[extropy-chat] Extropy and libertarianism

[Max More]

At 07:18 AM 9/8/2005, Mike Lorrey wrote:
>--- Hal Finney <hal at finney.org> wrote:
> >
> > I can't account for the beliefs people have that this version of the
> > Principles of Extropy has turned away from libertarianism or is
> > somehow inconsistent with that philosophy.  To me, the philosophy of
> > non-coercion is such a fundamental and pervasive part of the
> > foundations of Extropian thinking that it is hard to imagine how
> > people could see it otherwise.

I'll reply to Hal's lengthy and thoughtful post later today.


>The criticism is generally regarding a softening of terms and mealy
>mouthing. Getting rid of 'dynamic optimism' for 'pragmatic optimism',
>and the like.

Explain how "pragmatic" is more mealy than "dynamic". I made the 
change (with encouragement from others who commented) precisely 
because it was thought that "dynamic" sounded New Agey and vague. 
"Pragmatic" isn't as *fun* as "dynamic", but how is it more mealy?


>The real 'watering down' is the degree to which policies endorsed by
>ExI or advocated by other transhumanist groups (such as supporting
>corporate welfare subsidies for stem cell research) which do not hold
>to the extropian principles (such as WTA) and hold anti-libertarian
>leadership (such as a certain well known socialist) or policies (such
>as pro-borg agendas), and hold their annual conferences in nations
>controlled by fasco-socialist thugs (Venezuela).

This is a confused paragraph. By saying "policies endorsed by ExI or 
advocated by other transhumanist groups", you're not saying anything 
useful. What if I said "Murders committed by Mike Lorrey or other 
males called "Mike"? The issue is whether the Principles of Extropy 
have been "watered down" (whatever that means), not what other groups 
do. ExI has never supported "corporate welfare subsidies for stem 
cell research", so don't suggest otherwise, then try to weasel out of 
it by saying "I only said ExI OR other groups."


>Furthermore, the claim to hold to the principles, which as you amply
>demonstrated are quite plainly libertarian in meaning and intent, which
>is contradicted by the weasle word denial of Extropy being libertarian
>in a mealy mouthed attempt to appeal to a broader base of membership
>among those with an aversion to liberty, is a 'watering down' that is
>semantically no different from the Klan claiming it is no longer
>racist, or various socialist parties claiming they are no longer
>pro-communist.

It's hard to know how to respond when people like you thick-headed 
repeat the same stuff, failing to respond to my previous detailed 
explanations (as in the NeoFiles interview: 
http://www.life-enhancement.com/NeoFiles/default.asp?ID=39). Clearly 
the Principles of Extropy are highly *compatible* with a libertarian 
view of politics -- more so than with any other identifiable 
viewpoint that I know of. It doesn't follow that they are 
*restricted* to only that one, exact political philosophy. A dogmatic 
view of political and economic systems would be incompatible with the 
principles of rational thinking and perpetual progress.

As I've said many times, the Principles are *not* compatible with 
socialism, but do not rule out *possible* exceptions to strict 
libertarian answers. The ultimate goal is not adherence to 
libertarian doctrine, but to advancing our lives in *all* the ways 
described in the Principles. As far as I'm concerned, that *might* 
mean, for example, some government funding of basic research. And it 
might not -- I'm not at all sure on this issue at the moment. It 
*might* mean some laws limiting private property rights -- such as 
might be needed to conduct inspections of research labs working with 
extremely dangerous materials (nanostuff, AI, whatever).

>You only gain respect by standing strongly for what you believe,
>stating what you believe, and sticking to it, not let the marxists,
>socialists, and other infiltrators dilute or divert your intent with
>their entryist tactics.

I've already replied to this kind of slanderous rubbish when Perry 
Metzger blew a gasket. I'm not going to repeat myself.



_______________________________________________________
Max More, Ph.D.
max at maxmore.com or max at extropy.org
http://www.maxmore.com
Strategic Philosopher
Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org
_______________________________________________________