious groups fighting each other.

    Do you think we'll ever reach a post-state world? If we do i suspect it would be the turning of the world into a group of trading blocks, not moving the other way
    S
    I believe in deontological as opposed to consequential becuause our rights are self evident

    i dont need to justify myself like consequentialists do.
    S
    My whole point was that if you look at the emergence of authority from a sociopolitical point of view, in the beginning:
    1. state of nature
    2. group becomes powerful
    3. They become a private police force/military/whatever
    4. They then consolidate and become the government

    I don't see why this consolidation of power and authority is any less likely to occur in an anarchist government than a minarchist one. At least in a democracy we can overthrow our leaders and elect new ones when they centralise their power too much - which is what the US should do.

    I mean look at what thatcher did when she took on the unions and the special interests in their government, if we have the temerity we can refresh the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants and patriots even if it means we'll endure high interest rates and unemployment in the short term - and people will actually vote for it.
    S
    Im not a full on anarcho capitalist.

    I am a deontological libertarian.
    I am also a minarchist libertarian.

    To me, the quasi marketisation of what are essentially the pillars of civilisation (the military, the police, an independent judiciary) is retarded. These institutions are better served by the englightened ideals that put limited government into the constitution, and a bill of individual rights in the independent judiciary than some kind of bullshit market.

    After all, these government monopolies obviously emerged from a state of anarchy in the state of nature, so i don't see how reverting back to that is somehow more free.
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
Top