[extropy-chat] Authenticity, extropy, libertarianism, and history

[Mike Lorrey]

--- Jef Allbright <jef at jefallbright.net> wrote:

> Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> 
> >I suppose I'd like my label back. I have a bunch of friends who used
> >to enjoy using the label and would like to use it again, we're very
> >tired of having labels taken out from under us (we liked "Liberal"
> >before the Fabians corrupted it, for example). 

In the case of the Fabians, they were authoritarian socialists intent
on incrementalism and entryist campaigns. What the Fabians did is
distinctly different from what many libertarians insist upon, that the
label "Libertarian" does not apply only to people who score 100%x100%
on the Worlds Shortest Political Quiz, as Perry and his ilk would
prefer, but to anyone who scores 70%x50% or 50%x70% or higher.
"Libertarianism" is as big a tent as conservatism or modern liberalism.

> >I know Natasha doesn't
> >like labels -- labeling being, in her opinion (expressed above)
> >contrary to individuality -- and so perhaps you folks aren't
> >sufficiently attached to it to want to make further use of it.  I'm
> >sure we won't mind if the label arrives somewhat soiled -- we can
> >have it cleaned and repainted ourselves.

Not if you are going to stick it in a jar and hold Star Chamber purity
inquisitions against anyone who uses it.

> I find this statement particularly interesting because I feel the
> same, but from the opposite direction!
> 
> My history with the list doesn't go back as far, having joined only 
> about ten years ago, and my activity is not nearly as high as some 
> others, although I read and consider almost every post.  But since I 
> found this group, and through many ups and downs in signal to noise, 
> conflict and controversy, for me it has been a shining star of free 
> thought on the Net.
> 
> I have always seen the concept of extropy as being more abstract and 
> universal than any specific implementation of a set of political/ 
> social beliefs. Indeed, embracing "spontaneous order" and rejection
of
> "static utopia" logically lead one to a transpolitical stance, in my
> opinion.

static utopia != libertarian utopia

Libertarian utopias are generally quite dynamic, which is their point,
because stasis requires regulation to acheive and maintain. It
therefore follows that without regulation, you get dynamism.

And, no, extropy can't be transpolitical, as the principles clearly
exclude political memes that conflict with them, such as those opposing
technological progress and self determination of individuals, promoting
ignorance and superstition, etc.

Thus, a Borg may be transhuman, but it is not extropic. Nor can
luddites be extropic.

Thus, the principles clearly place extropy in one quadrant of a
political landscape, with technological progress being one axis, and
degree of centralization being the other. Borganists are the
neighboring pro-tech quadrant, while Green/Georgist luddites tend to be
on the neighboring pro-individualist quadrant, and
primitivist/theocratic collectivists are in the opposing quadrant.



Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com