View Full Version : Freedom Watch 12/17/10 - Reason Magazine roundtable discusses libertarianism
jct74
12-17-2010, 08:02 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkBdLHuc6xY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whD_84WbXqc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijtVtWAkb2o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMTbd9AbOg0
CaseyJones
12-17-2010, 08:16 PM
beat me by this much http://www.realflowforum.com/img/smilies/smiley-tongue.png
FSP-Rebel
12-17-2010, 08:36 PM
Thou shalt not beat Casey.
CaseyJones
12-17-2010, 08:38 PM
naa competition is the coolest
MRoCkEd
12-17-2010, 08:45 PM
Great episode.
Wesker1982
12-17-2010, 09:32 PM
Again lol
"Taxation is theft."- Judge Napolitano
:p
TruckinMike
12-17-2010, 10:23 PM
In Part IV --- at 1:00 -- Wow! I can't believe that both of the libertarian guys (Matt and Nick) said that the government should provide some type of "limited safety net" for the "less fortunate". Matt admitted that he came later to libertarianism, but man... How on earth can you claim that the government should provide a safety net in any form? At least Katherine held her own.
But whats the deal with those two lightweights, Matt and Nick? I'm guessing they were both leftist earlier in their lives. - Maybe this is just a case of Residual leftism rearing its ugly head. But hey, what do I know... And I thought Reason Magazine was supposed to be the grand poo-bah of Libertarianism? :confused:
BuddyRey
12-17-2010, 10:49 PM
In Part IV --- at 1:00 -- Wow! I can't believe that both of the libertarian guys (Matt and Nick) said that the government should provide some type of "limited safety net" for the "less fortunate". Matt admitted that he came later to libertarianism, but man... How on earth can you claim that the government should provide a safety net in any form? At least Katherine held her own.
But whats the deal with those two lightweights, Matt and Nick? I'm guessing they were both leftist earlier in their lives. - Maybe this is just a case of Residual leftism rearing its ugly head. But hey, what do I know... And I thought Reason Magazine was supposed to be the grand poo-bah of Libertarianism? :confused:
Yeah, I was a bit shocked by this as well, especially coming from Nick Gillespie with whom I'm usually quite impressed. I'm an ex-leftist myself, but the Natural Rights argument was enough to convince me that any "safety net" supported by theft contravenes all recognizable codes of morality.
Reason is a great magazine, but their libertarianism is sometimes inconsistent (many on their staff frequently demonized Ron Paul, for example), and I think they're more aligned with the Chicago School of economics than the Austrian School (just my impression, from some of their Federal Reserve coverage).
tpreitzel
12-18-2010, 12:04 AM
Youtube has been receiving a lot of requests from our network for this show so they're requiring one to verify access to this show .... ;) In the future, the link should probably be broken ... whatever.
Austrian Econ Disciple
12-18-2010, 06:51 AM
Now Judge needs to do a round-table with us Misesians. Tom Woods, Walter Block, Lew Rockwell, and HH Hoppe. :p
Then the Judge can do an amalgam show with people like Nick G., Tom Woods, David Friedman, and someone like a Bayesian Cowen.
Would be pretty fun I bet.
If you want a scholarly grand pooh-pah of libertarianism I would probably look more into the Freeman or the Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics. There really isn't much in the way of libertarianism in a magazine type fashion as Reason is (It is old-hat media afterall. I would be surprised if it lasts for another 10-20 years).
Also, Nick and Matt should read some Anthony de Jasay on the Nature of the State, and its tendency to destroy civilization and suck everything dry, especially Democracy. Anyone who is for any type of State-Welfare, will enivitably spell the doom of that civilization. I mean hell, even Tocqueville realized this simple fact. Also a primer on voluntary charitable and helpful organizations would help them in their quest for knowledge. Nick if you read this forum please read this great book:
http://www.amazon.com/Mutual-Aid-Welfare-State-Fraternal/dp/0807848417/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1292677140&sr=8-1
rprprs
12-18-2010, 08:00 AM
Again lol
"Taxation is theft."- Judge Napolitano
:p
Yes, but also, in reference to Huckabee...
"He's a sweetheart" - Judge Napolitano
:p
jct74
12-18-2010, 08:57 AM
Youtube has been receiving a lot of requests from our network for this show so they're requiring one to verify access to this show .... ;) In the future, the link should probably be broken ... whatever.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Never had such a problem.
BuddyRey
12-18-2010, 12:09 PM
By the way, did anyone catch the part in the show where the Judge basically came right out and said that even the very basic functions of government can be provided privately?
If the Judge isn't surreptitiously an Anarcho-Capitalist (or just doesn't yet realize he is one), he sure is dancing on the brink.
heavenlyboy34
12-18-2010, 01:17 PM
In Part IV --- at 1:00 -- Wow! I can't believe that both of the libertarian guys (Matt and Nick) said that the government should provide some type of "limited safety net" for the "less fortunate". Matt admitted that he came later to libertarianism, but man... How on earth can you claim that the government should provide a safety net in any form? At least Katherine held her own.
But whats the deal with those two lightweights, Matt and Nick? I'm guessing they were both leftist earlier in their lives. - Maybe this is just a case of Residual leftism rearing its ugly head. But hey, what do I know... And I thought Reason Magazine was supposed to be the grand poo-bah of Libertarianism? :confused:
The same way that conservatives get to this position-by misinterpreting the General Welfare clause and taking Federalism too literally. Reason is farrrr from the grand poo-bah of libertarianism (unless you mean "big L" libertarianism-the watered down, "conservative light" variety. In that case, I'd agree).
heavenlyboy34
12-18-2010, 01:20 PM
By the way, did anyone catch the part in the show where the Judge basically came right out and said that even the very basic functions of government can be provided privately?
If the Judge isn't surreptitiously an Anarcho-Capitalist (or just doesn't yet realize he is one), he sure is dancing on the brink.
I only watched the first one so far (so I can't vouch for that part), but it's good to know the Judge is saying that. :cool:
Wesker1982
12-18-2010, 02:09 PM
By the way, did anyone catch the part in the show where the Judge basically came right out and said that even the very basic functions of government can be provided privately?
If the Judge isn't surreptitiously an Anarcho-Capitalist (or just doesn't yet realize he is one), he sure is dancing on the brink.
He has said multiple times that ALL taxation is theft, and the free market could better provide all of the services of the state. It doesn't get much more clear.
low preference guy
12-18-2010, 02:11 PM
He has said multiple times that ALL taxation is theft, and the free market could better provide all of the services of the state. It doesn't get much more clear.
Many people who believe that all taxation is theft, myself included, are not anarchists. Ayn Rand is another example.
Matt Collins
12-18-2010, 07:02 PM
The end of the 4th video was the Judge's BEST MONOLOGUE EVER!!!
Matt Collins
12-18-2010, 07:04 PM
"He's a sweetheart" - Judge NapolitanoI'm going to send The Judge an e-mail with the following videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pLOC4krZI4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzXbXNgxQPE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-bVMJ-jr2k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYrGlfkvRV0&feature=related
tpreitzel
12-18-2010, 09:57 PM
I have no idea what you are talking about. Never had such a problem.
Yeah, YouTube requires a captcha when a particular video is being accessed "excessively" from a particular network as it did last night ... I'll guarantee you that it happens so breaking a link to YouTube is one solution to the problem.
ClayTrainor
12-18-2010, 10:02 PM
Many people who believe that all taxation is theft, myself included, are not anarchists. Ayn Rand is another example.
It's very puzzling to me. You recognize taxation as theft, yet still advocate it?
low preference guy
12-18-2010, 10:07 PM
It's very puzzling to me. You recognize taxation as theft, yet still advocate it?
no. i am against taxation. i'm for a voluntarily funded organization that has the monopoly of the legal use of force in a given territory. i'm not for "competing governments".
i talked about this before but don't have time to search for my posts. you might want to check this out.
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/taxation.html
jct74
12-18-2010, 10:10 PM
Yeah, YouTube requires a captcha when a particular video is being accessed "excessively" from a particular network as it did last night ... I'll guarantee you that it happens so breaking a link to YouTube is one solution to the problem.
Weird. Never heard of that. I don't think it is a common problem though. But you can hover over the triangle in the bottom right-hand corner of the embedded video and click the box that pops up, it will give you the video URL, you can then paste it into your browser.
BrendenR
12-19-2010, 12:21 AM
On F.A Hayek and The Road To Serfdom
Wise and prudent government must recognize that there are fundamental limitations in human knowledge. A government that recognizes its limitations is less likely to intervene at every level and implement a top-down control of the economy.
One last misconception has to do with helping those who suffer misfortune. It is true that he rejected the idea of a top-down, centrally controlled economy and socialist welfare state. But that did not exclude the concept of some sort of social safety net.
In his chapter on “Security and Freedom” he says, “there can be no doubt that some minimum of food, shelter, and clothing, sufficient to preserve health and the capacity to work can be assured to everybody.”{11} He notes that this has been achieved in England (and we might add in most other modern democracies).
He went on to argue that the government should provide assistance to victims of such “acts of God” (such as earthquakes and floods). Although he might disagree with the extent governments today provide ongoing assistance for years, Hayek certainly did believe there was a place for providing aid to those struck by misfortune.
This, I agree with. There is room for a social safety net that provides the very essentials to individuals, that does not castrate the drive to work and provide for oneself. I think it is a fine line, but it can be accomplished. I do not believe that charity alone can accomplish this, especially not in the culture that we find ourselves in at this time.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.