View source for What Is Wrong With Libertarianism
From Critiques Of Libertarianism
Jump to:
navigation
,
search
It would be nice if there was a simple dismissal of libertarianism, but there are so many different kinds that no one argument could apply. Instead, here is a list of criteria by which you can judge any presentation of libertarianism or single argument of libertarianism. And perhaps some will use this list to improve their understanding, whether they move towards or away from libertarianism. * [[Diversity In Libertarianism]] There is really no such thing as a coherent libertarian ideology or philosophy. Nor is there one "real" libertarianism: libertarianism is heterogeneous. Libertarianism can be left or right, rationalist or antirationalist, essentialist or pragmatist, hardcore or soft core, based on rights or liberty or values, using Austrian or Chicago or other economics, statist or anarchist, political or philosophical, etc. This occurs in other viewpoints (conservatism, liberalism, etc.) as well: but there are two great errors due to this fact. The first is presenting any one statement as typical of all libertarianism, instead of one or a few sects. The second is using these different varieties as if were the same thing. That is a fallacy of the shifting middle term. These problems are best avoided by focusing on individual arguments based on one libertarian viewpoint at a time. * [[Libertarians Misunderstand Rights]] Natural rights are nonsense on stilts. Rights are positive in the scientific sense: they are observable phenomena consisting of human behavior and institutions that can be studied as certainly as we study any other animal behavior. Rights are not mere claims: they exist because of enforced involuntary duties. And those involuntary duties conflict with freedoms. * [[Libertarians Misunderstand Freedom]] Libertarians use freedom as a [[glittering generality]] of [[propaganda]]. A freedom consists of an ability to do something without a human or natural obstacle. Libertarians redefine freedom as being unobstructed by humans. Either definition of freedom prohibits obstructions by humans. If a freedom is enforced, it is a right (otherwise it is merely a claim) and the prohibition of human obstruction is an enforced involuntary duty. Every enforced freedom creates these unfreedoms. A capability is a freedom where the ability is also a right: there is an enforced involuntary duty to enable in addition to the duty not to obstruct. * [[Liberty And Freedom Are Amoral]] The morality of any particular liberty or freedom must be decided independently. Just because it is a liberty or freedom does not mean it is good. For example, if I am free to punch you in the nose, is that good? If I am free to radioactively contaminate my own land for thousands of years, is that good? Arguments that these actions are not "real liberties or freedoms" have nothing to do with reality: they are simply attempts to redefine common words to fit ideology (see [[newspeak]].) * [[Libertarians Prefer Freedom To Capability]] Adrift in the ocean. * [[Libertarians Misunderstand Liberty]] * [[Rights, Freedoms And Liberties Cannot Be Divided Into Positive And Negative]] The Isaiah Berlin sense of positive and negative really means that positive rights are costly and negative rights are free because they rely on "doing nothing". But because all rights have costly enforceable duties, all rights are positive. Instead rights may be ranked in order of costliness, some more costly (positive) than others. * [[Libertarians Misunderstand Coercion]] * [[Libertarians Misunderstand Liberalism]] list of liberal tools for society, including markets and government * [[Libertarian Philosophy Is Wretched]] Libertarian philosophy consists of post hoc rationalizations for an intolerant conservative set of strongly held values, ie. view of the good or gut feelings. (In contrast, liberalism is tolerant of diverse values, and attempts to maximize satisfaction.) These "rational" bases are based in either omitted, unreal, untestable or demonstrably false assumptions. The "rational" arguments based on these philosophies frequently add grotesque fallacies on top of the false bases. * [[Libertarianism Has Unbalanced Values]] * [[Libertarianism Is Sold By Propaganda]] Reliance on spin, propaganda, public relations deceit, historical revisionism, denialism and crankery in defiance of science, history, economics, experience, and other more accurate ways of knowing. Often called vulgar libertarianism. * [[Perversion Of Language In Libertarian Argument]] Propaganda Terms (including classical liberalism), phatic language, dog-whistle terms, newspeak, libertarian special meanings of terms. * [[Vulgar Libertarianism]] "Them pore ole bosses need all the help they can get." http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2006/09/vulgar-libertarianism-neoliberalism.html * [[Chicago Economics]] (neoliberal economics) mistaking economic efficiency for an optimum, post-autistic economics * [[Austrian Economics]] * [[Individualist Viewpoint]] Methodological Individualism * [[Overlooking Corporate Privilege]] Corporate socialism, corporatism, corporate catspaws, vs. unions, corps as legal individuals, limited liability, Index Of Economic Freedom * [[Market Fetishism]] * [[Ayn Rand And Objectivism]] Anybody who thinks Rand is a great author or a great philosopher can be immediately discounted. She was the [[Horatio Alger]] of her era. * [[Gold Standard]] * [[Libertarians Misunderstand Their Own Political Position]] If you believe in taxation for national defense, then any honest libertarian can describe you as a statist who believes that coercive taxation is justified by an "ends justify the means" philosophy. * [[Distaste For Democracy]] * [[Irrational Fear Of Socialism]] Road To Serfdom, * [[Ideology Before Pragmatism]] * [[Libertarian Exaggerated Self-Importance]] Tiny, shrinking minority, claims on economists, claims of rationality, etc. * [[Libertarian And Objectivism Are Both Stolen Terms]] Libertarianism has been used by philosophers about free will for 200 years. Libertarian was used by anarchists for roughly 100 years before it was recently co-opted by right-wing American libertarians. Objectivism was used by Gottlob Frege for his philosophical realism decades before Rand's adoption. The Objectivist Poets also used the term before Rand did. http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/150-years-of-libertarian
Template:DES
(
view source
)
Template:Extension DPL
(
view source
)
Template:List
(
view source
)
Template:Red
(
view source
)
Template:Under Construction
(
view source
)
Return to
What Is Wrong With Libertarianism
.
Navigation menu
Views
Page
Discussion
View source
History
Personal tools
Log in
Search
Search For Page Title
in Wikipedia
with Google
Translate This Page
Google Translate
Navigation
Main Page (fast)
Main Page (long)
Blog
Original Critiques site
What's new
Current events
Recent changes
Bibliography
List of all indexes
All indexed pages
All unindexed pages
All external links
Random page
Under Construction
To Be Added
Site Information
About This Site
About The Author
How You Can Help
Support us at Patreon!
Site Features
Site Status
Credits
Notes
Help
Toolbox
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
Guidelines To Create
Indexable Page/Quote
Indexable Book/Quote
Indexable Quote
Unindexed
Templates
Edit Sidebar
Purge cache this page