Search results

Yes, I object to attempts to claim some sort of high ground by asserting that some claims need proof and others do not. Which is it? If he can say that libertarianism, for him, is only the NAP and nothing else. Ok then. Fine. Whatever. But that's not what the rest of us mean when we say...

Why should I even accept that libertarianism is based solely on your NAP?

I don't even know what to say to that. Go in peace.

I make no claims that his mutilated and incomplete picture of what libertarianism is includes anything explicitly.

You chain of logic, so called, has nothing to do with the actual intellectual history or development of libertarianism.

And now we're back to lying to my face.

At last, a true statement. As far is it goes. Ultimately Libertarianism is founded on the words of the Serpent to Eve. This is the meaning of all those 'state of nature' just so stories. "1Now the serpent was more subtle than any of the beasts of the earth which the Lord God made. And he...

We have already established this as the reason for anything. How can it be acceptable for the NAP but not for this?

Lol no, the 'government' under liberalism is just an extension of the banks. They are middle management. That's why voting never changes anything. "Liberty" is freedumb, now those with the gold make the rules and we call ourselves 'free'.

That's not even what the words mean.

Yes. All modern political economies are deformed in the same way. That is the point. The differences that moderns see as so essential are mere accidents in the wider scheme of human experience. After the Revolutions of Enlightenment what was the left became the 'right' to the new radicalism...

Have you even heard of begging the question? Why is personal freedom even something anyone should worry about?

No it is entirely a valid place. Libertarianism assumes Bentham and Utilitarianism. Reducing the human person and the meaning thereof to the satisfaction of appetites is the starting point, the same as Communism. They just take different roads to get there.

They are not, because libertarians turn around and take torches to anything outside of voluntary association and muh contracts because the markets can do it all. Libertarians are the enemies of Duty and without Duty, we are animals.

It's even true, as far as it goes. But it's hardly enough to build a functioning theory of politics around, let alone morality as lolbertarianism claims to be.

And we're back to our homo economicus.

Hernan Cortez is a hero. Therefore NAP is falsified.

Exactly! That’s the justification for the morality, to have a market. But what if we don’t care about having markets? What if we decide that the strong take what the can and the weak suffer what they must? What if our god commands aggression? Why should we treat enemy tribes as merchants...

It’s completely nonsensical outside of the market as a rule for interaction between stranger who need to cooperate long enough to trade without killing and/or robbing each other. And markets are the result of communities, not the other way around.

But it is, as non aggression is the morality of the marketplace, which is why it comes out of agorist and utilitarian theories of the good.