"E. Shaun Russell" wrote:
> Tim Bates wrote:
>
> >If you really want that sentence then it really should read:
> >"Extropianism has no bearing on political philosophy. While many
> >extropians are libertarian, the Extropian philosophy is fully compatible
> >with communism, facism, and anarchy."
> >If Extropy really has no bearing on politic[al] philosophy, then this
> >sentence, which many including me would want to say is false, would stand
> >as true. Is that the case?
>
> No. Extropy itself is separate from any politic; like objectivism
> and other philosophies, it is a philosophy which is comprised of certain
> facets --in the case of Extropy, these are the Principles. If a person was
> to claim to be both an extropian and a communist, the facets of the
> political party would be in obvious conflict with the Principles of
> Extropy. In other words, it would be a contradiction. Extropy has no
> political agenda whatsoever. The Extropy Institute is a non-profit
> organization which promotes the growth of Extropy.
You contradict yourself here. There are most certainly government policies which promote entropy and those which promote extropy. If we are promoting extropy then we are espousing a political agenda, a bias for some types of government policies and against others. If you are going to eat your cake, you must also admit that you are, in fact, eating cake......
> The question of libertarian compatibility with Extropy is one which
> frequently arises, yet seems to be rarely understood. Extropy has no
> association with the Libertarian Party, although many extropians would vote
> for this party if there was a member in their riding. Nothing in the
> premises of the Libertarian Party's political agenda is in conflict with
> the Extropian Principles --no contradictions can occur. As for the
> libertarian
> philosophy, there have been very few tangible guidelines as to what the
> philosophy is in the first place. Generally, libertarians are against the
> initiation of violence, and against government intrusion into the privacy of
> civilians.
This needs to be clarified. There is a distinct difference between the 'initiation of violence' and the 'use of violence'. Both libertarianism and extopianism abhor the first but espouse the second in the case of the defense of self or others from agression.
> However, other than these and other generalities, there are no
> set guidelines for the libertarian philosophy --a beautiful building with a
> weak foundation. Because of this, those who are in accordance with the
> Extropian Principles may also see themselves as libertarians as well.
It is hardly a weak foundation. It is merely difficult to build a statist monobloc on a foundation which refuses to stay in one place as it is told to. Free men can accomplish far more in association over the long term than any state unit can by compulsion. It is the foundation of state power which is weak, because it can easily crumble when it oppresses enough formerly free people.