tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post4359051784575320575..comments2024-03-28T09:59:13.754-07:00Comments on bionic mosquito: Thick Libertarians Leave Less Room in the Tentbionic mosquitohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-46860150967674589662014-04-08T18:33:36.428-07:002014-04-08T18:33:36.428-07:00Richman writes (as you quote him), "In its de...Richman writes (as you quote him), "In its denial of dignity to individuals merely by virtue of their membership in a racial group, there is a potential for violence implicit in racism that is too strong for libertarians to ignore."<br /><br />Consider this statement: "Old people, by and large, are bad drivers." Or, "Children are generally poor at calculus." These are generalizations about group characteristics. These statements don't treat members of these groups as individuals. Do they create the potential for violence? Hard to imagine they do. Are they unlibertarian? I can't see how.<br /><br />These statements are similar to racist statements. The reason we're repulsed by racist statements and not the ones above is that racist statements are wrong, and also because the are often accompanied by hatred (being bad drivers does not cause most people to hate old people). The reason we are repulsed is NOT because these are statements about groups of people.<br /><br />I think thick libertarianism is driven by the natural desire to be more relevant. If we just say we're against the use of violence against innocent persons, then we're not really saying much. But, for me, that's enough! The world would be completely different if just this one simple idea was accepted. I very much agree with your article.LarryRuanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13187331388492812355noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-44977500365848165412014-04-08T10:22:09.077-07:002014-04-08T10:22:09.077-07:00"...I also believe that the primacy of the in..."...I also believe that the primacy of the individual is the bedrock of the NAP."<br /><br />This is the rub - it's OK if that individual is (fill in your preferred label) but not if the individual chooses not to associate with (fill in your preferred label.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-85294216071170816422014-04-08T08:47:31.736-07:002014-04-08T08:47:31.736-07:00Thanks for the reply, BM.
By tolerant, I mean tol...Thanks for the reply, BM.<br /><br />By tolerant, I mean tolerant of others' peaceful actions.<br /><br />And sure, non-violence means non-violence, i.e. tolerance, even if the 'racist libertarian' upsets you.<br /><br />I suppose Richman can't see how a libertarian who recognizes the morality of the NAP, who respects the inalienable rights of the individual, can simultaneously disrespect someone's non-aggressive traits or choices, or to lump an individual into a group which one finds disagreeable.<br /><br />I also subscribe to the NAP on moral grounds, and I would consider myself tolerant, inclusive, and humanitarian (maybe not holistic), and I have a hard time seeing how someone can subscribe to the NAP and also discriminate against groups of people. I feel like it must be a moral decision, and I feel like Richman feels the same way.<br /><br />I agree that the NAP is the bedrock of libertarianism, but I also believe that the primacy of the individual is the bedrock of the NAP.<br /><br />-GMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-37646965540600606342014-04-07T14:06:05.377-07:002014-04-07T14:06:05.377-07:00I come to libertarian thought / NAP completely on ...I come to libertarian thought / NAP completely on moral grounds. The idea that it works best has never been satisfying to me; someone will always present a better argument for something else working better. And better for whom?<br /><br />But don’t initiate violence? Clean, simple. Sure we struggle at times with its application – IP is one such example. But at least we have a north start to guide the discussion.<br /><br />However, I still see no way to reconcile the requirement for the non-aggression principle with the requirement for eliminating racism – in thought or (non-violent deed). It cannot be done. one or the other must be subservient – both cannot be foundation stones for a consistent theory. <br /><br />“In the end, Richman is saying that a libertarian is de facto tolerant, humanitarian, etc., since being the opposite means you reject the moral case for non-aggression.”<br /><br />Says who? <br /><br />Define tolerant; in what circumstances? A libertarian can be very intolerant when it comes to (just one of several examples) trespass of his property – one could even be described as a zealot. He could be so intolerant that he might even shoot!<br /><br />What about the tolerance for a libertarian who is not tolerant about race – say because he came to value libertarian thought via pragmatic reasons (to lean on your flawed statement)? Doesn’t he deserve tolerance (however you define it) in Richman’s world? Who is Richman to draw the line on what things I tolerate and what things I don’t? <br /><br />The entire reasoning is nonsensical. <br />bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-48786439165013853662014-04-07T10:10:35.847-07:002014-04-07T10:10:35.847-07:00I think Richman is exploring the philosophical lin...I think Richman is exploring the philosophical link between the non-aggression principle and libertarianism, and is saying that if you subscribe to the non-aggression principle, you do so on moral grounds by recognizing the rights of the individual as supreme and rejecting interference in people's peaceful activities.<br /><br />So, if you follow the non-aggression principle on moral (rather than utilitarian) grounds, you must also reject discrimination based on race, sexuality, and religion, since these represent negative feelings toward individual traits or choices that don't directly affect others.<br /><br />Even Rothbard's quote from Rockwell's article implies a moral case for non-aggression:<br /><br />"There are other libertarians who have no moral theory at all apart from the imperative of non-violation of rights."<br /><br />There is a difference between a libertarian's respect of other peoples' discrimination, as in saying "non-violent" racism is tolerable, vs. being a racist libertarian, the latter being a perversion of libertarian thought according to Richman.<br /><br />In the end, Richman is saying that a libertarian is de facto tolerant, humanitarian, etc., since being the opposite means you reject the moral case for non-aggression.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-72566324490939073282014-04-07T03:53:46.134-07:002014-04-07T03:53:46.134-07:00Ira, thank you for the note.
Clearly, I could hav...Ira, thank you for the note.<br /><br />Clearly, I could have written this sentence more clearly. For the record:<br /><br />I recognize that mass-murder will have at its root any one (or more) of several probable excuses.<br /><br />I recognize that these are just that - excuses: in order to whip the population into a frenzy to either support or ignore the crime, race, religion, or any other emotional wedge will be deployed.<br /><br />bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-1227070325912211762014-04-07T00:59:39.766-07:002014-04-07T00:59:39.766-07:00Dear BM,
To define mass murders as race based geno...Dear BM,<br />To define mass murders as race based genocides is very limiting to the mass murders inflicted through history from ancient times to the recent episodes. To me, in the context of your post, is the nature of power. One can think of a Carthaginain peace in ancient history. How do we classify the communist massacres in Ukraine, the Cultual Revolution in China, or in Cambodia. Were the persecutions after the Reconquista in Spain purely religious or based on the power politics of Ferdinand and Isabella. In the end, can there be a race based, or any other, genocide in a libertarian society? I think the answer is no. Can I imagine genodice, or a least mass murder, in society based on equality? absolutley. <br /><br /><br />I enjoy your blog.<br />Best wishes,<br />IraAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-65806672726058982052014-04-06T07:08:25.789-07:002014-04-06T07:08:25.789-07:00Thank you, Lila.
After I wrote (and posted) this,...Thank you, Lila.<br /><br />After I wrote (and posted) this, I thought I could have been a bit more nuanced on this point. Absent some blatant error, though, I rarely go back to a post to edit.<br /><br />At least to the extent I understand the history of genocide, it seems to me either race or religion can be found at the root. (If you have different views, I would welcome to learn.) This is why I wonder if religion is next on the list of topics to be shed if one wants to be libertarian. <br /><br />bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-44050263117023062062014-04-06T06:53:22.752-07:002014-04-06T06:53:22.752-07:00Very nicely done Bionic. I don't think Richman...Very nicely done Bionic. I don't think Richman's statement about genocide is accurate though...Lila Rajivahttp://www.mindbodypolitic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-83356356148733366452014-04-05T19:52:19.007-07:002014-04-05T19:52:19.007-07:00Excellent BM! My tinfoil hat is firmly ensconced. ...Excellent BM! My tinfoil hat is firmly ensconced. Choose whichever conspiracy theory/organization you wish, anything that might hinder the agenda will be penetrated and co-opted. Libertarianism will by its very nature always be vulnerable to such shenanigans, since letting people do what they want is what we are about.<br />taxesAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com