Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Don't almost all libertarians support a kind of income redistribution?
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Don't almost all libertarians support a kind of income redistribution? (Read 6591 times)
Alan Jones
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2721
Joined: Apr 19th, 2014
Re: Don't almost all libertarians support a kind of income redistribution?
Reply #60 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 6:02am
Print Post  
Quote:
I take it for granted that non-idiots recognize a difference between a society that is developing towards some particular goal and a society that has reached the goal.

If limited aggressive government is a stepping stone to non-aggressive government, then God bless the Constitution.

If, however, there are people (Jeff) who are under the delusion that limited aggressive government is the functional "ideal", then I don't understand what your problem is with correcting them. Aggressive government is not the ideal.

Still silly. If minarchists thought minarchism was the ideal, we wouldn't have been going around calling it a "necessary evil" for centuries. Minarchists aren't disciples of utopianism, advocating only what is "ideal" instead of what will likely minimize aggression in the real world.

Utopian-ism is for Marxists and other morons. In the real world, zero aggression isn't one of our options, and never will be.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Alan Jones
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2721
Joined: Apr 19th, 2014
Re: Don't almost all libertarians support a kind of income redistribution?
Reply #61 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 6:06am
Print Post  
Josh wrote on Sep 18th, 2014 at 5:34pm:
Wait, Alan, you're still not an anarchist? What books have you been reading?

The kind with lots of pictures.  Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Josh
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Stop looking at me like
that, you pervert.

Posts: 4273
Location: Inside your girlfriend
Joined: Aug 8th, 2010
Re: Don't almost all libertarians support a kind of income redistribution?
Reply #62 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 10:38am
Print Post  
Alan Jones wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 6:06am:
The kind with lots of pictures.  Smiley

LOL

Rothbard, man. Rothbard.  Grin
  

I like big butts and I cannot lie.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 41795
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Don't almost all libertarians support a kind of income redistribution?
Reply #63 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 11:11am
Print Post  
Quote:
If, however, there are people (Jeff) who are under the delusion that limited aggressive government is the functional "ideal", then I don't understand what your problem is with correcting them. Aggressive government is not the ideal.

Given how often I rail about the necessity for idealogical homogenous communities and my basis for doing so (namely that you can't very well have a libertarian community if a third of the people are commies), I can only say…duh?

I view limited government as a necessary evil, and likely the best that can be done in the real world. I guess that is a "functional ideal". The actual ideal, having no government at all, isn't "functional", because the world is full of aggressive people.

Ideologically homogeneous communities would be boring and sterile. You certainly can have a libertarian society if you limit the government and charge it with protecting everyone's life, liberty and property. Communist communities were created and existed during the early years of our Republic, no problem, they just didn't have any power to force others to live they way they chose to live. A libertarian society is one where the government protects everyone's freedom to live as they choose, as long as they don't use force against others.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dissident Right
Ex Member


Re: Don't almost all libertarians support a kind of income redistribution?
Reply #64 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 3:04pm
Print Post  
Alan Jones wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 6:02am:
If minarchists thought minarchism was the ideal, we wouldn't have been going around calling it a "necessary evil" for centuries.

I didn't say "ideal". I said "functional "ideal"", and what I mean by that is "necessary evil".

Alan Jones wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 6:02am:
In the real world, zero aggression isn't one of our options, and never will be.

Whatever could that mean?

Jeff wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 11:11am:
The actual ideal, having no government at all, isn't "functional", because the world is full of aggressive people.

It does not follow from the existence of aggressive people that we must have an aggressive government to rule them.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 41795
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Don't almost all libertarians support a kind of income redistribution?
Reply #65 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 4:38pm
Print Post  
Quote:
It does not follow from the existence of aggressive people that we must have an aggressive government to rule them.

Well, before there were any governments, there were aggressive people. To protect yourself and your family, you had to fight them, often to the death. If you lost, they did what they wanted with your family and your property. As family groups developed into tribes, the defense function went to the group of men most capable of fighting.
Do you need an entire history of the world lesson? No, of course not.
As civilizations developed, governments were developed alongside them. These were usually aggressive governments. Actually, until the American Experiment, governments, that were usually very aggressive, always ruled over all people.
Magna Carta, the Enlightenment, the Reformation, and then the U.S. Constitution, but we finally got a government where the people were Sovereign and the government subservient.
Through all of this history, aggressive people were still around, killing, raping, robbing cheating. Developed civilizations, like ours, had discovered that a system of law and courts and impartial justice was the best way to deal with aggressive people. It still is. It's worth funding through taxation.
The Constitution does not create an aggressive government and gives it no power to "rule" people. It provides a limited power of taxation to fund the protection of life, liberty and property.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dissident Right
Ex Member


Re: Don't almost all libertarians support a kind of income redistribution?
Reply #66 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 5:04pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 4:38pm:
As family groups developed into tribes, the defense function went to the group of men most capable of fighting.

And aggression wasn't necessary, because the benefits of banding together voluntarily were and are transparently obvious.

Jeff wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 4:38pm:
It still is. It's worth funding through taxation.

Actually, it's so important that it's worth funding voluntarily. Anyway, if you submit to aggression to "protect" yourself from aggression, then you've achieved precisely squat.

Jeff wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 4:38pm:
The Constitution does not create an aggressive government and gives it no power to "rule" people. It provides a limited power of taxation to fund the protection of life, liberty and property.

LOL, didn't you just get through admitting exactly the opposite in other threads? What happened to, "it's obvious that taxation is aggression"???
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Alan Jones
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2721
Joined: Apr 19th, 2014
Re: Don't almost all libertarians support a kind of income redistribution?
Reply #67 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 7:10pm
Print Post  
Josh wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 10:38am:
LOL

Rothbard, man. Rothbard.  Grin

You already know I'm a huge Rothbard fan (and agree ~98%), but I don't think there's anything else to read. Did he write picture-books, too?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Alan Jones
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2721
Joined: Apr 19th, 2014
Re: Don't almost all libertarians support a kind of income redistribution?
Reply #68 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 7:37pm
Print Post  
Quote:
I didn't say "ideal". I said "functional "ideal"", and what I mean by that is "necessary evil".

LOL, you did a bait and switch between "functional ideal" and "ideal":
Quote:
If, however, there are people (Jeff) who are under the delusion that limited aggressive government is the functional "ideal", then I don't understand what your problem is with correcting them. Aggressive government is not the ideal.

I was obviously referring to that last statement, not the one that you now clarify as meaning that you think it's a delusion to consider limited government to be a necessary evil.

Quote:
Whatever could that mean?

That anarchism is obviously not zero aggression. In areas dominated by ideological Marxists, it would be rampant aggression. Is that acceptance of aggression a necessary evil (functional ideal), too?

Quote:
It does not follow from the existence of aggressive people that we must have an aggressive government to rule them.

But it follows that we must have private entities that are free to be as aggressive as the market will bear in a society consisting of mostly socialists?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dissident Right
Ex Member


Re: Don't almost all libertarians support a kind of income redistribution?
Reply #69 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 9:10pm
Print Post  
Alan Jones wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 7:37pm:
LOL, you did a bait and switch between "functional ideal" and "ideal":
I was obviously referring to that last statement, not the one that you now clarify as meaning that you think it's a delusion to consider limited government to be a necessary evil.

Um? Given that I was talking about exactly the same thing in both sentences and gave absolutely no indication that I had "bait-and-switched" to talking about some "theoretical ideal", your hyper-literal reading is obviously wrong. Funny, I knew someone would come along and say exactly what you said, but I figured that I only needed to specify my term once…

Alan Jones wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 7:37pm:
That anarchism is obviously not zero aggression. In areas dominated by ideological Marxists, it would be rampant aggression. Is that acceptance of aggression a necessary evil (functional ideal), too?

Again…what? If I establish a colony on the moon and invite fellow Rothbardians to join me, what the heck does the fact that is still aggression on earth have to do with anything? If a community exists that is, in principle (in law), "aggression-free", the fact people commit aggression elsewhere has nothing to do with anything. Even if somebody commits aggression within the community, what does that have to do with anything? Obviously a Rothbardian community has organizations in place to secure property and resolve disputes. What are you saying?

Alan Jones wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 7:37pm:
But it follows that we must have private entities that are free to be as aggressive as the market will bear in a society consisting of mostly socialists?

Um…no?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Don't almost all libertarians support a kind of income redistribution?
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy