Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz
No, I don't see how it is illogical. Explain. And ya, the first premise is correct. Libertarinism is a selfish philosophy bent on maximizing personal freedom and individuality whereas a society is all about sharing and mutual sacrifice for mutual goals.
|
I'm obviously not a libertarian but the latter is clearly an oversimplification of what libertarianism is about. That said, even if your description were correct, it's not the case that anyone who wants maximum freedom and individuality will always oppose "society-level goals". Where those "society level goals" are more likely to produce an environment fostering individuality and personal freedom, the libertarian you describe would logically be for that thing. Police forces, infrastructure, clean water, that sort of thing. There are many other society-benefiting things they tend to be for as a result of that utilitarian calculus, but are of the (often addled) view that those things are better provided by private enterprise than through tax dollars.
This Manichean thing you tend to do where you simplify everything to a point where it could be printed on a fortune cookie is extremely annoying, but I guess there's a reason I don't usually bother with this thread even during election season. I'll return to taking my own advice now.
Quote:
|
Technically you could have a society of Libertarians, but it would be pretty ####ty.
|
Well, yeah. By pointing out that you're saying something facile I'm not arguing that libertarianism is a good way to run a country, province, town, or... anything, really.