Libertarianism

Post Reply
MrJonno
Posts: 3442
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:24 am
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by MrJonno » Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:31 pm

That's a bit like saying doing experiments in death camps improved human health, it may be true but that doesnt justify the experiments
When only criminals carry guns the police know exactly who to shoot!

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:35 pm

MrJonno wrote:That's a bit like saying doing experiments in death camps improved human health, it may be true but that doesnt justify the experiments
Dude, it's nothing at all like saying that.

What he said was that providing economic freedom helped produce political freedom, which is a good thing, isn't it?

MrJonno
Posts: 3442
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:24 am
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by MrJonno » Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:39 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
MrJonno wrote:That's a bit like saying doing experiments in death camps improved human health, it may be true but that doesnt justify the experiments
Dude, it's nothing at all like saying that.

What he said was that providing economic freedom helped produce political freedom, which is a good thing, isn't it?
To be perfectly honest not sure, is working with an oppressive poor regime so it becomes an oppresive rich regime that might one day become a democratic rich regime a good thing?.

Not convinced its true either, but people do work with nasty regimes for their personal and their countries benefit, but I'm not sure you should get a nobel prize for that
When only criminals carry guns the police know exactly who to shoot!

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:43 pm

MrJonno wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
MrJonno wrote:That's a bit like saying doing experiments in death camps improved human health, it may be true but that doesnt justify the experiments
Dude, it's nothing at all like saying that.

What he said was that providing economic freedom helped produce political freedom, which is a good thing, isn't it?
To be perfectly honest not sure, is working with an oppressive poor regime an oppresive rich regime that might one day become a democratic rich regime a good thing?.

Not convinced its true either, but people do work with nasty regimes for their personal and their countries benefit, but I'm not sure you should get a nobel prize for that
Doing things to make an oppressive dictatorship become a democratic government is a good thing. If economic freedom does foster political freedom, isn't that a good thing? What ought to be done instead? Military action?

MrJonno
Posts: 3442
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:24 am
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by MrJonno » Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:15 pm

Not putting him in power in the first place?, if economic freedom leads to political freedom its unproven and likely to be pretty long term. Pincochet was put into power because of his economics, ie wasnt a leftie so its on pretty dodgy grounds that any involvement in him was due to political freedom
When only criminals carry guns the police know exactly who to shoot!

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:25 pm

MrJonno wrote:Not putting him in power in the first place?, if economic freedom leads to political freedom its unproven and likely to be pretty long term. Pincochet was put into power because of his economics, ie wasnt a leftie so its on pretty dodgy grounds that any involvement in him was due to political freedom
Milton Friedman didn't put him in power in the first place.

"Historical evidence speaks with a single voice on the relation between political freedom and a free market. I know of no example in time or place of a society that has been marked by a large measure of political freedom, and that has not also used something comparable to a free market to organize the bulk of economic activity." https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/ipe/friedman.htm Excerpts from Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), Chapter 1, "The Relation Between Economic Freedom and Political Freedom," pp. 7-17.

Can you think of a society that has had a large measure of political freedom without also something comparable to a free market to organize the bulk of economic activity?

And, see:


"Economic Freedom, Human Freedom, Political Freedom" by Milton Friedman Delivered November 1, 1991 http://www.cbe.csueastbay.edu/~sbesc/frlect.html

User avatar
Audley Strange
"I blame the victim"
Posts: 7485
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by Audley Strange » Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:45 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
MrJonno wrote:That's a bit like saying doing experiments in death camps improved human health, it may be true but that doesnt justify the experiments
Dude, it's nothing at all like saying that.

What he said was that providing economic freedom helped produce political freedom, which is a good thing, isn't it?
Chile had freedom until Nixon assisted and funded insurrection against Allende. It might not have been the "freedom" that American were lied to that they had, but it was a democratic country (there have been others). Encouraging a pliable Military Junta to take charge of a democracy and then allowing the acolytes of Friedman's "rationalist" economic policy, is like freeing Iraq from Sadam Hussain by carpet bombing Baghdad and liberating them from their limbs and lives.

Kinda like hailing the miracle that the kid you've been given punishment beatings no longer wets the bed.

I refuse to accept that it is an example of libertarianism, rather a form of Plutocratic Tyranny (which it does seem to me a lot of so-called libertarians). To me a libertarian would have been appalled by the Actions of the U.S. and the Junta as been outrageous abuses of counterfeit power.
"What started as a legitimate effort by the townspeople of Salem to identify, capture and kill those who did Satan's bidding quickly deteriorated into a witch hunt" Army Man

MrJonno
Posts: 3442
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:24 am
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by MrJonno » Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:51 pm

Friedman worked with a truely foul regime, that in itself isnt unusual most politicans have do to so. What makes his role quite possibly a crime against humanity was that he was part of a foreign policy that put it in power in the first place. You might as well discuss Hitler building really good roads, he did but again its not really what he is remembered for
When only criminals carry guns the police know exactly who to shoot!

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:59 pm

Friedman wasn't involved in the coup against Allende or with installing the Pinochet regime. He also was not a politician. He was not part of the foreign policy that put Pinochet.

It's not about building good roads for Hitler. Jeezus, people. It's about the free market helping to END the thing you're complaining about.

User avatar
Audley Strange
"I blame the victim"
Posts: 7485
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by Audley Strange » Thu Jan 03, 2013 4:58 pm

Quite right CES. It was his Chicago School acolytes who did the dirty work after being encouraged to go down there and invited by Pinochet. Are they responsible for the actions of that Junta? No, but they supported them right through it rather than going "these sick fuckers are totalitarian."

Not libertarians at all.
"What started as a legitimate effort by the townspeople of Salem to identify, capture and kill those who did Satan's bidding quickly deteriorated into a witch hunt" Army Man

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Jan 03, 2013 5:03 pm

Audley Strange wrote:Quite right CES. It was his Chicago School acolytes who did the dirty work after being encouraged to go down there and invited by Pinochet. Are they responsible for the actions of that Junta? No, but they supported them right through it rather than going "these sick fuckers are totalitarian."

Not libertarians at all.
That's ridiculous. Citations needed.

User avatar
Cormac
Posts: 6415
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by Cormac » Thu Jan 03, 2013 5:16 pm

rEvolutionist wrote:Well, free-marketeering, like I thought Friedman was an advocate for, would naturally lead to accumulation of capital, and therefore accumulation of power. How do libertarians propose to avoid that situation?

Oh, and by the way, Rothbard and Paul aren't critics of libertarianism. They are liberatarians themselves. They may or may not meet your criteria you just set above, but I don't have any reason to accept your criteria over self-avowed libertarians.
Just for a moment, imagine that I'm a tradesman - a plumber. I was born into a poor family, blighted by unemployment and so on. I managed to get myself trained as a plumber and over the years, I built up a reasonably busy business. At the end of each month, I have a modest excess of income (in other words - after I've paid my taxes and my bills, I have a little left over).

Because I want to provide for my retirement, or for a rainy day, I want to put this "surplus" aside for this purpose. There is no point in putting this money in a bank account - because inflation would strip away any value in the money every year. So I put my money into shares, or bonds, or commodities, or perhaps property - or perhaps I lend it to someone who agrees to pay some interest in addition to the principle in return.

This is accrual of capital. Taxes have been paid all the way along. What is the problem with this?

If I then feel that I would like to give my children a better start than that which I had experienced, and perhaps even my grandchildren - taxes have already been paid on this money - why should I not be able to give them this money?

If I chose instead to invest in an area that the government wishes to develop - and consequently, I enjoy a deferral of taxation. On the liquidation of the investment, I pay taxes and extract my capital and profit. What is the problem with this?

Accrual of Capital is not a bad thing. It is accrued capital that allows investment for the public good in addition to private good.

Capital itself is neutral - all it represents is accrued value/effort.
FUCKERPUNKERSHIT!


Wanna buy some pegs Dave, I've got some pegs here...
You're my wife now!

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Jan 03, 2013 5:21 pm

Cormac, some time ago that seemed to be overwhelmingly laudable and applauded by most. More and more, though, I hear people suggest that what you just described is the great evil in the world that needs to be stopped.

User avatar
Audley Strange
"I blame the victim"
Posts: 7485
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by Audley Strange » Thu Jan 03, 2013 6:05 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
Audley Strange wrote:Quite right CES. It was his Chicago School acolytes who did the dirty work after being encouraged to go down there and invited by Pinochet. Are they responsible for the actions of that Junta? No, but they supported them right through it rather than going "these sick fuckers are totalitarian."

Not libertarians at all.
That's ridiculous. Citations needed.
Well you won't read them the literature is available. Here's a couple.

http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledge/i ... cale=en_GB

http://dollarsandsense.org/archives/200 ... ypher.html

You could wiki Chigago Boys but that tends to be all based on Niaomi Klein's specific and questionable polemic.
"What started as a legitimate effort by the townspeople of Salem to identify, capture and kill those who did Satan's bidding quickly deteriorated into a witch hunt" Army Man

MrJonno
Posts: 3442
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:24 am
Contact:

Re: Libertarianism

Post by MrJonno » Thu Jan 03, 2013 6:14 pm

Friedman is a really really poor choice as an advertisement for economics or politics, if you want a right wing politican who while vile didnt actually run a government that was directly involved in mass murder then you are better of with Margaret Thatcher. She is many thing most of which arent particuarly complementary but she was a great intellectual and activist.

Next people on the forum will start use Stalin as an advert for socialism
When only criminals carry guns the police know exactly who to shoot!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 29 guests