/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
|
|
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 1213141516 294> |
| Author | ||
rogerthat 
Prog Reviewer 
Joined: September 03 2006 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 9869 |
 Posted: June 16 2014 at 19:21 |
|
|
I want to ask those who have studied Hayek's work whether this is a valid take on his theories, that he dealt with mal-investment rather than oversupply.
|
||
 |
||
|
Toaster Mantis
Forum Senior Member 
Joined: April 12 2008 Location: Denmark Status: Offline Points: 5898 |
Posted: June 07 2014 at 15:16 |
|
|
Nope, I think if it actually was Nozick himself who wrote that it would have been linked more extensively.
|
||
|
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
|
||
|
||
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Tallahassee, FL Status: Offline Points: 34550 |
Posted: June 07 2014 at 14:28 |
|
|
Hmm maybe on Monday when I am done studying I'll give it a read. Is it difficult? Ya know how those Harvard types are
 I once tried Rawls' book and honestly couldn't comprehend any of it...a blurb from the internet summarized the main point well enough! Edit: Oops! I thought this was by Nozick, the dangers of skim reading... I will certainly give it a read once I can dedicate some time. Edited by JJLehto - June 07 2014 at 14:29 |
||
|
||
|
Toaster Mantis
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 12 2008 Location: Denmark Status: Offline Points: 5898 |
Posted: June 07 2014 at 13:39 |
|
|
One of my favourite philosophical bloggers, Scott Alexander of Slate Star Codex, has posted a lengthy essay where he examines Robert Nozick's libertarian utopia in some rather odd directions. (the "Moldbug" and "Ozy" referred to are pseudonyms of bloggers with their own eccentric political philosophies)
Thought people here in this thread would find it worth reading. |
||
|
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
|
||
|
||
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Tallahassee, FL Status: Offline Points: 34550 |
Posted: May 23 2014 at 15:24 |
|
|
Well, not much else can be said. That is pretty much the core of it.
|
||
|
||
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005 Location: Philly Status: Offline Points: 15783 |
Posted: May 23 2014 at 11:16 |
|
|
I understand the want for a modern example, but I have two problems with this in practice:
1) The lack of an example is equated to a situation where a controlled experiment to produce one was attempted and failed. This is clearly not the case so the lack of a modern example really means nothing other than no nation currently organizes itself this way, a situation itself also colored by the way we define nation. 2) All examples must be governmental. There are plenty examples of self-organization on a large scale interacting with law and the enforcement of law, but they exist contained regions ruled by a government or as international associations whose groups are all ruled by a government. |
||
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
||
|
||
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Tallahassee, FL Status: Offline Points: 34550 |
Posted: May 23 2014 at 10:29 |
|
Totally fair. Though I'm sure you get the intent, which is that it would need to be a relevant example. The late 19th century US for example, it is still at least comparable and fairly modern but when you have to reach that far back... hard to take it as a legitimate response. You are right though, there are examples and if you want to say "there are none!" prepare to be bested. Related, I'm not sure if it's actually him but I think it was....David D Friedman actually commented on my Amazon review of "The Machinery of Freedom" and specifically my calling out his example of medieval Iceland, so I learned my lesson then  That too Teo, no one cares
 I was intrigued by Iceland and their not bailing out of their banks/political protests after the recession and I really had to dig to find good info. They are tiny and not "important" so no one cared about their intriguing battle with intl courts (they won btw) about not bailing out some big banks, and how the people peacefully up rooted their government. Edited by JJLehto - May 23 2014 at 10:31 |
||
|
||
|
The T
Special Collaborator 
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: May 23 2014 at 09:25 |
|
|
That is correct, but and that's why I jokingly said that, for political purposes, libertarians would do well not to use these examples as reference.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005 Location: Philly Status: Offline Points: 15783 |
Posted: May 23 2014 at 09:20 |
|
|
I think people misunderstand the point of the reference. Critics will say: The idea isn't possible in principle. You have a counterexample to show that this is false. It's not to say that the same system could be imported to the present day.
|
||
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
||
|
||
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: May 23 2014 at 09:16 |
|
|
Also, if even today Iceland is not precisely threatening China or India for the title of largest population on Earth, how many inhabitants could it have had in medieval times?
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Tallahassee, FL Status: Offline Points: 34550 |
Posted: May 23 2014 at 07:39 |
|
|
Medieval Iceland is an example I've heard put out before, I know David Friedman was one, and sorry...not that it invalidates their discussion but like I said with the going back and back...when you have to pull out Medieval Iceland as an example for your views, and how we can do this for 2014 US society I see a bit of an issue
|
||
|
||
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: May 22 2014 at 08:50 |
|
|
Those are some good examples and accurate answers to the
question. Now, for political purposes only, I wouldn’t really use the line “libertarianism
– like in medieval Ireland!” |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005 Location: Philly Status: Offline Points: 15783 |
Posted: May 22 2014 at 08:28 |
|
|
^If I recall it was referred to as Brehon laws and the collection of freemen were called the tuatha.
|
||
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
||
|
||
|
Ambient Hurricanes
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 25 2011 Location: internet Status: Offline Points: 2549 |
Posted: May 22 2014 at 00:46 |
|
Rothbard gives the example of medieval Ireland (before the British conquest) in For a New Liberty; for centuries, Ireland was an anarcho-monarchist society, populated by clans that gave military protection to their members. Despite the presence of quasi-governments, there was no state as we think of it today; membership in a clan (can't remember the specific historical name of the groups) was completely voluntary and you could join (with the consent of the other members) or leave one at any time. Here is a list of some historical libertarian societies. |
||
|
I love dogs, I've always loved dogs
|
||
|
||
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Tallahassee, FL Status: Offline Points: 34550 |
Posted: May 21 2014 at 12:35 |
|
|
Tis true.
Also no doubt there is a very biased view. Capitalism is as little gov as possible, anything more = road to serfdom if not communism already. Any deviation from the ideal is socialism!!! It's just not true. Correct me if I'm wrong but capitalism is just private ownership of property/the means of production. Also supply & demand/the price system running the show. That is the US, and most countries. Sure, the state owns some things, there are taxes and regulations, welfare, but none of that has drifted from capitalism. Nutty thing is I want gov restrained much as we can, and markets to run the show and all, most people do. Libertarians just take it soooooo far. Farther than they may realize just to stick by their point. I'll end with: Friedman beamed about how the dropping of central planning caused economies all over the world to flourish post WWII. Well post WWII was also even more "big gov" than today soooooo conflict here?
Edited by JJLehto - May 21 2014 at 12:37 |
||
|
||
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: May 21 2014 at 12:27 |
|
|
^^Exactly. According to some, the US is fully capitalist. According to others, its capitalism is tainted by government intervention; some even think the US is closer to socialism
 . Imagine trying to find a "real" libertarian example without knowing what "real" is, and as you can see from above, even that hasn't been agreed upon Edited by The T - May 21 2014 at 12:28 |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Tallahassee, FL Status: Offline Points: 34550 |
Posted: May 21 2014 at 12:25 |
|
|
In regards to that article, the tea party is dying now. Last few days all I've seen is how the GOP is "stomping out" or "crushing" the tea party and how they are basically fading.
Which I in my mighty glory predicted years ago It was a GREAT tool for Republicans, they milked that cow dry, but in the end (hey whadya know, what everyone with a brain cell has said) the GOP never actually believed in libertarianism, and after they reached their peak power (absolutely refusing to buckle, shut down the gov if need be) people said "this sucks" and Reps now can't throw the tea party under the bus any faster. I do agree with the general sentiment, it goes back to the "real" discussion. I did the exact same thing: "we just need real free markets!" "we need an actually limited gov" and no matter the counter argument I just went farther back in time, and found more distant counter points still. Eventually I decided, hate me all you want for using the R word, but it just is not realistic. To truly get what many libertarians claim to want, you need to not just go back in time but go FAR and often to areas rarely seen on Earth. And leaving as much as possible to the markets (ie people) is problematic. Some areas (ie finance/banking) HAVE to be regulated. Free markets don't work quite as the textbook says, so I see issues with leaving it all to that model. If you wanna go down the "Well we just need a TRUE free market, and get all gov out so it can function" have at it. I feel dizzy from the perpetual circle of it all!
 Edited by JJLehto - May 21 2014 at 12:26 |
||
|
||
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Tallahassee, FL Status: Offline Points: 34550 |
Posted: May 21 2014 at 12:17 |
|
Right off the bat the question can't really be answered (unless it's of course just an attempt to get someone to casually "admit" their ideas are unrealistic) by your use of real. Has there ever been "real" capitalism or commiunism or socialism? Or real democracy for that matter... Half the time people can't even agree on what the "real" versions are |
||
|
||
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005 Location: Philly Status: Offline Points: 15783 |
Posted: May 21 2014 at 09:46 |
|
|
I don't buy it either unless I'm to also agree that Conservativism and Modern Liberalism are also not political movements. Principles geared towards the organization of society are political. The market strategy of Libertarianism may be different and the meanings of Libertarianism may be more diverse, but I would still call them political.
|
||
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
||
|
||
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: May 21 2014 at 09:00 |
|
|
That might be true, and it probably is. But libertarianism
as a set of principles and as an end can then have no impact on politics
outside of personal decisions, or it runs the risk of becoming… a political
ideology. Libertarianism deals with the organization of society, even if it’s
just by demanding a minimal government. Then it’s politics. Coercion is
immoral, but that’s not just what defines libertarianism, isn’t it (most people
agree coercion is immoral anyway, they just disagree in what coercion is).
There is even a Libertarian Party, which might or might not really represent or
embody libertarian ideas, but it exists, and it’s a political movement. Here I’m not saying libertarianism is right or wrong. I
just don’t buy the “it’s not a political movement, it’s a principle” part.
Because even when it can be said that is not a cohesive and actually organized
movement, it’s still politics, and the principle applies to politics. It has no
other application. As a philosophical current it has little to no weight. I remember saying a while back that libertarianism was a
set of principles, but it really is more than that. |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 1213141516 294> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
"Freedom" thread or something
Topic Options
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
