I am sympathetic to the end goal of libertarianism but anyone who doesn't realize that libertarianism is self-defeating is legally braindead. You will not get a free society if corporations are allowed to silence ideas that offend power. Additionally, but unrelated to this particular post, you will not have a free people capable of self governing if they are addicted to fentanyl porn and sugary drinks. Basically if you want to be governed like a libertarian you have to have a disciplined and well ordered society which you don't get from libertarian policies.
Basically if you want to be governed like a libertarian you have to have a disciplined and well ordered society which you don't get from libertarian policies.
Order is an emergent property of freedom. Order does not have to be imposed on a people, they generate their own order. The less you protect them from the consequences of their actions, the more they will be informed on how to conduct themselves in a beneficial and orderly fashion.
you have to have a disciplined and well ordered society which you don't get from libertarian policies
This is a feature, not a bug. If you got it from policy, you would inherently break libertarianism's disfavor of governmental manipulation. You must instead get it from other sources, like culture, upbringing, philosophy, intelligence, etc.
I support the flavor that permits entire civilizations to try and fail this process, which will likely destroy them completely. But I reject large scale civilizations, so it wouldn't be so bad for a few towns to fail.
The logistic reality is basically impossible, though. It'd be insane to attempt anything like this without enormous preparation or some desperate cataclysm. Or something outlandish like Bioshock's Rapture.
you have to have a disciplined and well ordered society which you don't get from libertarian policies.
So government is the only way to keep people disciplined? Culture and upbringing have nothing to do with it? With views like that, you'd fit right in with our SJW friends.
I am sympathetic to the end goal of libertarianism but anyone who doesn't realize that libertarianism is self-defeating is legally braindead. You will not get a free society if corporations are allowed to silence ideas that offend power. Additionally, but unrelated to this particular post, you will not have a free people capable of self governing if they are addicted to fentanyl porn and sugary drinks. Basically if you want to be governed like a libertarian you have to have a disciplined and well ordered society which you don't get from libertarian policies.
Order is an emergent property of freedom. Order does not have to be imposed on a people, they generate their own order. The less you protect them from the consequences of their actions, the more they will be informed on how to conduct themselves in a beneficial and orderly fashion.
Everything you said seems correct. However:
This is a feature, not a bug. If you got it from policy, you would inherently break libertarianism's disfavor of governmental manipulation. You must instead get it from other sources, like culture, upbringing, philosophy, intelligence, etc.
I support the flavor that permits entire civilizations to try and fail this process, which will likely destroy them completely. But I reject large scale civilizations, so it wouldn't be so bad for a few towns to fail.
The logistic reality is basically impossible, though. It'd be insane to attempt anything like this without enormous preparation or some desperate cataclysm. Or something outlandish like Bioshock's Rapture.
There has to be some rules and leadership.
It's fantasy to think that the majority of people can live disciplined lives on their own.
The libertarian concept
So government is the only way to keep people disciplined? Culture and upbringing have nothing to do with it? With views like that, you'd fit right in with our SJW friends.
You advocating for a theoretical form of government that doesn't exist and wouldn't work in practice would fit in with our commie friends.
Im advocating for stronger communities with good morals. Why you think the government needs to be involved for that to exist is what im questioning.
Probably because government involvement has always been necessary for strong communities with good morals to even exist.