Pages:
Author

Topic: Closest thing to a libertarian utopia - page 3. (Read 3666 times)

hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 500
July 28, 2011, 01:59:25 PM
#6
How about we consider the more sensible assumption that if one can protect themselves from any physical attack, kidnapping and therefore coercion one can also protect their property in the same fashion.  In the context of you proposal this is the logical extension, therefore making your question moot.

End of thread or modify your question to support a more common sense approach to the issue.

"However, consider for a moment what that would mean for property."

It seems to me that the libertarian/anarcho-whatever ideology hinges on a couple of key ideas. The most important in my view is that every individual has inherent rights to security, self-determination and property (unless of course that individual violates the rights of others).
I want you to consider a scenario: Imagine that every individual had the means to protect themselves from any physical attack, kidnapping and therefore coercion. This seems, in theory, to be the ideal for a libertarian. No one would be able to harm you and you also could harm no other individual; no violent crime of any nature could occur.

However, consider for a moment what that would mean for property. There would be no physical means to preventing theft, and property would only be able to exist as an agreement (Don't steal any of my shit and I won't steal yours). Would this reduce property to a theoretical idea that would not actually exist in practice?
sr. member
Activity: 728
Merit: 252
SmartFi - EARN, LEND & TRADE
July 28, 2011, 01:56:48 PM
#5
That will taper of very quickly.

Cite: Charles Darwin.

New violent crazy people are born every day. Smiley

And any system that breeds poverty will always breed crime. Here in the U.S. we lock up more of our own people than any other country on Earth, yet our crime rates are still sky high when compared to anything that's not a Third World hellhole.

"you know you've got to have the
Police because if there were no police, look at what you'd be doing to
Yourselves -- you'd be killing each other if there were no police! But the
Reality is the police become necessary in human society only at that junction
In human society where it is split between those who have and those who ain't got. "

--Chairman Omali Yeshitela, as sampled in Police State by Dead Prez: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8c_UdWo4Zek
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1012
Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.
July 28, 2011, 01:48:59 PM
#4
Imagine that every individual had the means to protect themselves from any physical attack, kidnapping and therefore coercion. This seems, in theory, to be the ideal for a libertarian. No one would be able to harm you and you also could harm no other individual; no violent crime of any nature could occur.

However, consider for a moment what that would mean for property. There would be no physical means to preventing theft, and property would only be able to exist as an agreement (Don't steal any of my shit and I won't steal yours). Would this reduce property to a theoretical idea that would not actually exist in practice?
I can't think of any practical scenario where every individual could defend themselves, even against all the other similarly-armed individuals acting together. Are you imagining a scenario where every individual has sufficient nuclear weapons to blow up the entire world? I don't think people would ever let such a situation happen because one crazy person would end human life.

I can't imagine a scenario where every human is capable of defense such that no human is capable of offense.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
July 28, 2011, 01:48:07 PM
#3
I want you to consider a scenario: Imagine that every individual had the means to protect themselves from any physical attack, kidnapping and therefore coercion. This seems, in theory, to be the ideal for a libertarian. No one would be able to harm you and you also could harm no other individual; no violent crime of any nature could occur.

Mutually Assured Destruction doesn't apply to regular people with handguns.

Cite: every street gang ever

That will taper of very quickly.

Cite: Charles Darwin.
sr. member
Activity: 728
Merit: 252
SmartFi - EARN, LEND & TRADE
July 28, 2011, 01:46:20 PM
#2
I want you to consider a scenario: Imagine that every individual had the means to protect themselves from any physical attack, kidnapping and therefore coercion. This seems, in theory, to be the ideal for a libertarian. No one would be able to harm you and you also could harm no other individual; no violent crime of any nature could occur.

Mutually Assured Destruction doesn't apply to regular people with handguns.

Cite: every street gang ever
newbie
Activity: 46
Merit: 0
July 28, 2011, 01:42:39 PM
#1
It seems to me that the libertarian/anarcho-whatever ideology hinges on a couple of key ideas. The most important in my view is that every individual has inherent rights to security, self-determination and property (unless of course that individual violates the rights of others).
I want you to consider a scenario: Imagine that every individual had the means to protect themselves from any physical attack, kidnapping and therefore coercion. This seems, in theory, to be the ideal for a libertarian. No one would be able to harm you and you also could harm no other individual; no violent crime of any nature could occur.

However, consider for a moment what that would mean for property. There would be no physical means to preventing theft, and property would only be able to exist as an agreement (Don't steal any of my shit and I won't steal yours). Would this reduce property to a theoretical idea that would not actually exist in practice?
Pages:
Jump to: