This is a type of anarchy (Anarcho-Capitalism) that has been tagged with libertarianism. It is true that taken to its extreme, Rothbardianism can be taken to the ‘absolutely’ no government extreme. Rothbard himself, however, was stumped at how to protect property rights. He, like this fellow talked about private police but could never reconcile disputes between two opposing police organizations. This problem brought life down to fiefdoms run by people with guns and paid for adjudication and not a common set of rules. There is not one anarchist that can’t intelligently propose a society of more than a few dozen people(commune) that will run well without some form of formal rules and enforcement structure. Berwick talks in platitudes about being the slave of no country... a perpetual tourist... but the fact is, regardless of where he goes, he has some form of property right(even if it is only his knapsack) and some form of protection from aggression which is lacking in a stateless society. While his premise is correct, and personal liberty to do and be as you wish is paramount, he is wrong headed about the way the world would be without a rule structure that punishes fraud and aggression.
Here is an article by Kelley L. Ross, Ph.D that explain why I am a small ‘L’ libertarian. It is quite possible that you will not be familiar with many of the people he talks about and thus, if you are truly interested, will have to back track and even research to understand my positions:
http://www.friesian.com/fallen.htm
From the same person is an expose’ that is pretty clear why I do not identify myself as a republican and why I don’t identify with being a democrat, even though I have some empathy with portions of philosophy of each.
I also agree with the small "L" libertarian viewpoint, but still vote Republican because we all know what happens when you vote third party. Just ask Ken Cuccinelli......................
This is indeed the problem with Libertarians. They vote strictly for the party and not the candidate. While it would be nice to have a viable third party and maybe one day that will happen but the most efficient way to effect change in government is to use the major parties against themselves. One day it would be very nice to see a Democrat stand up for fiscal discipline ... but that would ruin their voter base...
This is a type of anarchy (Anarcho-Capitalism) that has been tagged with libertarianism. It is true that taken to its extreme, Rothbardianism can be taken to the ‘absolutely’ no government extreme. Rothbard himself, however, was stumped at how to protect property rights. He, like this fellow talked about private police but could never reconcile disputes between two opposing police organizations. This problem brought life down to fiefdoms run by people with guns and paid for adjudication and not a common set of rules. There is not one anarchist that can’t intelligently propose a society of more than a few dozen people(commune) that will run well without some form of formal rules and enforcement structure. Berwick talks in platitudes about being the slave of no country... a perpetual tourist... but the fact is, regardless of where he goes, he has some form of property right(even if it is only his knapsack) and some form of protection from aggression which is lacking in a stateless society. While his premise is correct, and personal liberty to do and be as you wish is paramount, he is wrong headed about the way the world would be without a rule structure that punishes fraud and aggression.
ReplyDeleteHere is an article by Kelley L. Ross, Ph.D that explain why I am a small ‘L’ libertarian. It is quite possible that you will not be familiar with many of the people he talks about and thus, if you are truly interested, will have to back track and even research to understand my positions:
http://www.friesian.com/fallen.htm
From the same person is an expose’ that is pretty clear why I do not identify myself as a republican and why I don’t identify with being a democrat, even though I have some empathy with portions of philosophy of each.
http://www.friesian.com/satan.htm#repub
I also agree with the small "L" libertarian viewpoint, but still vote Republican because we all know what happens when you vote third party. Just ask Ken Cuccinelli......................
DeleteThis is indeed the problem with Libertarians. They vote strictly for the party and not the candidate. While it would be nice to have a viable third party and maybe one day that will happen but the most efficient way to effect change in government is to use the major parties against themselves. One day it would be very nice to see a Democrat stand up for fiscal discipline ... but that would ruin their voter base...
Delete