Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Libertarian Postmodernism
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2  Send TopicPrint
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Libertarian Postmodernism (Read 94 times)
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 34556
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Libertarian Postmodernism
Sep 28th, 2018 at 7:57am
Print Post  
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 34556
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Libertarian Postmodernism
Reply #1 - Sep 30th, 2018 at 4:56pm
Print Post  
Huh... I thought somebody might be interested in talking about what they read.

Probably nobody read it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 34556
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Libertarian Postmodernism
Reply #2 - Sep 30th, 2018 at 5:19pm
Print Post  
I'll try to get it started...

On page 2, Nick says-

Gillespie: I don't think so, particularly there's two things to consider. One is the idea that people are somehow disallowed from disagreeing, or from denouncing certain aspects of the world, whether you're a right winger, or a left winger. I think the very existence of social media proves that's wrong. There are attempts at censorship and whatnot. There is no shortage of people bitching and moaning about every goddamn choice that everybody around them makes, both big and small, so that's just just spurious. The larger question, and this gets to the distinction between being a classical liberal, or a libertarian, I think, and being a conservative: Do you believe in pluralism or not? If so, what is your commitment to saying, "On things that are very important to each of us, we fundamentally disagree with one another. How do we live peacefully with that?"

That is the actual signal accomplishment of Western civilization, and it came out of the religious wars when people took religion very seriously. "You believe in the Pope. I believe in an unmediated access to Jesus Christ, my Lord and savior." Or, "I believe in this version of Protestantism versus your version of Protestantism." People used to kill each other in Europe and in North America over these questions. We don't anymore. That is not moral relativism; it's pluralism. And that's the thing that we need to get back to and understand and fully appreciate. That's the great achievement of Western civilization, if we're using that term... of civilization, that we can disagree on fundamental things and still live peacefully side by side.

And what Gillespie is talking about is what he calls-

...the actual signal accomplishment of Western civilization.

I agree with him on this.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 7698
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Libertarian Postmodernism
Reply #3 - Sep 30th, 2018 at 7:34pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Sep 30th, 2018 at 5:19pm:
that we can disagree on fundamental things and still live peacefully side by side


How fundamental? If you think it's okay to shoot people in the head, and I don't, then we can't live side-by-side.
  

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
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 34556
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Libertarian Postmodernism
Reply #4 - Oct 1st, 2018 at 7:07am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Sep 30th, 2018 at 7:34pm:
How fundamental? If you think it's okay to shoot people in the head, and I don't, then we can't live side-by-side.
We can as long as I'm willing to obey the law.

Gillespie is talking about the fundamentals of a civilized society... How did you miss that and get off into anarchy and barbarism again?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 7698
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Libertarian Postmodernism
Reply #5 - Oct 1st, 2018 at 11:14am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Oct 1st, 2018 at 7:07am:
We can as long as I'm willing to obey the law.

Gillespie is talking about the fundamentals of a civilized society... How did you miss that and get off into anarchy and barbarism again?


I didn't miss anything. He's pretending we can all live together despite fundamental differences of opinion, and I pointed out that it depends how fundamental you're talking about.

He's using an example that doesn't matter because there are no meaningful differences in behaviour that result, but he very well means differences of opinion about right and wrong.

A good example of a dispute that matters because it leads to practical differences in behaviour is Leftists thinking that they have a right not to be offended. If you say something nasty to them, they think you aggressed and they will defend themselves. In their moral world view, they have every right to.
  

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
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 34556
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Libertarian Postmodernism
Reply #6 - Oct 1st, 2018 at 2:54pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Oct 1st, 2018 at 11:14am:
I didn't miss anything. He's pretending we can all live together despite fundamental differences of opinion...
Yes, he's talking about pluralism in a civilized society, something the founders of America tried very hard to ensure would be the rule in America.

Pluralism does not extend to tolerating murder and theft and physical violence.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 34556
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Libertarian Postmodernism
Reply #7 - Oct 1st, 2018 at 2:57pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Oct 1st, 2018 at 11:14am:
If you say something nasty to them, they think you aggressed and they will defend themselves. In their moral world view, they have every right to.
If anyone replies to words with physical violence, the courts will determine if the response was justified by the words.

What you are talking about is stifling differing  opinions with physical violence, and no one has a right to do that.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 7698
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Libertarian Postmodernism
Reply #8 - Oct 1st, 2018 at 11:41pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Oct 1st, 2018 at 2:54pm:
Yes, he's talking about pluralism in a civilized society, something the founders of America tried very hard to ensure would be the rule in America.

Pluralism does not extend to tolerating murder and theft and physical violence.


He's talking about pluralism with regard to morality.

When stripped of dogma and ritual, morality is uniquely defined by rules for what you can and cannot do to other people. He happened to have one example that dealt with meaningless superstition.

Well sure; have whatever meaningless superstitions, cosmologies, theories about the afterlife, and rituals you like. These are side dishes. The rest of morality (the meat) is not up for compromise.
  

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
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 34556
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Libertarian Postmodernism
Reply #9 - Oct 2nd, 2018 at 9:27am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Oct 1st, 2018 at 11:41pm:
He's talking about pluralism with regard to morality.

Nick is obviously talking about pluralism when it comes to political and religious beliefs.

He is advocating, as do all libertarians, a peaceful society where people allow each other to live their own lives as they choose to live them, provided they don't hit the other children and steal their toys.

Certainly there is a morality beneath the idea that each individual is deserving of respect and that that respect requires that they be allowed their own beliefs.

Back in 1776, Adam Smith spoke of "the liberal plan of [social] equality, [economic] liberty, and [legal] justice." This is a very moral plan, and it carries pluralism within it's outline.

Edit: On a practical level, an advocate for tyrannical authoritarian government can live as a good neighbor beside a radical libertarian, provided they are governed by impartial laws administered by a government that has no power to elevate any one ideology over any other. The way this was done by our Constitution was to grant the government limited enumerated powers.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Libertarian Postmodernism
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy