Libertarianism: Need Help in its Defense

[Imperial]

http://www.40konline.com/community/index.php?topic=175794.0

Come on this website and help me out.

While I can argue up to a minarchist viewpoint(although admittedly I don't think I am quite a minarchist either), i have been unable to really make a leap to anarchism. However, some wish to learn more about anarcho-capitalism. So, if somebody wanted to jump in and read the thread, be my guest. You would have to register, but that's it.

Among the arguments, there has been a huge debate about what is a libertarian government and the virtues and vices of regulation.

[LibertyEagle]

If you're trying to make the case for a very limited, small constitutional government, you don't need a bunch of anarchists going over there. It will drive everyone away from your argument.

[acptulsa]

I'll see what I can do later.

By the way, I disagree that libertarian and anarchist thought are so closely related that one could really be considered a subset of the other.

And, yes, the thread is about minarchy, not anarchy.

[danberkeley]

You forgot the non-initiation of aggression axiom. That IS the key aspect of libertarianism.

[Imperial]

**

[The_Orlonater]

I was reading through that commmunist thread; makes me lose hope. I hope our revolution is bigger than theirs.

[hypnagogue]

That thread is fubar-d. Law is not bad. Regulation is not bad. Law and regulation are not un-Libertarian. You somehow ended up trying to argue that laws and regulations are bad. They are not. Bad laws and bad regulations are bad. The Libertarian philosophies prescribe what kind of laws and regulations should exist. It is Anarchism that states that laws and regulations are bad. The two do not overlap.

The fact that the number and extent of the laws prescribed by Libertarian philosophies are lesser than our current system, and far lesser than many other possible systems, does not mean that Libertarianism finds fault with the concepts of law or regulation.

I strongly suggest acquiring a more solid understanding of the various philosophies of Libertarianism, and Anarchism if you're going to try and discuss that. I can't help but feel you left a very erroneous and no doubt negative impression of Libertarianism on those people.

Don't take that too harshly though. I don't want to try and tear you down. Most of the people on these boards wouldn't have faired any better. Just do some more reading before you try that again.

[Imperial]

**

[Conza88]

I'll see what I can do later.

By the way, I disagree that libertarian and anarchist thought are so closely related that one could really be considered a subset of the other.

And, yes, the thread is about minarchy, not anarchy.

:rolleyes:

Libertarianism = foundation: Lockean homesteading private property principle. Lynchpin: non aggression axiom.

Anarcho-Capitalism = foundation: Lockean homesteading private property principle. Lynchpin: non aggression axiom.

Difference? The anarcho-capitalists CONSISTENTLY apply the principles. Rothbard wins. :)