Im not always right. In fact I know very little about most things. But there's a whole group out there who have anointed themselves arbiters of morality, behaviour and ethics and these people want to force others to behave in certain ways and they think if they just jigger the laws the "right" way the society can be steered towards a b…
Im not always right. In fact I know very little about most things. But there's a whole group out there who have anointed themselves arbiters of morality, behaviour and ethics and these people want to force others to behave in certain ways and they think if they just jigger the laws the "right" way the society can be steered towards a better future. THis kind of thinking leads to misery always and everywhere. And it creeps into the thinking of even the most well intentioned libertarian minded person. HUman beings will only flourish under conditions of freedom. Liberty doesnt mean the freedom to abuse others rights as Im sure you know. But any application of political or government laws meant to alter or guide human behavior will always and everywhere fail and make the problems worse. Government is force and violence by definition. Government is not the same as governance. There will always be rules. But a majority voting to expropriate a minority is never moral. A small group of self appointed elites deigning to know the best rules to live by and imposing them on everyone else is the very definition of tyranny. Thats why I think Murray Rothbard was right and anarcho-capitalism is the paradigm we might strive to follow
I don't disagree with most of what you say. My point is that progressivism is not a "disease", nor is it inherently authoritarian anymore than conservativism is inherently authoritarian. Every ideology has something they can bring to the table. The simple minded tend to take both ideologies to the extremes (see the woke left and much of the religious right), but they're not inherently extreme. If you haven't read Jonathan Haidts book, The Righteous Mind, it would probably explain this topic better than I can. And it's a fascinating read. Also, I'm more of a Mises girl.
Im not always right. In fact I know very little about most things. But there's a whole group out there who have anointed themselves arbiters of morality, behaviour and ethics and these people want to force others to behave in certain ways and they think if they just jigger the laws the "right" way the society can be steered towards a better future. THis kind of thinking leads to misery always and everywhere. And it creeps into the thinking of even the most well intentioned libertarian minded person. HUman beings will only flourish under conditions of freedom. Liberty doesnt mean the freedom to abuse others rights as Im sure you know. But any application of political or government laws meant to alter or guide human behavior will always and everywhere fail and make the problems worse. Government is force and violence by definition. Government is not the same as governance. There will always be rules. But a majority voting to expropriate a minority is never moral. A small group of self appointed elites deigning to know the best rules to live by and imposing them on everyone else is the very definition of tyranny. Thats why I think Murray Rothbard was right and anarcho-capitalism is the paradigm we might strive to follow
I don't disagree with most of what you say. My point is that progressivism is not a "disease", nor is it inherently authoritarian anymore than conservativism is inherently authoritarian. Every ideology has something they can bring to the table. The simple minded tend to take both ideologies to the extremes (see the woke left and much of the religious right), but they're not inherently extreme. If you haven't read Jonathan Haidts book, The Righteous Mind, it would probably explain this topic better than I can. And it's a fascinating read. Also, I'm more of a Mises girl.