Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › What Would Rothbard Do?
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) What Would Rothbard Do? (Read 1154 times)
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 12521
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: What Would Rothbard Do?
Reply #20 - Sep 28th, 2019 at 1:08am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Sep 27th, 2019 at 9:05pm:
Well, he would [de-criminalize pot], and then he'd regret it. He actually changed his mind on open borders later in his life.

Cultivating and using marijuana is a Natural right.  Before men made governments and Laws and Courts, a person could do whatever the hell he wanted to with marijuana.   

Then someone declared it illegal.  He made a Law that says if you possess or use marijuana, you will be PUNISHED by the State.   

But did that natural right magically disappear?   Of course not.   It didn't go anywhere.    We've always had the natural right to use marijuana however we see fit.

I think Rothbard understood this.   Most libertarians do.

The Opposition wrote on Sep 27th, 2019 at 9:05pm:
Shortly before his death, Murray Rothbard published an article called “Nations by Consent: Decomposing the Nation State.” He had begun rethinking the assumption that libertarianism committed us to open borders.

He noted, for instance, the large number of ethnic Russians whom Stalin settled in Estonia. This was not done so that Baltic people could enjoy the fruits of diversity. It never is. It was done in an attempt to destroy an existing culture, and in the process to make a people more docile and less likely to cause problems for the Soviet empire.

Murray wondered: does libertarianism require me to support this, much less to celebrate it? Or might there be more to the immigration question after all?


I think Rothbard would have appreciated my Guest Visa plan!
  

Governments will always devise ways to deprive an honest man of his money or property, and claim that it's legal.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 51128
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: What Would Rothbard Do?
Reply #21 - Sep 28th, 2019 at 9:02am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Sep 27th, 2019 at 9:05pm:
See, this is all I was asking for. Even in this extremely unlikely scenario, I was just going to ask where the right to vote no comes from.


If people agree to be bound by the results of everyone voting, then everyone has a right to vote, and everyone is bound by the results of the voting.

If people agree to allow everyone to vote to elect representatives who will be granted some limited powers to legislate, then everyone will be allowed to vote for those representatives, and everyone wil be bound by laws the representatives enact, just so long as the enacted laws are within the powers granted. In the case of marijuana, it's legitimate to ask "Was the government we constituted granted a power to make things illegal if the possession and use of those things doesn't involve violating the rights of others?"

I say the answer is clearly no.

As I hope you can see, the voting part isn't a right, its a privilege granted by prior agreement.
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 12063
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: What Would Rothbard Do?
Reply #22 - Sep 28th, 2019 at 11:33am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Sep 28th, 2019 at 9:02am:
If people agree to be bound by the results of everyone voting, then everyone has a right to vote, and everyone is bound by the results of the voting.

If people agree to allow everyone to vote to elect representatives who will be granted some limited powers to legislate, then everyone will be allowed to vote for those representatives, and everyone will be bound by laws the representatives enact, just so long as the enacted laws are within the powers granted. In the case of marijuana, it's legitimate to ask "Was the government we constituted granted a power to make things illegal if the possession and use of those things doesn't involve violating the rights of others?"

I say the answer is clearly no.

As I hope you can see, the voting part isn't a right, its a privilege granted by prior agreement.


If 99% of people want marijuana illegal, that's the agreement. It's no less valid than whatever agreement generated the legitimacy you think the Constitution has. You can nitpick on the percentage the vote should require (and of course we should require the vote to make something illegal, not the other way round) but the principles you have established make this valid.

SkyChief wrote on Sep 28th, 2019 at 1:08am:
Cultivating and using marijuana is a Natural right.


I actually agree with you. I'm only using this question to get answers to another question I have.

You actually gave me exactly the answer I wanted right off the bat: You have no right to take away marijuana so you have no right to vote to take away marijuana. Doesn't matter what the outcome will be. Doesn't matter what rights you'll lose.
  

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
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 12521
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: What Would Rothbard Do?
Reply #23 - Sep 28th, 2019 at 12:12pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Sep 28th, 2019 at 11:33am:
You have no right to take away marijuana so you have no right to vote to take away marijuana...

Agreed!   Smiley
  

Governments will always devise ways to deprive an honest man of his money or property, and claim that it's legal.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 51128
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: What Would Rothbard Do?
Reply #24 - Sep 28th, 2019 at 3:13pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Sep 28th, 2019 at 11:33am:
If 99% of people want marijuana illegal, that's the agreement.
If it's been agreed that the form of government will be democracy, then yes.

If you're presuming anarchy, then the people with the most power win, even if they are a minority.

If you're presuming rule by a one Party government, then whatever the Party says goes.

If you're presuming a government with unlimited power has been agreed to, then whatever the government says is the law.
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ahhell
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2818
Joined: Sep 21st, 2016
Re: What Would Rothbard Do?
Reply #25 - Sep 30th, 2019 at 9:50am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Sep 27th, 2019 at 9:05pm:
My main question remains: In this rare and probably in practice impossible scenario, what gives you the right to vote no on pot?
Not being some sort of libertarian ideolgue, I can vote for what ever policy the evidence suggests has the best outcome, which for me is generally the least authoritarian government. 

And if I care about the constitution, because the states do have the right under the constitution to regulate things like pot.   


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 9390
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: What Would Rothbard Do?
Reply #26 - Oct 18th, 2019 at 2:54pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Sep 25th, 2019 at 11:14pm:
In front of the most libertarian being possible is a ballot. He is being asked to choose whether pot should be legal in his area.

He also has Skychief's magic 8 ball and knows the outcome with absolute certainty.

Skychief's infallible crystal ball tells him that if pot is legalised, it will draw hippies and they will vote Left, stripping far more freedom than is gained by legalising marijuana. The crystal ball also tells the most libertarian being possible that he happens to be the deciding vote.

How does this perfect being vote?

Not voting will result in the policy (currently illegal marijuana) not being changed.


Um ... Rothbard was an anarchist.  He wouldn't have voted, duh ...
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 9390
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: What Would Rothbard Do?
Reply #27 - Oct 18th, 2019 at 2:56pm
Print Post  
ahhell wrote on Sep 30th, 2019 at 9:50am:
Not being some sort of libertarian ideolgue, I can vote for what ever policy the evidence suggests has the best outcome, which for me is generally the least authoritarian government. 

And if I care about the constitution, because the states do have the right under the constitution to regulate things like pot.   




So libertarians have to vote for the least authoritarian choice because we're libertarians, but since you're not one, you're free to vote for the least authoritarian choice?  I'm not sure what you're arguing here
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 9390
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: What Would Rothbard Do?
Reply #28 - Oct 18th, 2019 at 2:59pm
Print Post  
ahhell wrote on Sep 26th, 2019 at 10:31am:
I don't know how the perfect libertarian would vote.   How much information does the magic ball tell me?  Is it just that in the future more progressive pot smoking hippies will liver here or is it more detailed?  Does it tell me what sort of policies will result and what kind of society said hippies will create?

With out that information, I still vote to legalize.


Well, since Opposition picked Rothbard as the standard, he would never vote as an anarchist in any election, so there's no discussion.  Anarchists argue that voting is consenting to the results of the election, even if they lose.  I disagree with that, but I'm not an anarchist.

As for libertarians, the libertarian thing is clearly to vote for legal pot despite any short term setback that would entail.  Voting for more government never leads to positive long term results.  Voting for more government is always a foolhardy endeavor, even if Opposition can come up with a contrived scenario
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 9390
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: What Would Rothbard Do?
Reply #29 - Oct 18th, 2019 at 3:03pm
Print Post  
ahhell wrote on Sep 26th, 2019 at 12:01pm:
Your timeline on and causation in Colorado is way off. 

As an economic refuge from CA in CO, I didn't come here for the pot. 


What's so terrible about California economic refugees are they are voting for the same policies that destroyed California and are turning the surrounding States all blue.  They're such idiots
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › What Would Rothbard Do?
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy