What drives people towards libertarianism?

Post Reply New Topic

For a flat 10 percent tax to work we would have to institute land reform.

I only really see American men on the Internet advocate the kind of libertarianism you speak of. Most of them are autistic and middle class. I think those are influencing factors.

That's really interesting- we could investigate what proportion of libertarians are on the spectrum. I guess the lack of empathy could explain it- I'm unsure if I am or not (but joined because I have a good deal of AS traits), but empathy wasn't always a weak point of mine.

The individualistic US culture also plays a role- the government is not as "big" as in most European and European-style countries so people attribute their successes on their own effort.

Ironically, I bought into that while I was lower class because I defied trends like crazy- I'm a top student who grew up with parents (and later a revolving door of stepparents) that weren't around much and am economically disadvantaged. I didn't realize until recently that I was more exception than rule, and thought "if I could do well, so could everyone else who's lower class".

Last edited by hfwang18 on 15 Dec 2012, 12:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

I don't know if it's empathy so much as having lots of people similar to yourself on the Internet (and rl) advocating the ideology.

Libertarians don't like to be told they lack compassion/empathy and will talk about how they donate to charity, participate in community, etc... It seems to me they just don't realize how much our culture would have to change to make up for the lack of any kind of government social safety nets. We would definitely have to start becoming much more community oriented. As it is most people are way too busy with their hectic modern lives to really connect deeply or provide true support for anyone but immediate family members. With the decline of religion it's gotten even worse and people are even more isolated. This whole need to move and commute to find work has pretty much destroyed the more traditional extended family structure. Then you have the high divorce rates that make everything even more economically precarious. The bottom line is any kind of "minarchist" experiment in the US would lead to pure hell in an economic downturn because our extremely individualistic culture is not equipped to deal with poverty. Crime and social unrest would soar and things would get very ugly.

I don't think libertarians have a true intuition for human social nature. When there is prosperity, technology and capitalism creates this illusion of self-sufficiency. You work and get a pay check and this allows you to buy the things you need. Since everything was an impersonal financial transaction, there's this illusion of complete individual autonomy. You don't see all the complex larger scale processes bringing it all together. All you pay attention to is your money and the price of the stuff you buy. You don't need any appreciation for how it was produced, where it came from, or how many people were involved.

Parsimony is another appealing thing about libertarian ethics. You can determine whether something is ethical or not by following a limited set of axioms. It's almost like treating ethics as mathematics. Fuzzy notions like "fairness" are disregarded in favor of concrete individual rights that in theory should apply equally to everyone.

Last edited by marshall on 15 Dec 2012, 12:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The normal counter to that argument is that rich people typically don't just sit on their money. They don't spend it like normal consumers do either though. They tend to invest it. The problem is they don't like to invest in anything where the risk of losing their investment is greater than potential for profit. When wages and aggregate demand are stagnant the number of investments with potential for future payoff is low. Because wages are not growing in the US too much investment has been chasing after bubbles, i.e. artificially inflated assets. Inflated assets prices also increase the amount of debt people are willing to take on (inflated asset prices make people feel artificially rich). This happened with both the initial dot-com bubble in the 90s and the housing bubble in the early 2000s. This increase of private debt acts as it's own Keynesian stimulus. My theory is all this debt-driven consumption allowed the economy to grow artificially for decades and this was an almost purposeful form of artificial compensation covering up deeper structural issues that have been with us since the 1970s when the globalization trend first began. Only in the downturns between bubbles are these issues laid bare before our eyes. Right now the already wealthy are continuing to make gains because they are feeding off growth that's occurring in the developing world where wages are still rising. There's also certain energy industries that are growing locally, mainly natural gas.

The simple answer is a feeling that you know what's best for you better than some bureaucracy does and that others likely do as well concerning themselves. I don't feel like typing out the complicated answer right at the moment.

Ethical egoism, in my experience.

Egotistic ethics. That is the best kind.

ruveyn

I'm not a "libertarian" per se, but I do lean that way.

I wish to be left alone and am willing to grant others the same courtesy.

That's about it. And, when it comes down to "freedom" verses "safety," I go with "freedom."

Then let us get busy and do it.

Clearly the current system in the U.S. is not long term sustainable. It is the road to ruin.

ruveyn

It frustrates me that we as a society have come to define our economy by consumption rather than production.

That said, the utility of what I produce and earn is none of your damn business outside of what you are willing to offer for exchange. Why do you feel it's your right to interfere with what I do unless I'm doing something to hurt you?

People have such double standards when it comes to liberty. Stay out of my bedroom, but I want in your wallet. Don't touch my gun rights, but I want to control who you marry. Again, why do you feel it's your right to interfere with what I do if I'm not doing anything to hurt you?

Why do we produce in the first place. To consume or use produced things to fulfill our needs.

ruveyn

From my experience libertarians believe too much equality leads to instability. They believe human nature is static and unconditional. Many of them believe externalities are not factors to an individuals success in this world. They tend to view other people as property. They believe it is possible to own yourself even though you are yourself, and that if you don't own yourself you must belong to other people.

You ought to get out more. Equalizing the unequal is in and of itself unjust. It has nothing to do with stability. Only one kind of equality matters: equality under the law. The laws are for all of us, not just for particular classes of people.

ruveyn

The interpersonal comparison of utility is a non-scientific concept, and it is thus not a part of economics.