[ExI] Libertarianism wins again...

[Dan]

The problem here is you've surrendered the principle. You believe it's okay to force people (against their will). So, what's wrong with the state or "theophilic militiae" forcing you against yours? Simply that you disagree with what they see as your good! And the state would usually view anyone having a gun -- save for the agents of the state -- as going against her own good and even society's good (and definitely the state's good). So, the scientist in this scenario would likely be disarmed for her own good.
 
And this sort of view can only end in basically what we have now at best and something much worse at worst. (Much worse because what we have now is partly due to the impact of libertarian ideas on statism: putting a brake on some of the worst aspects of statism.*) Under this system, whoever controls the state -- and that ain't you at this time -- gets to decide what research gets down and how to push everyone else around (within limits, of course, with the ultimate limit being that some people might decide to overthrow the government**).
 
Try to look at the libertarian perspective here. You'd be able to carry on research and the like, provided it coerced no one else. Other than that, there would be very little limits on your freedom to question or to experiment. Overall, too, such a setup would likely be much more productive as no one would be coerced into supporting other people's pet projects -- however fine and noble said others believe those projects to be. (No doubt, under this setup, people would still donate and help each other out -- maybe to a larger degree -- and would still make ridiculous investments of time and effort. But it would be their time and effort -- not yours and mine. E.g., if someone wants to build a church to worship a giant bird-man in, yes, to me, that's a waste -- though maybe not if it provides good entertainment:) -- but I wouldn't be forced to pay for it or to pray in it.)
 
Regards,
 
Dan
 
* Yes, yes, I'm aware that the statist position is that statism put a brake on the worst aspects of liberty.
 
** Of course, real world states or elites don't usually let things get that far. They usually reform or the old guard falls and a new guard takes over. Yes, on occasion, there are revolutions and overthrows, such as the recent Arab Spring, but "business as usual" for the state, just like for any smaller but stable criminal gang, usually involves not lashing people too hard -- just enough to keep them building the pyramid, but not enough to make them openly defy authority en masse. (And, of course, the sting of the lash is not the worst thing ever -- as one person here has pointed out -- so almost all will put up with it rather than even contemplate an alternative.)
 
From: Will Steinberg <steinberg.will at gmail.com>
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 2:44 PM
Subject: Re: [ExI] Libertarianism wins again...


Agreeably, I also like the way Stefano puts it!  Though I do think a little bit of coercion is well and good, so that we might never have to come to a time where the scientist needs an AK for when the theophilic militiae come knocking down his or her door... 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110721/50670301/attachment.html>