Libertarians are Huge Fans of Initiating Force

From Critiques Of Libertarianism
Jump to: navigation, search

Choose one of these to see this page:

Matt Bruenig points out the obvious: that initiation of force is a coded term referring to the libertarian theory of entitlement. If you don't buy libertarianism, it is obviously bullshit.


Nothing in this index yet.


[...] it's clear that when the libertarians talk about not initiating force, they are using the word "initiation" in a very idiosyncratic way. They have packed into the word "initiation" their entire theory of who is entitled to what. What they actually mean by "initiation of force" is not some neutral notion of hauling off and physically attacking someone. Instead, the phrase "initiation of force" simply means "acting in a way that is inconsistent with the libertarian theory of entitlement, whether using force or not." And then "defensive force" simply means "violently attacking people in a way that is consistent with the libertarian theory of entitlement." This definitional move is transparently silly and ultimately reveals a blatant and undeniable circularity in libertarian procedural reasoning.
Matt Bruenig, "Libertarians are Huge Fans of Initiating ForceLibertarians are Huge Fans of Initiating Force"