Barbara (and Olga),
What Mike and Lee agreed on below is not what I would characterize as the
proper libertarian position, and perhaps they are forgetting their history.
Generally, if people aren't willing to defend their property and lives
against an invading force, then those things weren't worth defending in the
first place. Forcing people to do anything for any purpose is a giant red
flag that what you are trying to do is violating a central tenet of value
economics. The War for Independence in the United States was accomplished
in large part because ordinary people decided it was a worthwhile cause for
which they were willing to expend substantial effort and put their lives at
substantial risk. And that wasn't a fight against an evil invading force,
it was a mere petition for independence.
On 7/29/01 3:19 PM, "Barbara Lamar" <email@example.com> wrote:
> Mike Lorrey wrote:
>>> Namely, if your group already maintains a very high level of
>>> liberty, and you don't want to lose it, then resistence to
>>> [liberty-destroying] invaders damn near justifies any means.
> and Lee Corbin agreed.
> IMO, your libertarian society is thereby doomed to become unfree. The
> problem is that the state power used to win wars is never dropped (not
> entirely) once the wars are won.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:58 MDT