[net.philosophy] Libertarianism is Not Philososph

mwm@ea.UUCP (11/07/84)

> Libertarianism is not philosophy: it is advocacy.

Philosophy: (among others) 1) A search for a general understanding of
values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than observational
means. 2) Ethics. 3) A theory underlying or regarding a sphere of activity
or thought (political ~). 4) The most general beliefs, concepts, and
attitudes of an individual or group.

By all of the above, libertarianism is a philosophy. If you don't like
it being discussed here, push for a net.philosophy.libertarian in
net.news.group, or don't read this group.

"Libertarianism is advocacy." No more or less than socialism, capitalism,
etc. are advocacy in an environment like the net. You can't act on those
things here, all you can do is advocate them.

> I might add that it is also a simple-minded political theory advanced
> in contravention of historical experience and common sense.

You are, of course, correct. History and common sense teach that people are
scum, who will grab power if they can get it, force their beliefs on
others, steal anything left loose, and not pay for anything unless forced
to. That doesn't prevent those of us who *aren't* that way from trying to
build a rational society.

> A government by any other name (read cartel, monopoly,etc.) will oppress
> as much, if not more.

I don't care what you call it, why not work to make it less oppressive? Or
would you prefer living in a totalitarianism?

> Let's consign the libertarian discussion to net.astrology, where it belongs.
>		Bo Curry  hplabs!curry

Given the first definition of philosophy, it *all* belongs in net.astrology.
Or, more accurately, net.astrology should be net.philosophy.astrology.

	<mike

P.S. Definitions from Webster's New Collegiate. Sorry, but my OAD was at
home.