Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/23/84; site ucbcad.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!ucbvax!ucbcad!faustus From: faustus@ucbcad.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics,net.philosophy Subject: Re: Vulgar Libertarians Message-ID: <67@ucbcad.UUCP> Date: Sun, 20-Jan-85 04:40:54 EST Article-I.D.: ucbcad.67 Posted: Sun Jan 20 04:40:54 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 22-Jan-85 06:22:48 EST References: <754@cbosgd.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: UC Berkeley CAD Group, Berkeley, CA Lines: 42 Xref: watmath net.politics:7023 net.philosophy:1372 > I am appalled by what some of the alleged Libertarians on the net are > saying. > Let's get one thing clear: > Libertarianism is a POLITICAL philosophy; nothing more. > It is NOT a general theory of ethics, meta-ethics, epistemology, or ontology. > For example: IT IS NOT A THEORY OF ETHICAL RELATIVISM!! Some Libertarians are > Relativists; some (in fact: MOST) are not. Libertarianism, PER SE, has little > to say on the matter. How can you have politics without ethics? Ethics tells you what is good, and politics tells you how to get it in society. The real debate going on between libertanians and non-libertarians does seem to be an ethical one, though - is freedom the ultimate good? > It is galling to me to see people preaching Relativism and calling it > Libertarianism for two reasons: > 1) I am a Libertarian; and I am not a Relativist. > 2) As any half-assed philosopher realized before he reached puberty, the > logical conclusion of Relativism is Nihilism. I'll be damned if I'll > sit quietly as some one attempts to erect an edifice that I care so > much about on a foundation of rotten wood! Not at all... The logical conclusion of relativism is subjectivism, but if you can't take that you become a nihilist... But this isn't net.philosophy... Luckily I am blessed with a complete ass so that I'm immune to this sort of logic... :-) > I have other complaints about those who we may call "vulgar Libertarians", > but I always feel like Sisyphus when writing to net.politics or net.philosophy Exactly... You never convince other people, but you can impress the people who are not yet committed... The trick is to figure out when you have impressed them enough that you can ignore the people you disagree with. I'm not really serious, but this sometimes isn't far from the mark... [ Side note -- when you write articles, please don't let the lines reach to the 80th column, because it is a real pain to make sure that they don't overflow when they are quoted... No fmt with > ... ] Wayne