Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [existlist] Libertarianism

Expand Messages
  • Aija Veldre Beldavs
    ... yes! Ayn Randians, libertarians, social Darwinists, and the open free market (which it can be argued in fact is slanted, rather than genuinely
    Message 1 of 5 , Aug 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      > The stance I prefer is that of Generativity: wanting the mutual relationship
      > between individual and society to be as rich and encouraging of health (in
      > both directions) as possible. This is the stance that makes good marriages
      > and friendships possible. It is secure in autonomy, but includes the other
      > (spouse, child, society) as a loved object--caring for this loved object
      > doesn't threaten autonomy; it is an autonomous choice. This leads me away
      > from Libertarianism and toward liberal social democracy.
      > Jeff

      yes! Ayn Randians, libertarians, social Darwinists, and the open free
      market (which it can be argued in fact is slanted, rather than genuinely
      competitive), and free-for-allers do not yet have a patent on
      individualism or independent original thought or original hybrids.:)

      aija
      ps so many others to add to the humorist list throughout the world, like
      Jara Cimrman
      <http://www.radio.cz/en/article/63467>
      <http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-greatczech1aug01,0,
      6272273.story?coll=la-home-headlines>
    • Exist List Moderator
      ... Actually, I developed away from a socialist/Marxism idealism in college to a more libertarian mode of thinking. The longer I pursued my own businesses,
      Message 2 of 5 , Aug 1, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        On Jul 31, 2005, at 5:56, jtate wrote:

        > These two quotes, pulled from two e-mails today are, in my opinion,
        > related.
        > Libertarianism is a kind of asocial stance; the stance of those who
        > want the
        > world to leave them alone, to deny responsibility beyond avoiding
        > actively
        > hurting others. It is an elaboration of the psychological stage most
        > teenagers go through when they want siblings and parents to "just
        > leave me
        > alone!" and not insist that they have any responsibilities toward the
        > care
        > of the family (e.g. taking out the trash, doing the dishes, helping
        > with
        > younger siblings, etc.). It stems from a fear of losing autonomy.

        Actually, I developed away from a socialist/Marxism idealism in college
        to a more libertarian mode of thinking. The longer I pursued my own
        businesses, writing, and teaching, the more I wished to be allowed
        greater freedom to fail. The greater risk we allow individuals, the
        greater the potential rewards.

        Certainly, I am asocial or anti-social. I think most of society is
        cruel, self-centered, and rather ill-informed. They choose to be so.
        You can find anything you want to read on the Internet or at a
        bookstore, but most people do not want to think -- and I do not wish to
        chat about silly things. There is a conflict, resulting in an increased
        sense of elitism or meritocracy.

        When I hear people talking about issues, and realize how wedded they
        are to notions I find laughable, the less I want to be around the
        masses. I reject the New Age mysticism common in my department, the
        radical Marxism, and the narcissism that allows people to imagine we
        are the center of all creation. Mankind is a blip. The best we can do
        it attempt to make this little blip in time bearable.

        Unfortunately, a great many people are unbearable, no matter what
        allowances I might make for them. Maybe that is the result of working
        in retail, tech support, and teaching. You encounter a lot of mean
        individuals. And that isn't cynicism. Reality is, there are more
        apathetic and mean people than kind and generous souls.

        Apathy is especially easy. That's how you can have someone attacked in
        New York and no one calls the police or tries to interfere. That's
        humanity. I tend to get involved and then get slammed for it.

        - C. S. Wyatt
        I am what I am at this moment, not what I was and certainly not all
        that I shall be.
        http://www.tameri.com - Tameri Guide for Writers
        http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist - The Existential Primer
      • louise
        [Simone, responding to Jeff] Aren t most democratic institutions socialist since ideally they focus upon enabling the best methods of survival for the most
        Message 3 of 5 , Aug 5, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          [Simone, responding to Jeff]
          Aren't most democratic institutions 'socialist' since ideally they
          focus upon enabling the best methods of survival for the most kinds
          of citizens? Aren't families, of any configuration, based upon this
          principle? Bodies and minds must be safe and nourished before they
          can be free. The only concern for socialism* should be fiscal
          management, not whether it's moral. This is true even in smaller
          social units.

          When Sartre, Beauvoir, Camus and others struggled to formulate a
          philosophical-politique, their concern was not how to minimize
          individual efforts. They wanted governments to be more responsible
          and vigilant, to avoid fascism, communism, extremism, any system
          that took away responsibility from individuals, not to mention their
          lives. Their disagreements were about limits and their concerns were
          legitimate. I now worry, that just as Germany self-destructed in the
          1930's in a fascist backlash against socialism, my country (USA) and
          possibly the world is headed down the same bloody path.

          It isn't that socialism has failed but that we have so many diverse
          sensibilities and immaturities which can't comprehend the complex
          entanglement of our lives on this planet.

          Louise
          The categories employed in the above paragraphs all lie in the
          ontical domain (for rough definition, see e35702). We in the West
          can easily make the same mistakes now as did Sartre in the 1950s,
          indeed I would opine that large numbers of people are indeed making
          those mistakes, and that this generates a form of populist extremism
          which lightly dismisses such a charge on account of the security of
          numbers and wealth. 'It isn't that socialism has failed ...'!!!
          Why not substitute 'fascism' or 'communism' for 'socialism' in that
          sentence, any ideologue can claim that for his chosen set of
          theories. We need philosophical arguments, to make the case,
          otherwise, what's the point of saying these things at existlist, you
          might as well write a letter to the newspaper or to your democratic
          representative.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.