On May 10, 4:13 pm, Dan Clore <cl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> *Anarcissie* wrote:
> > On May 8, 1:12 am, Michael Price <nini_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> On May 8, 11:21 am, "*Anarcissie*" <anarcis...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>> On May 7, 3:48 pm, BretCah...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> >>> I think you're confused. First of all, you've switched from a
> >>> moralistic argument to an anthropological one: from "humans are
> >>> so evil that they require government to restrain them", to "all
> >>> human communities exhibit a state". (This is incorrect, but it
> >>> could be improved with qualification.) Secondly, you're
> >>> confused about libertarians. Libertarians are liberals: they
> >>> believe a state is necessary.
> >> Some of them do, they're called "minarchists". The term was coined
> >> by libertarians to distinguish them from libertarian anarchists.
> > I'm just going by common usage. I think we can call people who
> > assert that the state is unnecessary and undesirable, or who live
> > that way, "anarchists", leaving "libertarian" for liberals who prefer
> > the government to be as small and light as possible, but who believe
> > that some government is necessary (Locke, Jefferson, Nozick, etc.)
> But "libertarian" is a traditional synonym for anarchist. Thing's are
> now confused because it was later adopted by minarchists -- and then
> that croud sprouted some anarchists as well. It might be best to use it
> in a fairly inclusive sense, with anarchists at the center, and the
> various "minimal" government types -- and just how "minimal" some of
> them turn out to be when examined closely would make it advisable to
> give the definition a somewhat fuzzy border rather than a strict
> is-or-isn't kind of definition. Someone like Ron Paul, who has some
> significant anti-libertarian positions (abortion, immigration, etc.),
> would fall in the fuzzy area.
Actually, Bret Cahill referred to "looneytarians". Like most
such schoolyard wit, its referent, if any, is imprecise. I
assumed he meant "libertarian" in the common Usenet
sense. Attempting to elicit meaning seems to have been
a wasted effort, however.
|
