Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Moral Anarchy
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Moral Anarchy (Read 3266 times)
Crystallas
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2060
Location: R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution
Joined: May 4th, 2011
Re: Moral Anarchy
Reply #40 - Mar 4th, 2013 at 9:29pm
Print Post  
Tom Palven wrote on Mar 4th, 2013 at 9:23pm:
Grin His heart's definitely in the right place, but I'm giving up and posting the sexist remarks that Isabel Paterson was rather cute in her youth in the four top left photos, and the 6th has a cute breast, whoever she is:
http://www.google.com/search?q=isabel+paterson&hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&rlz...


LOL, that's Vashti Cromwell McCollum ("in her youth").

Google's algorithm(actually, every major search engine) matches text with content. When there is no file name(isabel_paterson.jpg) matching the content, it displays results of images based on the media content found within the pre or sub content on a site.

I know nothing about Vashti Cromwell McCollum, and I don't see a reason to based on that site.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Zimobog
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 672
Location: Alaska
Joined: May 31st, 2011
Re: Moral Anarchy
Reply #41 - Mar 5th, 2013 at 12:30am
Print Post  
You know guys, I really learn a lot being here around you all. Since I started here a while back, I listened to an entire Rothbard book on tape cause Bo said I ought to. I bought a book by Block, cause I heard Crystallas mention it.

And today, I found out who Isabel Paterson was.

And I saw a BEWB!!!  Cheesy
  

I'm sure it is, Mr. Lefty Pants. I'll take your word for it.
The libertarian creed rests upon one central axiom: that no man or group of men may aggress against the person or property of anyone else.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Tom Palven
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 1506
Location: North America
Joined: Sep 27th, 2011
Re: Moral Anarchy
Reply #42 - Mar 5th, 2013 at 6:40am
Print Post  
Crystallas wrote on Mar 4th, 2013 at 9:29pm:
LOL, that's Vashti Cromwell McCollum ("in her youth").

Google's algorithm(actually, every major search engine) matches text with content. When there is no file name(isabel_paterson.jpg) matching the content, it displays results of images based on the media content found within the pre or sub content on a site.

I know nothing about Vashti Cromwell McCollum, and I don't see a reason to based on that site.


Vashti Cromwell McCollum was apparently a prominent atheist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vashti_McCollum
She's #5 in the row.  #6 is the one with the cute breast. I didn't find the content you mentioned to identify her.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Crystallas
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2060
Location: R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution
Joined: May 4th, 2011
Re: Moral Anarchy
Reply #43 - Mar 5th, 2013 at 7:11am
Print Post  
Google also caters results to history and locale. We'll get the same results, just in a different order. *shrug*
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Liberalterian
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 3316
Joined: Feb 6th, 2011
Re: Moral Anarchy
Reply #44 - Mar 5th, 2013 at 11:58am
Print Post  
zophos wrote on Feb 26th, 2013 at 3:00pm:
My best defense of the state is that at the very least, a "good" government (one in which all men are equal before the law, there is an element of participation and representation, and essential liberties are guaranteed and more or less respected by the government monopoly on force) is stable and predictable, allowing economic and personal growth to flourish. In other words, the tyranny of the state is restrained and not exercised arbitrarily (is it still tyranny if it's not arbitrary? Perhaps tyranny wasn't the best word - 'control' or 'rule' might be better). Ultimately, this is the Chicagoan approach to government. I'm open to the idea of anarchy, but not in the year 2013 or for the foreseeable future.

I do tend to agree with you. That said, the problem is that no state has remained so constrained. Our Bill of Rights and Constitution is basically ignored nowadays. And it was even ignored early on with the Alien and Sedition Acts. So my question is, how do you actually constrain the state and assure that there truly is representation and that civil liberties remain sacrosanct? It seems apparent that, especially at times of real or artificial emergency, people easily conform to the idea of giving up their essential liberties. And even beyond that, there is disagreement about the role of government. So whilst you may make a Minarchist state there's no reason why it would never grow out of this and provide national health care and education and housing, etc.

Basically, it SOUNDS great and I would support a Minarchy IF it would remain as such. If there is some way to truly assure that it remains a limited government then it sounds great. Unfortunately time has shown that this is never the case. And whilst it may be argued that Anarchy would revert to Statism and arbitrary rule, it cannot be denied that Minarchy appears to go in the same direction.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Ludwik
Junior Member
**
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 28
Location: Fort Lee, NJ, USA
Joined: Dec 29th, 2011
Re: Moral Anarchy
Reply #45 - Mar 5th, 2013 at 3:13pm
Print Post  
zophos wrote on Feb 26th, 2013 at 10:53pm:
Let me rephrase then - as the novel implies, anarchism, even of the libertarian flavor, will be chaotic and violent (example: people being "eliminated" for minor personal slights). We can further imagine real-life scenarios of anarchic violence - what happens when a group of adherents to the non-aggression principal run into a much larger group loyal to the Proletarian Dictatorship, or the glory of jihad? They get obliterated in the most unpleasant fashion, and tyranny rules the day. At the very least, a limited constitutional government in the style of many Western democracies creates a society that is bearable and safe to live in, even if that society in underpinned by institutionalized immorality. I know we've reached this conclusion before - there's a trade-off between anarchic moral purity and statist institutions that minimize (domestic) bloodshed.
...


Yes, indeed. Thank you.

  

Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)
http://csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/life/intro.html,
based on a diary I kept between 1946 and 2004, in the USSR, Poland, France and the USA
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
zophos
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 1307
Location: Pennsylvania
Joined: May 14th, 2011
Re: Moral Anarchy
Reply #46 - Mar 5th, 2013 at 7:45pm
Print Post  
Liberalterian wrote on Mar 5th, 2013 at 11:58am:
That said, the problem is that no state has remained so constrained.

I can't disagree, though I am skeptical that even an anarchic society can stay that way. Obviously Heinlein's book was fiction, but he depicts an anarchist society that quickly succumbs to overbearing legislation (well, depending on your interpretation of the book). Or recall Rothbard's allegorical description of the birth of a state:
Quote:
The classic paradigm was a conquering tribe pausing in its time-honored method of looting and murdering a conquered tribe, to realize that the time-span of plunder would be longer and more secure, and the situation more pleasant, if the conquered tribe were allowed to live and produce, with the conquerors settling among them as rulers exacting a steady annual tribute. One method of the birth of a State may be illustrated as follows: in the hills of southern "Ruritania," a bandit group manages to obtain physical control over the territory, and finally the bandit chieftain proclaims himself "King of the sovereign and independent government of South Ruritania"; and, if he and his men have the force to maintain this rule for a while, lo and behold! a new State has joined the "family of nations," and the former bandit leaders have been transformed into the lawful nobility of the realm.

Nothing ensures an anarchic state will stay free either. I conclude that though the state inevitably grows under minarchy, so it also inevitably grows under anarchy. Hence both minarchy and anarchy require dissidents and social critics who must actively work to roll back the threats against liberty. That's why we're all libertarians, regardless of whether we are minarchists or anarchists. And as de la Paz opined, perhaps the libertarian is powerless against the coercion in the world - all we can do is try to live perfectly in an imperfect world.  Neither system guarantees success or permanence.
  

Bread and Circuses
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Liberalterian
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 3316
Joined: Feb 6th, 2011
Re: Moral Anarchy
Reply #47 - Mar 6th, 2013 at 1:22pm
Print Post  
zophos wrote on Mar 5th, 2013 at 7:45pm:
I can't disagree, though I am skeptical that even an anarchic society can stay that way. Obviously Heinlein's book was fiction, but he depicts an anarchist society that quickly succumbs to overbearing legislation (well, depending on your interpretation of the book). Or recall Rothbard's allegorical description of the birth of a state:
Nothing ensures an anarchic state will stay free either. I conclude that though the state inevitably grows under minarchy, so it also inevitably grows under anarchy. Hence both minarchy and anarchy require dissidents and social critics who must actively work to roll back the threats against liberty. That's why we're all libertarians, regardless of whether we are minarchists or anarchists. And as de la Paz opined, perhaps the libertarian is powerless against the coercion in the world - all we can do is try to live perfectly in an imperfect world. Neither system guarantees success or permanence.

Exactly! The key is not to somehow bring about Anarchism. The key is to change the opinions of people in general. If people did NOT feel entitled to other people's money (be it for health care or education or security, whatever) then we would not be having a discussion about the merits and problems of Anarchism, we would already have it.  Grin

The reality is that people DO believe that they ARE entitled to other people's money. Thus the rise in people who believe in the "Right" to Health care, Housing, Education, etc. funded by taking money from others. So long as people think this way I don't see how Anarchy could function. So the key is to change this way of thinking and start thinking about you the individual and how you can give yourself these many things that you seek. How you can best improve your own status (of course, with the help of others who voluntarily wish to help you in some way) and get health care and education and housing through your own work rather than through the work of others.

The key, then, is how do we convince others of this? How can we convince people that To teach a man to fish, is greater than to give a man a fish? Or in this case, to teach a man to be independent and work for their money rather than be dependent and receive money. If we can somehow convince people that the former is better than the latter then libertarianism (Anarchy or Minarchy) would cease to require force. We could have a truly voluntary society at such a point. That said, I don't see how we could go there any time soon, as you have said as well. People are too engrained in their beliefs.

The other day I spoke with a Liberal and asked him "What if Private Education leads to better Education for EVERYONE and everyone still has access to Education?"
His response:
NO! That's not the way we do things in this country! Education is a right and there's no way we can trust the private sector to handle this!

So basically, even if it is DEFINITELY more efficient and everyone still has access to education he would STILL oppose it because it is "bad". When people think this way it is apparent that Anarcho-Capitalism will NOT work because there are literally millions who think this way or similarly.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Moral Anarchy
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy