[ExI] Strong libertarianism, societal good, & suffering (was: Cephalization, proles)

[Damien Sullivan]

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 12:43:43AM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
> 2011/5/15 Amon Zero <amon at doctrinezero.com>:
> > On 14 May 2011 11:03, Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Suffice to say, I disagree with your analysis on multiple levels. I have
> > never seen anything approaching conclusive evidence that full-blown
> > libertarianism would "produce good outcomes for the poor" (although of
> > course I've heard a *lot* of assertions), whereas I have seen plenty of
> > examples of unrestrained economic and political behaviour causing great
> > suffering to people unable to protect themselves from its effects.
> 
> America, you might have heard of the place, was once very much a
> libertarian place. I hear they have produced good outcomes for the
> poor.

Libertarian apart from the slavery and the land theft.  Which latter you
can't handwave away, because a lot of the "good outcomes for the poor"
came from the "free" (stolen) land that was given away to homesteaders.
Good land that hadn't seen much agricultural abuse yet, too.
Approximately post-scarcity conditions make the details of economic
systems somewhat less relevant.

A lot of other good outcomes (manufacturing jobs) came from having a big
internal free trade zone under a strong central government (not
anarchic) which meant only one big war, and from being somewhat
democratic and not having aristocratic cruft.  Which is libertarian, but
not distinctly libertarian vis a vis other setups like modern US
liberalism.

Oh, and those jobs developed under the protection of tariffs, a pattern
which has been repeated again and again in the 20th century.  External
free trade doesn't seem good for diverse development.

-xx- Damien X-)