Talking Libertarianism

But that creates another problem. If someone is killed while stealing because of an emergency wouldn’t it have been better to actually have had that law in place so it wouldn’t have been stealing in the first place?

What I’m saying, or asking, is why should we create ideologies that we expect the world to conform to when the world couldn’t care less? Ideologies are not discovered by science.

Then you have to legally define emergency. The biggest purpose of the judicial system is to operate within the confines of the law using some level of discretion. Discretion is often used when people are in genuine emergencies, but legally requiring accepting of emergencies opens it up to abuse.

What’s the ratio of people who will be saved from jail/etc because it was a genuine emergency vs. how often will it be abused to let a real criminal off? Society hedges against “outliers” 100 different ways to Sunday.

I don’t think humans know how to live without an ideology, and by that I mean some framework for how to organize, and categorize their world.

Everywhere you go, you’re going to find some system of government, cultural ideas about things like fairness or justice, social organization or ties between people. Religion or some framework for belief, belonging, and behavior that helps people make sense of the world.

If you assume that humans develop some sense of ideology, then you’re just down to finding one the “best” ones. The ones that best help humans flourish, hopefully while preserving important things like human rights.

And this is why we can’t live without things like war and oppression. Even More’s Utopia was oppressive for although it had religious freedom you couldn’t be an atheist.

1 Like

What about morally accepting emergencies?

Basement_Gainz: the Ubermensch is not an essential component of libertarianism.

zecarlo: Are you the ubermensch?

Me: I iz not da Ubermensch. #dreamscrushed

*This how the hypothetical is supposed to go

True story! The successful ones are politicians/kings/presidents/etc.; the others go to prison.

Laws and moral codes are different things altogether.

It’s not. It is. Whoever wants to.

Tell that to the Bernie voters and watch heads explode.

2 Likes

I like these questions - but I gotta be honest your assumption here is that “we” expect. I don’t think anyone here has implied expectations of “perfect” behavior. One thing I’ve found of libertarians is they do not expect perfection. On the contrary, I expect imperfection as “we” (humans) don’t know what the fuck we’re talking about. My understanding of a word can be completely different from yours, or it can illicit identical reactions in our minds - most fall somewhere in between.

My understanding of why “we” create ideologies is to help people understand the world and hopefully influence behavior in such a way as to promote peace or contentment or w/e the goal happens to be (some might say chaos). Libertarian ideologies promote individual liberty - freedom from coercion - and mutually beneficial transactions however the economic actors in a given scenario see fit and agree upon.

They (libertarians) also understand (or try to understand) people are flawed and won’t use logic/reasoning in ALL transactions/interactions - there’s also a huge capacity among libertarians for tolerance - more so than any other ideology I’m familiar with wrt lifestyle - how one lives their life so long as it doesn’t infringe on their own individual liberties…

The “world” in this sense is pretty ambiguous but you’re right - “the world” doesn’t care. But I think you’re looking at it from space - what matters is your community. Your immediate surrounds and the people you interact with. THEY care. That should be your world. Now, understand, in that sense, worlds can and do change - the world (universe) is change, life is understanding.

3 Likes

Define them?

Tell that to any country that invaded another. Tell that to the Native Americans as well.

Wouldn’t that be the job of society?

Then my question to you is, who’s society? What is society to you?

That’s kinda my point. What’s society’s ability to define “emergency” look like? You’re a member of society, give it a crack.

I’m simply asking questions btw. I’m not trying to prove anything or try and make people look dumb. For the record, I don’t think of myself as right or left, liberal or conservative. I think of myself as more of a classical liberal, which seems to fall in line with how many libertarians see themselves. With that said, on specific issues I might tend to side with the left though not the far left Marxists, more often but that has changed over time.

I’m just curious as to how we should try and reckon reality and biology with ideology. Should we rely on morals and/or laws?

I also have to admit that though I respect the idea of property rights I don’t like the idea of worshiping those rights. Maybe that’s my Christian upbringing, I don’t know. But the idea of putting the right to own property above being humane is something that bothers me. I’m not saying anyone here feels like that but I wonder about an ideology that can lead to feeling that way. For example, even if the law said I could shoot and kill someone stealing my car from my driveway, I wouldn’t do it. I couldn’t put a car above a human life. There are people however, who do believe that you should be allowed to kill, legally and morally, to protect property. Maybe it’s even legal in some places, I don’t know.

I might look at it from the other side. Someone tells you it’s an emergency, if believing them will do you no harm then believe them. If they lied then there is the law for them to deal with.

That doesn’t do anything. If I tell you my cat is REEEEEALLY hungry, is that an emergency? How about if my grandpa is having a heart attack? How about if I think my kid is having an allergic reaction to something, but after we get to the hospital it turns out she was fine the whole time?

There’s nothing that precludes people who believe in limited government from being humane. You’ll find the right gives more to charity than the left. The problem is with coercion and the use of force.

Libertarians aren’t anarchists. They acknowledge some need of government, laws, force and tax. But they want it limited.

I want government power limited as much as possible. I want the minimum effective dose to maintain public order and national defense (minarchy). And while individual sovereignty is important that isn’t the main reason for me. The main reason is that humans with power over others will abuse it given time and opportunity. It’s an immutable part of human nature and has been forever. Just because we’re not on trains to the chambers (yet) doesn’t mean power and coercion arent making our lives worse.

2 Likes