"Corwyn J. Alambar" wrote:
>
> How to bring up this point? I know I'm not the only one to wonder this, but
> here goes...
>
> Is the core idea of Extropy (as I understand it, summarized by "Upward and
> Outward") predicated on a libertarian philosophy? Does one have to accept
> all the other excess baggage that comes with libertarianism (i.e. absolute
> freedom to own and use firearms, no centralized legal systems, decentralized
> or no environmental regulations, no public investment from non-private
> organizations, etc.) to be a true extropian?
>
> I ask this question as a believer in the concepts of expanding beyond what
> are accepted as "common" limitations - overcoming such barriers as aging
> pathologies and death, limitations of the physical body (strength, endurance,
> etc.), limitations of input bandwidth and storage, gravity wells, the speed of
> light... All of these things that we can and SHOULD overcome.
>
> I do not, and cannot, accept the fundamental assumptions that seem to underly
> libertarianism - the axioms, often implicit, are ones I cannot accept, just
> as I cannot accept the axioms that underly Christianity or Scientology. I
> can accept an dsympathize with many of the ideas underlying the political
> philosophy, and am at least friendly to most. My issues are those of
> implementation - the practical questions that need to be answered before a
> political philosophy becomes a political system. That having been said,
> I need to ask this in plain language:
>
> Is everyone out there on this list a libertarian, or is that just the air this
> list puts forward? Because if that's the cost of entry... I don't know if I
> can continue to provide constructive input into a discussion where I don't
> buy into the same basic assumptions.
>
> -Corey
For someone who cares deeply about political principles and positions
you managed to broadly tar what you call "Libertarianism" without saying
hardly a thing about what sort of politics you do hold much less why you
are convinced it is better and more beneficial than this bunch of
notions you loosely label "Libertarian". I find that quite curious. I
would be interested in a talk about general political philosophy and
relative merits and demerits of different systems with some level of
agreement about how the different systems are defined and
distinguished. But just ragging on one or another of them and
threatening to take your ball and go away if this "is the cost of entry"
is pointless. In the first place, Libertarians are a pretty diverse
bunch. In the second place, the list of things at the front of your
post is not held in utterly unqualified form by many on this list. In
the third place I am not very interested in conversations that require
me to buy into a bunch of assumptions up front either, including yours.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:39:06 MDT