The viewpoint you are describing is anarcho-capitalism. Not everyone with libertarian leanings or who is critical of our current government is in favor of outright abolition and a 'return to a state of nature' as you put it. This is akin to saying that everyone in the police accountability movement is against the existence of police, which is only true for a handful of people. Most people who criticize the police would like to see corrective measures implemented such as civilian review and requiring officers to have malpractice insurance so they can't push the cost of their misconduct. The same holds true for people critical of taxation; it doesn't necessarily imply a desire to do away with all public services. I've addressed this topic on my own blog but you seem content to use hasty generalizations of everyone who opposes the status quo. It's cheap and expedient, but it's also intellectually dishonest.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Hello Chris, thank you for your comment.
I would to some extend agree that there are some generalization in the article, since it only is an article and not a book generalizations would be necessary if the article shouldn't end with more than 50 pages. It is a wrong to conclude that the view on the libertarians in this article is that they are in favor of the state of nature. I argued that they believe that there only should be paid enough taxes in order to avoid the state of nature.
I do though not believe that my view is dishonest as you mention.
As an example Nozick is in favor of a minimal state, where the taxes should be limited to the very least. Nozick as one of the leading philosophers of the libertarian school, believed that taxation is interfering with the personal freedom.
I don't believe that many libertarian are in favor of taxation. On an everyday basis a high taxation do in their point of view remove the motivation of working.
The idea for them is exactly that the people are responsible for their own acts and they should have the chance to invest the money they earned as they desire.
As I pointed out, this has its good and negative sides depending whom is having the view.
Currently I am living in Greece, and I must admit that I find it disturbing paying taxes here, since I feel that the taxation here is interfering with my freedom and is used to either pay the failures of others and keeping a failed state alive.
I don't feel that I am having any health insurance from the government, despite the fact that I am paying around 250 dollars or more per month only for public health insurance through my tax payments. Personally I would in this case benefit more by having a private insurance, since I am eating healthy food and keeping myself in a good shape.
On the other hand I also have been living the majority of my life in Denmark where I was more than happy to pay around 45% of my salary in taxes, since I felt that it wasn't interfering with my freedom but instead was my contribution to a healthy society with a high level of safety.
What I want to say with this example is that I don't see this from any negative perspective, nor do I view libertarians as bad people.
For every society there is an ideology that fits, which is the reason why we have so many different ideologies.
If I myself should point out a point of criticism, it should be the choice of photo in the beginning, since this might seem a bit negative.
Not my name. If you are Greek as you claim to be my name shouldn't be too difficult.
Instead of being lazy and getting all your talking points from liberal talk show hosts, you could have gone to google and done some research on the liberty movement. You don't need to write a thesis style paper to accurately present every school of thought within the liberty movement. You could write a short summary of each, their principles and goals, within 2 pages. Also the small government/low taxes shtick is not libertarianism. That's a ruse created by Republicans to con people out of even more of their money (look up Piyush 'Bobby' Jindal).
I've never read Nozick. His philosophy isn't synonymous with libertarianism. This is just as dumb as people who claim that all libertarians are inspired by Ayn Rand, another person I've never read. Neither of these people are the authorities on libertarianism. The only thing that you have revealed within your article and response is that despite pretensions to the contrary, you don't actually know what libertarianism is. It's not a single philosophy or set of beliefs or the 'non-aggression principle' as ancaps like to claim. It is basically the atheism of politics. Libertarians are only united in what they are against or what they don't believe is just. Criticisms of the government, police, the tax code, fiat currency etc. are common to all libertarians, but no two libertarians agree on a solution, what they think should replace our current institutions.
On average libertarians are Not in favor of the current tax code. On average, libertarians are against the current convoluted tax code, and it's not because it's soaking the rich. The rich can afford to comply with the tax code; it actually hurts the middle class and poor the most since they have less money to hire a tax professional. The IRS also audits poor and middle class people more often because they are easier targets. Taxes on the state and local level are regressive. The rich also disproportionately benefit from deficit spending and the federal reserves's monetary policy. Yes, libertarians are individualists who believe people are responsible for their own actions; this doesn't imply that we don't believe in any group collaboration.