[ExI] The Bullet-Swallowers

[Lee Corbin]

I do object to the notion that Libertarianism (with or without a
capital L) can really be considered an "all or nothing" philosophy
that one either accepts or does not accept, quite unlike a scientific
theory or conjecture that---at least to a degree---must be
critically held or critically rejected.

James Madison famously wrote

     "Is there no virtue among us? If there be not, we are in a
     wretched situation.  No theoretical checks -- no form of
     government can render us secure. To suppose liberty or
     happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical
     idea. If there be sufficient virtue and intelligence in the
     community, it will be exercised in the selection of these
     men. So that we do not depend on their virtue, or put
     confidence in our rulers, but in the people who are to
     choose them."

To me, the key ingredient is whether or not a certain amount
of liberty, or democracy, or even scientific temperament can
plausibly be attained by a given group of people at a certain time.

Even now in Iraq, we in the West wonder if "Iraq is ready
for democracy", whereas doubtless some perceptive people
in Iraq wonder, "Is the West ready for complete submission
to the will of Allah?". 

I think that the historical record is clear: the freedoms that
we enjoy in the West (regardless of how much attack they're
currently under) could not have been enjoyed by Europe
ten centuries ago. It would have been entirely futile for some
set of feudal barons to get together and say "Let's get a
democracy along the Greek model going around here."

Likewise, libertarians should admit that libertarianism is only
a *direction* towards which many of Earth's societies today
should move. 

Therefore the idea that we can "bite the bullet" and accept
the "logic" of libertarianism is wrongheaded. If the people
are not individualistic enough, if they're not law-abiding 
enough, or if they're *too* religious, forget about it.

Meanwhile, let's endorse what memes we can to help move
things towards more capacity for freedom and liberty.

Lee

> [Jef] A good discussion ongoing at Scott Aaronson's blog,
> of interest to many here.  What's missing, in my opinion, is
> epistemological awareness of the role of the observer in
> any model (at any level.) You can never *really* account
> for your own prior.
> 
> <http://scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=326>