TestMagic

FreeMarkets · 2009 March 14th, 06:19 AM

For those interested in classical liberalism/libertarianism, I highly recommend attending an IHS seminar.

The Institute for Humane Studies - 2009 Seminar Lineup

The IHS is a great organization that holds free seminars for students interested in liberty. They also give very generous fellowships.

fp3690 · 2009 March 14th, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreeMarkets

For those interested in classical liberalism/libertarianism, I highly recommend attending an IHS seminar.

The Institute for Humane Studies - 2009 Seminar Lineup

The IHS is a great organization that holds free seminars for students interested in liberty. They also give very generous fellowships.

I'm a bit offended at the way libertarians usurp the word liberty. I am not a libertarian but I of course believe in freedom. I don't remember Hayek patenting the concept. No offence to the OP, just something that has been bothering me for a long time.

YoungEconomist · 2009 March 14th, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fp3690

I'm a bit offended at the way libertarians usurp the word liberty. I am not a libertarian but I of course believe in freedom. I don't remember Hayek patenting the concept. No offence to the OP, just something that has been bothering me for a long time.

Can you explain what you mean, I don't quite follow?

fp3690 · 2009 March 14th, 05:51 PM

It's just that libertarians seem to have a monopoly on the concept of liberty. Anyone that opposes laissez faire is automatically labelled as anti-liberty. I am especially opposed to the last remark of the OP - "for students interested in liberty". Opposition to libertarianism does not imply opposition to liberty.

YoungEconomist · 2009 March 14th, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fp3690

It's just that libertarians seem to have a monopoly on the concept of liberty. Anyone that opposes laissez faire is automatically labelled as anti-liberty. I am especially opposed to the last remark of the OP - "for students interested in liberty". Opposition to libertarianism does not imply opposition to liberty.

I hope you'll expand on this point and maybe given some examples, because although I understand what you're saying now, I'm not convinced that it's true. It seems to me that libertarians are the only ones mainly concerned with liberty and that opposition from the "left and right" are usually not about disagreements regarding the concept of liberty, but rather about circumstances in which individual liberty is not desirable.

economics · 2009 March 14th, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YoungEconomist

It seems to me that libertarians are the only ones mainly concerned with liberty and that opposition from the "left and right" are usually not about disagreements regarding the concept of liberty, but rather about circumstances in which individual liberty is not desirable.

i disagree

the left is rather concerned with circumstances in which individual liberty is prevented. to say that the left doesn't care about liberty is outright wrong, as the left argument is that structural forces and asymmetric power relations prevent you from exerting your own liberty. have you ever read marx? i don't think you have.

this is the problem with people that promote dichotomies between libertarianism and [leftism] - you should read what the other side has to say.

KGkhan23 · 2009 March 14th, 07:25 PM

It's my impression that anyone who is not an anarchist and values liberty, values it only to some degree. I have a few libertarian friends who are all for the right to bear arms, but they don't believe that private parties should be allowed to buy ICBMs or F-16s. I also know libertarians who support the just compensation clause of the fifth amendment (US constitution, for those who are from elsewhere). You could argue that these are specific people and that their views are not necessarily representative of all of libertarianism, and you'd be right. Just a thought.

But what is the difference between a libertarian's belief in absolute property rights, and a liberal's belief in an absolute right to certain kinds of medical care? Both are ideological biases with no clear truth attached to them. Proponents of both believe the government should act to uphold their view, which, were it to be institutionalized into law, would require government expenditure (taxation?) to enforce. So what's the difference?

By the way YoungEconomist, I love your quote.

KGkhan23 · 2009 March 14th, 07:44 PM

Economics beat me to it, though (s)he did it in a slightly more combative way than I would have. There are many different constraints on our behavior, and the government is only one of them. Some others are markets (lack of wealth, for instance) and social norms, plus what economics said above. Some might say that to truly promote liberty, we have to do away with (some of) these other limits on it as well.

This is not to say that all liberals are freedom loving libertarians in disguise. I, for one, am of the opinion that freedom is not some grand first principle unto itself that we need to focus all our policies on promoting. Though that's a separate discussion.

economics · 2009 March 14th, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KGkhan23

Economics beat me to it, though (s)he did it in a slightly more combative way than I would have. There are many different constraints on our behavior, and the government is only one of them. Some others are markets (lack of wealth, for instance) and social norms, plus what economics said above. Some might say that to truly promote liberty, we have to do away with (some of) these other limits on it as well.

i LOVE your way of phrasing it - everyone has liberty, but the constraints differ, government being one particular one, and libertarians focus on this one only.

KGkhan23 · 2009 March 14th, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by economics

i LOVE your way of phrasing it - everyone has liberty, but the constraints differ, government being one particular one, and libertarians focus on this one only.

Haha, thanks. I pretty much stole this from Larry Lessig, but I think I made it my own to some degree.

2009 March 14th, 06:19 AM	#1 (permalink)
FreeMarkets Eager! Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 33	Institute for Humane Studies For those interested in classical liberalism/libertarianism, I highly recommend attending an IHS seminar. The Institute for Humane Studies - 2009 Seminar Lineup The IHS is a great organization that holds free seminars for students interested in liberty. They also give very generous fellowships.

2009 March 14th, 07:44 PM	#8 (permalink)
KGkhan23 TestMagic Guru-in-Training Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 544	Economics beat me to it, though (s)he did it in a slightly more combative way than I would have. There are many different constraints on our behavior, and the government is only one of them. Some others are markets (lack of wealth, for instance) and social norms, plus what economics said above. Some might say that to truly promote liberty, we have to do away with (some of) these other limits on it as well. This is not to say that all liberals are freedom loving libertarians in disguise. I, for one, am of the opinion that freedom is not some grand first principle unto itself that we need to focus all our policies on promoting. Though that's a separate discussion. Last edited by KGkhan23 : 2009 March 14th at 07:45 PM. Reason: made it sound prettier

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

2009 March 14th, 05:51 PM	#4 (permalink)
fp3690 TestMagic Guru Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 1,214	It's just that libertarians seem to have a monopoly on the concept of liberty. Anyone that opposes laissez faire is automatically labelled as anti-liberty. I am especially opposed to the last remark of the OP - "for students interested in liberty". Opposition to libertarianism does not imply opposition to liberty.

2009 March 14th, 07:25 PM	#7 (permalink)
KGkhan23 TestMagic Guru-in-Training Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 544	It's my impression that anyone who is not an anarchist and values liberty, values it only to some degree. I have a few libertarian friends who are all for the right to bear arms, but they don't believe that private parties should be allowed to buy ICBMs or F-16s. I also know libertarians who support the just compensation clause of the fifth amendment (US constitution, for those who are from elsewhere). You could argue that these are specific people and that their views are not necessarily representative of all of libertarianism, and you'd be right. Just a thought. But what is the difference between a libertarian's belief in absolute property rights, and a liberal's belief in an absolute right to certain kinds of medical care? Both are ideological biases with no clear truth attached to them. Proponents of both believe the government should act to uphold their view, which, were it to be institutionalized into law, would require government expenditure (taxation?) to enforce. So what's the difference? By the way YoungEconomist, I love your quote.

TestMagic

Free GMAT, GRE, SAT Test, TOEFL practice tests