Difference between revisions of "What Is Wrong With Libertarianism"

From Critiques Of Libertarianism
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 5: Line 5:
 
* [[Diversity In 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.
 
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.
 +
 +
* [[There Is No Simple Description Of Libertarianism]]
 +
There are many, many one-line descriptions such as "no initiation of force or fraud", but there are major problems with such descriptions.  First, the statement is heavily value-laden: ideas of "initiation", "force", and "fraud" vary greatly even among libertarians.  Second, as libertarian [[David Friedman]] points out, such simple rules may dictate results that even libertarians find grossly undesirable.  Such as giving back land to the American Indians.
  
 
* [[Libertarians Misunderstand Rights]]
 
* [[Libertarians Misunderstand Rights]]

Revision as of 15:23, 11 October 2009