Difference between revisions of "Liberals and Libertarians"
From Critiques Of Libertarianism
(Created page with "Partridge, Ernest Category:Uncategorized {{URL | url = http://www.crisispapers.org/essays7p/libertarians.htm}} <!-- exactly one of these --> {{...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Ernest Partridge|Partridge, Ernest]] | [[Category:Ernest Partridge|Partridge, Ernest]] | ||
| − | [[Category: | + | [[Category:Liberal Criticisms Of Libertarianism]] |
| + | [[Category:Libertarianism Is Not Liberalism]] | ||
{{URL | url = http://www.crisispapers.org/essays7p/libertarians.htm}} <!-- exactly one of these --> | {{URL | url = http://www.crisispapers.org/essays7p/libertarians.htm}} <!-- exactly one of these --> | ||
{{DES | des = Ernest Partridge details the irreconcilable differences between liberalism and libertarianism.}} | {{DES | des = Ernest Partridge details the irreconcilable differences between liberalism and libertarianism.}} | ||
| Line 65: | Line 66: | ||
The liberal, while accepting the libertarian triad of negative rights, also proclaims the citizens’ “positive rights” – to an education, to employment with a living wage and safe working conditions, to a clean and safe environment, etc. These rights arise from the fact that the liberal, unlike the libertarian, recognizes social benefits and public interests. Communities flourish, the liberal insists, when they include an educated work force, when the citizens are assured that their basic needs for livelihood and health-care are met, and when the citizens share the conviction that the society is their society and that they have a role in its governance. And because the communal activity produces more wealth than would be obtained by the sum of individual efforts, members of the community have positive rights to a share of that wealth, and to community assistance in case of misfortune. | The liberal, while accepting the libertarian triad of negative rights, also proclaims the citizens’ “positive rights” – to an education, to employment with a living wage and safe working conditions, to a clean and safe environment, etc. These rights arise from the fact that the liberal, unlike the libertarian, recognizes social benefits and public interests. Communities flourish, the liberal insists, when they include an educated work force, when the citizens are assured that their basic needs for livelihood and health-care are met, and when the citizens share the conviction that the society is their society and that they have a role in its governance. And because the communal activity produces more wealth than would be obtained by the sum of individual efforts, members of the community have positive rights to a share of that wealth, and to community assistance in case of misfortune. | ||
| − | Accordingly, Ayn Rand’s ubermensch, John Galt, is a fantasy. There is no fully “self-made man,” morally free of all responsibility and obligation to the society that nurtured him and sustains him. On the contrary, as the nineteenth century sociologist, W. T. Hobhouse observed: | + | Accordingly, Ayn Rand’s ubermensch, [[John Galt]], is a fantasy. There is no fully “self-made man,” morally free of all responsibility and obligation to the society that nurtured him and sustains him. On the contrary, as the nineteenth century sociologist, W. T. Hobhouse observed: |
The organizer of industry who thinks he has 'made' himself and his business has found a whole social system ready to his hand in skilled workers, machinery, a market, peace and order -- a vast apparatus and a pervasive atmosphere, the joint creation of millions of men and scores of generations. Take away the whole social factor, and we have not Robinson Crusoe with his salvage from the wreck and his acquired knowledge, but the native savage living on roots, berries and vermin. | The organizer of industry who thinks he has 'made' himself and his business has found a whole social system ready to his hand in skilled workers, machinery, a market, peace and order -- a vast apparatus and a pervasive atmosphere, the joint creation of millions of men and scores of generations. Take away the whole social factor, and we have not Robinson Crusoe with his salvage from the wreck and his acquired knowledge, but the native savage living on roots, berries and vermin. | ||
