As libertarians attempt to persuade others of their
position, they encounter an interesting paradox. On the one hand, the
libertarian message is simple. It involves moral premises and intuitions that
in principle are shared by virtually everyone, including children. Do not hurt
anyone. Do not steal from anyone. Mind your own business.
A child will say, “I had it first.” There is an intuitive
sense according to which the first user of a previously unowned good holds
moral priority over latecomers. This, too, is a central aspect of libertarian
theory.
Following Locke, Murray Rothbard, and other libertarian
philosophers sought to establish a morally and philosophically defensible
account of how property comes to be owned. Locke held the goods of the earth to
have been owned in common at the beginning, while Rothbard more plausibly held
all goods to have been initially unowned, but this difference does not affect
their analysis. Locke is looking to justify how someone may remove a good from
common ownership for his individual use, and Rothbard is interested in how
someone may take an unowned good and claim it for his individual use. And here is the libertarian paradox.......Why
is it so difficult to persuade people of what they implicitly believe already?
The reason is not difficult to find. Most people inherit
an intellectual schizophrenia from the state that educates them, the media that
amuses them, and the intellectuals who propagandize them.....the conception of the intellectual and the politician as the sculptors, and the human race as so much clay.....To Read More....
My Take – Let me start out by saying....there is much in this presentation that I find absolutely true and totally appealing. However, libertarian thinking reminds me very much like
military strategies. Did you know that every military strategy ever planned was
perfect? At least until they met the enemy....who also had a
"perfect" plan in place. Then everything starts to fall apart. The one most able to recognize the lack of
perfection in their “perfect plan” and quickly adapt it to whatever
difficulties the enemies “perfect plan” is causing is the one who wins.
Libertarianism is basic fundamental morality; a morality
that is foundation to the human makeup. It is
a reality that is imprinted in our makeup and governed by a force we call - conscience!
The trouble with conscience as an absolute arbiter of
right and wrong is that the conscience can be changed, adjusted…..or…lets just
say the conscience can be “trained”. And
what molds the conscience? Time and
circumstance! If the entire world
practiced the form of libertarianism as outlined to some extent here…and this
isn’t the only intellectual outline for this philosophy….it would be very
nice.
At least until someone desired
those things others have.
In spite of
the governing morality imprinted on our conscience, The Ten Commandments
apparently needed to be outlined as the ten "commandments", not ten "recommendations". Why? Because people will always find ways to
rationalize their views to their own benefit.
As I read this I started to think about the Jews as they
entered the Promised Land. What form of
government did they have? None to speak
of! The land was broken up into tribal
areas and those tribal areas were broken up into homesteads that became hereditary
holdings.
Even if they sold the land it
was returned at some point in the future.
But people were pretty much able to “do that which was right in their
own eyes”. What happened? They eventually demanded a king to rule over
them, judge them, and defend them against foreign enemies.
Libertarianism is a nice foundational philosophy that
will be a moving force for conservatives, but it holds little appeal as a
lasting, effective stand alone governing philosophy that will stand the test of
time.
Why?
Because for libertarianism to work it would
require people to become much more introspective and less self serving. A
Catholic priest once said:
"If you ever find the perfect organization, join
it. However, once you have joined
it; it is now become somewhat less than perfect!”
I have yet to find any flaw in that thought,
because people will always be people.
No comments:
Post a Comment