On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 7:42 PM, Trent Shipley <tship...@deru.com> wrote:
> > It started me thinking about the bases of libertarianism and American > conservatism. Previously when I had thought of libertarianism, I had > not thought of it as particularly based in a moral principle. Good for you... it's not, IMO. > Of course, I knew there was another strain in libertarianism that was > based in morality. This was an ideological commitment to maximize > individual freedom. Basically Aleister Crowley's "Harm no one and do > what thou wilt", with the "harm no one" clause being > optional--particularly when doing business. That's not a moral principle. That's principled amorality, an abandonment of social responsibility. At best it is mysticism; faith that we don't have to do anything for our neighbors because the universe will take care of them (if they deserve it, or whatever). Morality an antidote, not a synonym, for self-centered pragmatism. > > But there other moral strains mentioned by one of my libertarian Linux > respondents. "Taking money from some one who earned it to give it to > some one who didn't is stealing, government or otherwise." This > actually combines two moral axioms common to libertarians and > conservatives. The first is that taxes are a form of theft. The second > is that it is immoral to give (poor) people money. Ack. Again, no morality here. Pragmatic arguments are not moral arguments, they are complementary. Many seemingly practical arguments are outlandish because they are immoral, which, for example, is Swift's point in A Modest Proposal. The moral principle that "taxes are theft" suffers from a similar > limitation. Logically taxes ARE theft. Newspeak! Nick
_______________________________________________ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
