Nostr Web Client

Libertarianism is the ideal on a theoretical level. It is what society should strive towards: maximum freedom for the individual with minimal government meddling.

The problem is that this form of rule only works in a civilization that is high-trust and highly aligned in its values.

You wouldn’t try to implement libertarianism in a place like Somalia. Nor would you try to revive El Salvador by being *more* lenient on criminals.

A certain amount of central authority is needed to maintain order, and thus create the conditions wherein peaceful, productive citizens may flourish and exercise their liberties.

While authoritarianism can certainly go too far, as we saw during COVID, a middle way is possible. England under British Common Law, and the USA in the gilded era, are excellent examples.

Enronpaul 1y ago

The only legitimate use of force is to establish and defend private property rights. This is libertarianism.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Alan ₿ 1y ago

Agree. However, even by that principle, would a central authority not arise to establish and defend property rights?

Cody 1y ago

I think that it would and that as you dlsaid before. Libertarianism is the ideal, it is a vector, not a destination.

It is a question if scale of central authority. IMO we have way too much of it now, but how small can we go before it becomes fragile? Hard to say.......bet definitely smaller😂

Enronpaul 1y ago

It may, but anything beyond defending property rights is an unjustifiable use of force. So it handcuffs what is justifiable to only include that which doesn’t violate our natural rights.

Could this happen without centralization? I suspect it could.

Bitcoin is a great example of an emerging voluntary system that is not centralized yet delivers a just system which naturally helps to protect individual liberty.

What is possible? I am not 100% sure. But I do believe that it is not moral or right to go any further than that with the use of force. The Non-Aggression Principle is valuable and the more it is esteemed in a society, the more chance it has to become the law.

Through greater consensus and striving for what is right, we can hope to put it to the test.

It starts by building enough of a consensus. We are much further than we were a decade or two ago.

I have a feeling that if Rothbard were with us today, he would be beyond excited to see where we are at today with Bitcoin, the propagation of the freedom movement, the peaceful subversion of the state, and the propagation of the ideas of liberty.

Where can this go? Let’s find out!

C.S.Burner 🪙➡️🔥 1y ago

How to define and defend property rights of the public (negative externalities of individual contracts) in a libertarian society?

Enronpaul 1y ago

Give me an example of what you’re talking about and I’ll show you how the Non-Aggression Principle applies.

C.S.Burner 🪙➡️🔥 1y ago

Environmental pollution (air, water).

Water use from a river.

Enronpaul 1y ago

Such are extensions of the NAP and involve property rights.