Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › How to make decisions
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) How to make decisions (Read 7224 times)
JW
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 385
Joined: Jul 4th, 2014
How to make decisions
Aug 20th, 2014 at 10:12pm
Print Post  
Let's say we make a utopian retirement community, or maybe Porcfest or libertopia event planning organization.

A group of people, who all claim to be libertarians, agree to operate solely by libertarian principles.

Unexpectedly, one person says another person violated NAP, and strikes back, injuring the first person slightly.  It is necessary for the community to agree on which of the two people are at fault for the purpose of throwing one of them out of the community as punishment (?)

A judge might be appointed, but since we don't believe in democracy, we don't vote on a judge.  It would be totalitarian for one person to appoint another person as a judge.  How does a community decide a case.  Or should the community as a whole make a decision without subjecting one of the other parties to an unwanted intrusion of personhood?

And since someone mentioned "it's all in the books", can you point me to where this is covered?  I've been reading Nozick's Anarchy, State and Utopia, but haven't found my answer there.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 9425
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: How to make decisions
Reply #1 - Aug 20th, 2014 at 11:29pm
Print Post  
Is it all in the books? Yes it is.

Rothbard's A New Liberty explores the idea of private courts to handle these exact questions.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stevea
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 992
Location: Ohio
Joined: Jul 24th, 2011
Re: How to make decisions
Reply #2 - Aug 21st, 2014 at 3:25am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Aug 20th, 2014 at 11:29pm:
Is it all in the books? Yes it is.

Rothbard's A New Liberty explores the idea of private courts to handle these exact questions.


I appreciate the citation, but a description might be better.

Where does a private court gain it's authority to mete out punishment ?  If it's from the  people generally, then we have the same problem of the invalidity of mob rule, or democracy.

The only way this centralized scheme it could work is if both parties voluntarily submitted to the courts decision.  That might work to adjudicate contracts, but no wrong-doer would voluntarily submit to judgement.





  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 9425
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: How to make decisions
Reply #3 - Aug 21st, 2014 at 4:32am
Print Post  
I don't trust myself too much to give a fair description of something I don't agree with. So keep that in mind.

Basically, you have regular people paying what amount to insurance premiums to Court A, or Court B, or Court C. The idea is that there would be a lot of them. So if Bob accuses you of thievery, your court goes to bat for you. If you don't pay any premiums to any courts, Bob's court settles the dispute by itself. If Bob uses the same court as you, Court A, the dispute will be settled there. If you use different courts, they must either come to an agreement or use a neutral court, a third-party court, for arbitration of the dispute.

(I think where they get their authority is a really good question!)
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JW
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 385
Joined: Jul 4th, 2014
Re: How to make decisions
Reply #4 - Aug 21st, 2014 at 9:39pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Aug 21st, 2014 at 4:32am:
they must either come to an agreement or use a neutral court, a third-party court, for arbitration of the dispute.

(I think where they get their authority is a really good question!)


Why must they come to an agreement?  And wouldn't system based on courts as an authority be an oligarchy?  Is an oligarchy libertarian?  Do libertarians recommend a government where a few people (like Stalin) make the important decisions?

If both parties feel they are in the right, they are not willing to subject their self-ownership to 3rd party who may rule against them.  It would appear to be an impasse. How would a libertarian community seek to resolve this issue?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 9425
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: How to make decisions
Reply #5 - Aug 21st, 2014 at 11:05pm
Print Post  
JW wrote on Aug 21st, 2014 at 9:39pm:
And wouldn't system based on courts as an authority be an oligarchy?


That's what I said. I was told to read the book again.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stevea
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 992
Location: Ohio
Joined: Jul 24th, 2011
Re: How to make decisions
Reply #6 - Aug 22nd, 2014 at 1:21am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Aug 21st, 2014 at 4:32am:
I don't trust myself too much to give a fair description of something I don't agree with. So keep that in mind.

Basically, you have regular people paying what amount to insurance premiums to Court A, or Court B, or Court C. ....
(I think where they get their authority is a really good question!)



Thanks sincerely.  I'm aware of the idea, didn't realize it was Rothbard's, and I can't believe it would work in practice.

If my memory serves, every individual pays a "protection service" (my term).  If you are aggressed against they act as police (come the the scene investigate) and if there is a probable perp they make a claim against his protection service which also investigates from a defense perspective.  This may go to some adjudicator/court if the two firms disagree.  If they agree that perp is guilty, then his defense stands-down and refuses to protect him from aggression by the victim's protection agency.

This system stinks badly - I certainly can't afford the same protection as a billionaire.  Further the only interest of the protection service is financial, so a wealthy person can make my security service hand me over by simply out-bidding me.

Illegitimate force, doesn't provide meaningful justice - it's nothing more than a private police with no authority bullying ppl..


JW wrote on Aug 21st, 2014 at 9:39pm:
Why must they come to an agreement?


They won't, they can't.  It's the norm that courts decide cases where satisfying both parties is literally impossible.   Child custody case, or a case of murder where there is insufficient evidence but the aggrieved party believes they know.

Quote:
  And wouldn't system based on courts as an authority be an oligarchy?  Is an oligarchy libertarian? 
Do libertarians recommend a government where a few people (like Stalin) make the important decisions?


These "courts" are only for resolution of interpersonal matters (both crime and civil matters) they aren't creating laws that can be imposed  on others.  They are more like private adjudicators/police/insurers IIRC.   These courts are also not part of government so they can't be an oligarchy.

This brings us to another issue.  Criminal law is technically a crime against the state, and not necessarily an individual.   If someone kills a homeless man, then who will bring a case against the murderer ?   The dead man's security service (if he had one) has no financial interest in doing wok for a dead man who owes no more payments.  If some sadist tortures animals then what security service will make a proceeding against the Sadist ?  Badly flawed I think.

This still leaves the question of where they get any authority.

Quote:
If both parties feel they are in the right, they are not willing to subject their self-ownership to 3rd party who may rule against them.  It would appear to be an impasse.


Yes, I see the same problem.


Quote:
How would a libertarian community seek to resolve this issue?


If you mean a stateless anarchical form of libertarianism, then I don't know.  Any sort of "punishment" or "retribution" or forced compensation is necessarily aggression against the individual.  So either you allow all crimes to go unpunished and all contract violations go uncompensated, or else you decide exactly when aggression against an individual is acceptable and then figure out how to impose such force fairly.

Personally I'm more of a minarchist.  I think we need public criminal courts, prosecutors, investigators, public defenders and some very basic criminal law outside of the free market.  Justice isn't for sale.

Civil law is a bit different.  If Apple wants to sue Samsung, or if your neighbor thinks you cut down his tree - then the aggrieved party can contract with a civil court and pay for it's use.  But the civil process has to be forced on the defendant, and any judgement has to be forced on the defendant.  Where does that force come from ?  Should the plaintiff have to hire a private police force with authority from the civil judge to seize or attach the defendants assets ?

We probably need some national DEFENSE and a means to deploy it effectively.

All of that means  taxes, which is of course a nationalization of personal property and a form of theft.
Sigh !  So I can understand if some types of libertarians reject my thoughts.

==

I think the 1776 solution is fairly close to minarchism, but has evolved into something MUCH MUCH bigger by having courts interpret the Constitution in ways that defy any reasonable reading of the document.   I think SCOTUS is mainly to blame for the the failure of "the experiment".
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JW
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 385
Joined: Jul 4th, 2014
Re: How to make decisions
Reply #7 - Aug 24th, 2014 at 3:03pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Aug 21st, 2014 at 11:05pm:
That's what I said. I was told to read the book again.


In my reading, I have now confirmed that Free State Project is an oligarchy.  All decisions, like the decision to throw a member out of the group, may be made by a majority of board members.  The board is 11 members self appointed.

In my opinion; a first generation oligarchy like this will lead to activists seeking board seats (2nd generation) and a purge leaving one leader (third generation). 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 41801
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: How to make decisions
Reply #8 - Aug 24th, 2014 at 5:56pm
Print Post  
JW wrote on Aug 20th, 2014 at 10:12pm:
Let's say we make a utopian retirement community, or maybe Porcfest or libertopia event planning organization.

A group of people, who all claim to be libertarians, agree to operate solely by libertarian principles.

Unexpectedly, one person says another person violated NAP, and strikes back, injuring the first person slightly.  It is necessary for the community to agree on which of the two people are at fault for the purpose of throwing one of them out of the community as punishment (?)

A judge might be appointed, but since we don't believe in democracy, we don't vote on a judge.  It would be totalitarian for one person to appoint another person as a judge.  How does a community decide a case.  Or should the community as a whole make a decision without subjecting one of the other parties to an unwanted intrusion of personhood?

And since someone mentioned "it's all in the books", can you point me to where this is covered?  I've been reading Nozick's Anarchy, State and Utopia, but haven't found my answer there.

Were you high when you wrote this? Stoned out of your mind? That might not be up to date terminology, but I'll clarify if anybody doesn't understand.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Alan Jones
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2721
Joined: Apr 19th, 2014
Re: How to make decisions
Reply #9 - Aug 25th, 2014 at 2:56am
Print Post  
JW wrote on Aug 24th, 2014 at 3:03pm:
In my reading, I have now confirmed that Free State Project is an oligarchy.

You have a source?

JW wrote on Aug 24th, 2014 at 3:03pm:
All decisions, like the decision to throw a member out of the group, may be made by a majority of board members.  The board is 11 members self appointed.

Wow, does that mean that my Leo Sayer karaoke club constitutes an oligarchy?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › How to make decisions
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy