RE: Is this the libertarian utopia some Steemers dream of?
It's hard to bring up these subjects without some people feeling attacked. I don't think David is necessarily calling the ideas of Libertarians evil or anything that dramatic, I think his point is that they might not be applicable.
I've had a few conversations with fellow Steemians regarding the ideas of how a world with a smaller government would be. For the most part regardless of our political position we would like the same outcome, prosperity, health and ultimately our concept of happiness. However, we might not agree on the path to get there.
I think that sometimes the Libertarian ideas are too difficult to apply to our world, not because they are necessarily bad, but because we have grown to a size that it would be close to impossible for us to begin to apply them.
If any of us thinks that somehow, someway the powers to be will let go of their grasp of our currently political system for Utopian ideas, we might be setting ourselves up for disappointment.
Would I ideally like a smaller government, to pay little to no taxes, more privacy, etc etc? Of course I would!! Do I think its feasible, or even possible in my life time, I'm not so sure about that.
The other point being made here, which I think is pretty balanced is that if we believe that a free market driven society would organically create the necessary mechanisms to develop infrastructure, medical system, etc etc. We would also have to ponder that we might be stating that a free market driven society would develop a governance of some sorts as to organize such projects, bring them to fruition.
Which would take us to step one, now we have a type of government. So maybe, it might be more practical to find the compromise, determine in what areas we benefit from a free market and in what areas we simply are better of with a government structure.
At least, that is my current position.
I understand that people hold political ideas not because they are evil or want to hurt others intentionally - some maybe do, but most don't, but "problem" with non-libertarians or statists that they mostly don't have any principles to stand on. When libertarians call for ending the war on drugs for example, we do it out of principle, not because we want people do drugs, but because we think that every person owns himself and his body and he is free to do whatever he wants with it (studpid things included), when we call for cutting welfare benefits and lowering taxes we don't do it because we hate the poor, but because we understand that taking other's people hard earned money is wrong, it would be wrong for someone to force people to do stuff for him, so it's wrong for someone to take other people's money by force... Libertarian idea is so simple, yet you can apply it to so many areas.
When you say libertarian ideas are hard to apply to or world, you are contradicting yourself. Why? When you wrote this response to my comment, you supposed - rightfully so - that non-violence is meaningful and that I am a free individual that can be reasoned with. Everything libertarians want to do is expand this principle to everyone including government... make this non-violence universal, and apply it to the government. Does government treat me the same when they take your money? No, the government uses violence.
You can have competence-based hierarchies in a libertarian social order and organize with whoever you want and however you want (but you can't use force), and in reality there is no compromise, it's like saying "we are going to stop rape" but we will choose 100 people who can rape without being punished. Libertarianism is about principles, not "engineering" society.
@nullpointer and honestly brother, there is probably not one sentence you said there that I could possibly disagree with. I believe the ideals of libertarianism are quite beautiful, I just don't know if we could ever be stronger than the people holding the guns.
Maybe I'm guilty of not having enough faith in humanity, maybe that is my biggest flaw as a person. It can be quite easy for people to abuse power, that even when a social structure has started with a positive/ideal goal eventually greed and corruption show their face.
But again, I may be guilty of not having enough faith in us humans, but it also might be a good sign that I'm here, learning a bit more every day.
A "libertarian utopia" would still require a monopoly of force to keep the poor separate from the rich, otherwise the poor would eat the rich via revolution when the class divide became too wide
The difference is government has force behind it. If a community is peacefully and voluntarily organizing, then it's not government. Libertarianism is anything but "utopian". Thinking a few elected officials in Washington wielding the immense power of government, and the incredible incentives of lobbyists will ever do anything but line their pockets is utopian to me.
Well, I meant to use the word utopian for its traditional meaning really.
Utopian.- A Utopia is an imagined community or society that possesses highly desirable or nearly perfect qualities for its citizens
So in reality I'm not in disagreement with your statement one bit.
Oh I see