A thought for discussion

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. – Herbert Spencer

Yes, Herbert Spencer, darling of the south, proponent of Social Darwinism, and father of post-slavery racism.

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:The non-aggression principle (NAP), also called the non-aggression axiom, is a concept in which "aggression", defined as initiating or threatening any forceful interference with either an individual or their property, is inherently wrong. ... In contrast to pacifism, the NAP does not forbid forceful defense.

This is the basic ideology that binds libertarians who could be anarchists, minarchists, anarcho-capitalists, voluntarists or capital "L" Libertarians (those in the party itself).  

I know this. My right to swing my fist ends at the tip of your nose; i.e., do whatever the hell you want as long as it doesn't harm anyone besides possibly yourself, i.e. my favorite way of putting it: "A free society doesn't look for reasons to allow people to do things, it demands a logical reason for not allowing people to do something."

But this isn't all that binds American libertarians. They are all equally outraged at the banning of Four Loco, for one thing. They all LOVE gold. I don't know if I said that before.

They're fond of baseball caps. They range in age from late teens to early 50s, and they're almost all men. They have an interest in guns and can obsessively recite obscure facts about them. They think non-libertarians worship "the state" while being unaware of the fact that they themselves worship Elon Musk.

They know who Ayn Rand was, and a bit about her. They probably haven't read "Atlas Shrugged" and they probably haven't even heard of "The Fountainhead." But they shouldn't read either book, because as Dorothy Parker famously said of the former, it's "not a book to be tossed lightly aside. It should be thrown with great force."

They spend a lot of time on mises.org. They care deeply about keeping the government off people's backs, apparently, but really only talk about taxes and business regulation (rather than stuff like abortion and gay marriage).

And one of their "great thinkers" wrote a book not too long ago trying to make the case that people were more free under monarchies than they are under democratic governments, because of something about taxes, superior genetics, and taxes.

They don't really care for democracy -- they call it "two wolves and a sheep voting for what's for dinner." One libertarian I knew actually felt that the act of voting was a violation of the NAP.

Many of them believe the United States was a better country under the Articles of Confederation than under its current constitution.

Ask me for more about libertarians if you have the inclination and the wherewithall.

I don't need to ask you about libertarians.  

I'm too busy correcting you about them.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yes, Herbert Spencer, darling of the south, proponent of Social Darwinism, and father of post-slavery racism.

Darling of the UK, not that it matter to me.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I don't need to ask you about libertarians.  

I'm too busy correcting you about them.

You have a funny definition of "correcting" then, because you haven't corrected anything I've said.

Anyway:

Ben Reilly wrote:How about this one?

"Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."

- Bernie Sanders

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:How about this one?

"Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."

- Bernie Sanders

So labor is rewarded with capital.  Sounds fine to me.

Or does Bernie think labor isn't rewarded with capital?

To be honest, I think Bernie is talking out of both sides of his ass.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:

So labor is rewarded with capital.  Sounds fine to me.

Or does Bernie think labor isn't rewarded with capital?

To be honest, I think Bernie is talking out of both sides of his ass.

Sorry -- don't know how I managed to do this, but that quote was actually by Abraham Lincoln!

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:

So labor is rewarded with capital.  Sounds fine to me.

Or does Bernie think labor isn't rewarded with capital?

To be honest, I think Bernie is talking out of both sides of his ass.

Sorry -- don't know how I managed to do this, but that quote was actually by Abraham Lincoln!

Then Abe is talking out of both sides of his ass.

”Do I contradict myself? Very well; I contradict myself. I am vast, I contain multitudes”
~ Walt Whitman

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Then Abe is talking out of both sides of his ass.

To me, his point was that society shouldn't value those who have money (say through inheritance) over workers, because money is nothing without the labor it pays for, and because money ultimately comes from work, not the other way around.

I mean, the story we like is the guy who came from next to nothing and built a successful company. The story that bores us is the guy who was born rich and managed to add to his wealth by prudently investing it. It's human nature to think/hope that hard work will be rewarded, and that the interesting part ends when the wealth has been won, rather than after that part of the story.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Then Abe is talking out of both sides of his ass.

To me, his point was that society shouldn't value those who have money (say through inheritance) over workers, because money is nothing without the labor it pays for, and because money ultimately comes from work, not the other way around.

I mean, the story we like is the guy who came from next to nothing and built a successful company. The story that bores us is the guy who was born rich and managed to add to his wealth by prudently investing it. It's human nature to think/hope that hard work will be rewarded, and that the interesting part ends when the wealth has been won, rather than after that part of the story.