Back in the 70's and 80's one read Rand, Mises, Rothbard and Hayek, went to a few meetings in smoke-filled rooms, and gradually realised that Libertarianism was correct, but also that there were only around ten of us in the country. Nowadays the Internet is what matters and the conversion rate is much faster. I still think the youngsters should read the libertarian classics though.
2 comments:
Comments made on previous template:
C H Ingoldby
'their' not 'there'
26 September 2009, 14:17:02 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
C H Ingoldby
I just have to say that, having read several of Ayn Rands books, i do not think she was a Libertarian.
She was clearly a power worshipper who believed in some form of hierachical elitism. Her theories were pretty much diametrically opposed to the actual reality of human nature and seem highly artificial and convoluted.
Better to keep to and try to regenerate the British tradition of individual liberties as the basis of society and the protection of, the primary function of the State rather than follow the American Libertarians down there rather odd ideological path.
26 September 2009, 14:16:06 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Steve Sexton
David,
Echoing comments here and on the day let me also thank you for your time and contributions. Having either read the various works noted or am currently in the process of doing so (again) I try to take the balanced view.
In an age where necessity provokes thought it is good to see the wide variety of ages and contributions each can bring.
Each look towards Libertarianism for their own reasons and whilst some will be similar each is as unique and individual as the next.
3 August 2009, 14:23:57 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Henry North
Indeed was good to see such a turn out, I enjoyed flying up from London
3 August 2009, 12:20:04 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Craig J. Bolton
My own rather unusual position is that there is little real difference between anarcho-capitalism (which I support) and a severely limited state such as one mentioned by Mises somewhere in which he said that any property owner should be free to secede from the state whenever he wanted.
=====================
That is also approximately my position, albeit, as a former academic economist and present lawyers, I suspect I'm a bit different in how I get there.
We'll simply have to agree to disagree on Rand and the Objectivists. As someone who also had some undergraduate training in Philosophy, I think that she and her's are a bad joke, whose self-disaffiliation from libertarianism is an excellent thing.
3 August 2009, 11:08:27 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Comments made on previous template:
David Farrer
Craig,
I know that Objectivists (followers of Rand) claim that they aren't libertarians, but I think they're wrong and also that that claim harms their cause. Objectivists claim that one must start from certain philosophical principles (Rand's ones!) and then work through some quite complicated thought processes that eventually lead to a belief in limited government and capitalism. But the end-point of a limited state is exactly the same as that held by non-anarchist libertarians. I think it makes the objectivists look silly to claim that they have no connection whatsoever to libertarianism of which they are actually a subset. It's absolutely fine for them to claim that the philosophical approach is the only one that will win in the long run.
Again, it's OK for objectivists to oppose anarcho-capitalism, but the idea that a-c is somehow the same as communism or hippiedom is bizarre in the extreme and does the objectivist cause no good at all. All people have to do is read the books.
It is a fact that many who wouldn't call themselves objectivists today were nevertheless profoundly affected by Rand's writings and went on from her to read the likes of Mises and Rothbard. That applies to myself and to many others I know.
My own rather unusual position is that there is little real difference between anarcho-capitalism (which I support) and a severely limited state such as one mentioned by Mises somewhere in which he said that any property owner should be free to secede from the state whenever he wanted.
3 August 2009, 10:45:41 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Rab C. Nesbitt
It was good to meet you David and I learned a lot on the day. I really need to get some reading done though!
3 August 2009, 09:49:13 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Andrew Withers LPUK
Good to see you there David, lets keep the converation going !
3 August 2009, 06:51:35 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Craig J. Bolton
A couple of comments:
First of all, not to fly under false colors, I do not reside in Scotland and have never even visited. However, that does keep me from admiring one of the two homelands of modern Western Civilization [along with Holland], and the only one of the two where most of the natives speak a variety of English. Maybe one day I will have more wealth and leisure and can indulge my desire to visit and stay awhile.
Secondly, however, as someone who has been a libertarian before that label for the view was popular [somewhat before the 70s and 80s] I have to question your inclusion of Rand in the category "libertarian." She personally hated libertarians and those of us whose libertarian roots are in classical [mostly Scottish] liberalism, right anarchism and critical rationalism happily return the sentiment.
2 August 2009, 23:52:07 GMT+01:00
Post a Comment