Forgive me, but please think about what you're saying. First, "when someone points out practical challenges to a libertarian utopia" they are arguing from a position of crowding out in which there are few to no opportunities to experiment in the manner I'm describing. There is literally a monopoly that is enforced. Now, it's NOT at all l…
Forgive me, but please think about what you're saying. First, "when someone points out practical challenges to a libertarian utopia" they are arguing from a position of crowding out in which there are few to no opportunities to experiment in the manner I'm describing. There is literally a monopoly that is enforced. Now, it's NOT at all like communist responses, because all of those experiments were tried, whereas entrepreneurs, social entrepreneurs, and civic innovators are simply not given opportunities to experiment locally. This is a pragmatic point, not an idealistic one. Finally, "most of us are not capable or willing to live in such a voluntary society" is a contradiction in terms. If you were willing to do it, it would be voluntary. What you're saying is *I'm not willing to overcome my failure of imagination or my status quo bias and question the value of status quo systems in ANY jurisdiction in my country, so I will continue to lend my support to the systems that are failing, or double down on the empty promise of political reforms.* All that means is that you're continuing to worship *democracy* -- the illusion of choice -- all controlled by people more powerful than you. Thank you for your honesty, though. You'd rather have faith in suits and jackboots than creative people working together locally to solve problems.
I’ll set aside that you basically repeated the communist complaint that entrepreneurs and civic innovators haven’t been given a real chance yet, because government monopoly.
As to the second point, it’s not a contradiction in terms. You can’t have a voluntary society if it is comprised of three libertarian dudes worshiping Ayn Rand. You need critical mass. You can’t or won’t get it if the common organizing principle is just the quid pro quo or you-do-you-and-I-do-me.
I’ll set aside that you basically repeated the communist complaint that public policing hasn’t been given a real chance yet, because capitalist utopians.
"As to the second point, it’s not a contradiction in terms." Uh huh. "You can’t have a voluntary society if it is comprised of [sic, composed of] three libertarian dudes worshiping Ayn Rand." Ayn Rand was not a libertarian and was committed to government police monopolies. If you're going to ascribe views to me or anyone else, you'd better know your stuff.
"You need critical mass. You can’t or won’t get it if the common organizing principle is just the quid pro quo or you-do-you-and-I-do-me." Think about this long and hard. Read my original criticism. And kindly stop ascribing views to me and others I've never held. You're getting lost and it shows.
Forgive me, but please think about what you're saying. First, "when someone points out practical challenges to a libertarian utopia" they are arguing from a position of crowding out in which there are few to no opportunities to experiment in the manner I'm describing. There is literally a monopoly that is enforced. Now, it's NOT at all like communist responses, because all of those experiments were tried, whereas entrepreneurs, social entrepreneurs, and civic innovators are simply not given opportunities to experiment locally. This is a pragmatic point, not an idealistic one. Finally, "most of us are not capable or willing to live in such a voluntary society" is a contradiction in terms. If you were willing to do it, it would be voluntary. What you're saying is *I'm not willing to overcome my failure of imagination or my status quo bias and question the value of status quo systems in ANY jurisdiction in my country, so I will continue to lend my support to the systems that are failing, or double down on the empty promise of political reforms.* All that means is that you're continuing to worship *democracy* -- the illusion of choice -- all controlled by people more powerful than you. Thank you for your honesty, though. You'd rather have faith in suits and jackboots than creative people working together locally to solve problems.
I’ll set aside that you basically repeated the communist complaint that entrepreneurs and civic innovators haven’t been given a real chance yet, because government monopoly.
As to the second point, it’s not a contradiction in terms. You can’t have a voluntary society if it is comprised of three libertarian dudes worshiping Ayn Rand. You need critical mass. You can’t or won’t get it if the common organizing principle is just the quid pro quo or you-do-you-and-I-do-me.
I’ll set aside that you basically repeated the communist complaint that public policing hasn’t been given a real chance yet, because capitalist utopians.
"As to the second point, it’s not a contradiction in terms." Uh huh. "You can’t have a voluntary society if it is comprised of [sic, composed of] three libertarian dudes worshiping Ayn Rand." Ayn Rand was not a libertarian and was committed to government police monopolies. If you're going to ascribe views to me or anyone else, you'd better know your stuff.
"You need critical mass. You can’t or won’t get it if the common organizing principle is just the quid pro quo or you-do-you-and-I-do-me." Think about this long and hard. Read my original criticism. And kindly stop ascribing views to me and others I've never held. You're getting lost and it shows.