[Peace-discuss] Libertarian/Anarchist

[LAURIE SOLOMON]

>Libertarians like Wayne (correct me if I'm wrong here, Wayne) are actually 
>promoting classical liberal democracy, which is scarcely radical, at least 
>not in the US.

I would correct you here Bob on one point, although I essentially agree with
the above statement.  Libertarianism in the US comes closest to resembling
traditional classic English Liberalism (especially as put forth by the
advocates of Utilitarianism like Jeremy Bentham and James Mill - John Stuart
Mill's father). 

Classical liberal democracy while partially grounded in Utilitarianism is
also grounded in the ideas of English political theorists and philosophers
who came later (i.e., John Locke and J.S. Mill) which did not place equal on
all interests or individuals. For them, unlike the early Utilitarians, "push
pen was not as good as poetry." While all citizens that were given the vote
were to have their votes counted equally, some individuals were more equal
than others in terms of their right and ability to participate in the
elections and the government; moreover, not all liberties or rights were
inherent, universally given natural rights that the individual could
exercise as they saw fit.  Some were viewed as socially and politically
proscribed privileges granted and sanctioned by the society through the
society's government as defined by the citizen's and their representatives
in the legislative bodies.  Moreover, there were no individual rights that
did not carry some tacit or explicit, covert or overt, social obligations
that restricted their exercise and that were granted to the individual only
under the terms and conditions of the social contract that they be exercised
in ways that furthered the common good or at least was not to the detriment
of the common good in accordance with the needs of society as defined by the
government through its enacted laws. I do not think that libertarians want
to promote liberal democracy as it was traditionally envisioned by English
liberal political philosophers and theorists who did not necessarily view in
all cases government as limited government (except possible in the realm of
economics and economic activities) as the libertarians view government to be
and are attempting to promote.  In fact, I am not sure that for libertarians
there is any *NECESSITY* for government to be democratic as long as it is
limited and keeps out of individuals personal activities and does not
interfere with the individual interests of the citizenry.  They would be
just as happy with a monarch as a democracy so long as it was a limited
government.

-----Original Message-----
From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net
[mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Bob Illyes
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 2:56 PM
To: peace-discuss at anti-war.net
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Libertarian/Anarchist

Libertarians like Wayne (correct me if I'm wrong here, Wayne) are actually 
promoting classical liberal democracy, which is scarcely radical, at least 
not in the US.

Radical Libertarians, on the other hand, claim that any government is bad 
government, so we should just get rid of the stuff. Nice idea, if you want 
to live in a REAL nightmare.

Chomsky knows this, and is playing games with words and painting with too 
broad a brush. But then his specialty IS language.

The connection of all of this with war? I think we're looking under the 
wrong rock. Ask if there is a difference between an authoritarian state and 
a large multi-national corporation, and the cause of war might be clearer. 
Before we consider if government is or is not the problem, or if it even 
makes sense to ask this question, we need a better handle on what can be 
called a government.

Bob

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss