Libertarian Thread #2: We Shall Never Die!

I think the best thing to do is just to eliminate all taxes and let magical fairies take care of everything.

The T wrote: ^Just by reading, thinking, analyzing, introspectionizing (r) and discussing with people could I liberate myself from the stronghold of the blanket idea of the Mommy State. Only through that will I discover and see if I can really view full privatization of everything as doable in reality (including future, evolutionary reality), though I already agree it is desirable.

I was just joking of course. If you read those articles, you should at least become interested in seriously considering the idea. After that you may or may not deduce that it is possible. The articles should clear up some conceptual stuff and give some nice justifications. The Rothbard article was key to my progress.

This is quite kindergarten economics 101 but: any tax in a competitive market brings prices for sellers down (who will then offer less product), prices for buyers up (who will then demand less product) and quantities moved around altogether down. Nobody benefits with taxes in a market but third persons not in the market. Am I wrong in seeing something incorrect here or is this over-simplifying something than has much more implications? 

"The basic principle which leads a libertarian from statism to his free society is the same which the founders of libertarianism used to discover the theory itself. That principle is consistency. Thus, the consistent application of the theory of libertarianism to every action the individual libertarian takes creates the libertarian society. 
    Many thinkers have expressed the need for consistency between means and ends and not all were libertarians. Ironically, many statists have claimed inconsistency between laudable ends and contemptible means; yet when their true ends of greater power and oppression were understood, their means are found to be quite consistent. It is part of the statist mystique to confuse the necessity of ends-means consistency; it is thus the most crucial activity of the libertarian theorist to expose inconsistencies."

Edited by The T - February 09 2011 at 13:01

The T wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: The T wrote: Pat do you agree with the evolutionary view of Anarcho-capitalism? I frankly find it to be very reasonable one...  Yes. In fact, if it were a revolutionary one, I'm not so sure that it would work. I always talk about gradually changing the system. I do think some monumental event will probably spur the primary impetus towards freedom. I think Anarcho-capitalism is desirable. From a "I wish this to be the reality of my world" perspective, I would like it to be an anarcho-capitalist society of total freedom and private contracts forged by individual interests which in the end would lead to a "common good" (this is just previsible, not really a necessity). But it's quite impossible for it to just "happen". Only a gradual liberation in all fronts can eventually lead to the final changes: those having to do with private police, courts, and roads, and the eventual end of the state.  In a different way (not forced, not brought about by a guiding hand or group) but just as uni-directional, just like Marx and Engels theorized socialism to be the path towards communism (in a way they were right, they just failed to foresee the atrocious consequences -or they actually liked them), it's logical that libertarianism will end, finally, non-utopically (new word), and with no need for a tyrant hand, in anarcho-capitalism. Provided capitalism is protected throughout the entire process (which is obvious if libertarianism eventually becomes reality).

Then why aren't you an anarchist? Join the dark/lunatic side with me.


Edited by Equality 7-2521 - February 09 2011 at 12:46

The T wrote: Pat do you agree with the evolutionary view of Anarcho-capitalism? I frankly find it to be very reasonable one...

Yes. In fact, if it were a revolutionary one, I'm not so sure that it would work. I always talk about gradually changing the system. I do think some monumental event will probably spur the primary impetus towards freedom.

Pat do you agree with the evolutionary view of Anarcho-capitalism? I frankly find it to be very reasonable one... 

It was my boy Russ Feingold, a Progressive Dem, who was the only senator to vote against the Patriot Act originally 

The T wrote: Damn, this is a simple yet informative brief explanation of anarcho-capitalism. Of course I'll do a larger study and I'll read Rothbard and others, but I can say I'm not leaning away but towards that direction... Btw, how can there be something called "anarcho-communism" or "anarcho-syndicalism"? If the economy is controlled (as it should be if we are to implement communism or syndicalism -whatever this last one means in this context-), the it's not anarchy, since some group would have to be making the decisions, thus needing power to make them and enforce them, thus creating a state again. Am I wrong?

Read the two excerpts, Rothbard - Police, Law and the Courts, David Friedman - The Machinery of Freedom: Guide to Radical Capitalism. Together they probably total 50 pages and are great introductions.

Anarcho-Communism can exist I think. I think the major problems come with it's universal existence. Obviously sects of willing people can form communities where goods are completely public. The problem comes when you want an entire country, or region of land, to behave this way. This will require the use of force to bring it about then, otherwise known as a government, which will of course grow in power and impede the system from ever emerging.

There tends to be a problem of what I guess you could call free-riders too. That is, you can't morally prohibit a private property person such as I, from walking onto your land and wanting food or to build a shed there. Of course, anarcho-communists tend to abhor private property and seek for the elimination of it. So a peaceful coexistence with people of differing beliefs probably wouldn't be possible.

Will the most blatantly unconstitutional parts of the Patriot Act finally expire? Maybe!