Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (2970)	11/24/2007 6:38:55 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

If there is a difference, can you see that there are many impressionable people, many that you have debated with on other SI threads, can not or will not be able to discern. Trust me, there is little I see more clearly after so many years on SI than the inability of so many people to analyze, particularly to differentiate. <gg> That folks fail to see it does not mean that there is no distinction or that said distinction is not salient, even critical. I would very much like to have a discussion with someone, per your Stirner, who thinks that anarchy could possibly be in the long-term self interest of anyone. I cannot imagine what that argument might be. It seems pretty obvious to me that it is in the interest of humans to collaborate and respect and to establish institutions that so facilitate.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (2970)	11/26/2007 1:03:33 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Libertarianism isn't defined as not following moral rules, or having no responsibility for anyone else. Even anarchism doesn't mean that. Libertarianism covers a lot of specific ideas, but its general point is limited government. Not no government, and certainly not no moral considerations or no attempt to take care of people besides yourself. Anarchism means belief in having no government, but it doesn't mean that you can't have moral rules or feelings of responsibility to others. As for "possession by might rather than right", well libertarians tend to be strong supporters of property rights, and anarchocapitalists also support such rights. Some other anarchist subsets might not, but now your not just dealing with a minority (like libertarians), or a tiny minority (like anarchists), but a subset of the tiny minority. Stirner may have been an anarchist, and believe in no responsibilities or moral rules, but he's just one individual, and not one that has wide spread support either in society in general, or among those wanting smaller government.