On Sat, 11 Apr 2015, Rohan McLeod <rhn@jeack.com.au> wrote:
Lev Lafayette wrote:
On Sat, April 11, 2015 12:47 pm, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
Murray Rothbard (the founder of modern "libertarianism") believes that parents should be allowed to starve their children to death.
More bullshit.
..................snip
Are yes ; political philosophy on luv-talk, none of this namby pamby comparison of theories , standpoints and values; good and evil are alive and well and truth will prevail !
Truth does actually exist. Many political ideas really are evil. I reject the idea of "standpoints", anyone who's argument is "I'm entitled to my opinion" has just conceded the fact that their argument is not sustainable.
He also supported selling of children, to generate a "flourishing free market in children". Still, he did hold their moral right to run away, and thus assert their independence.
In a later chapter of the same book he claimed that it was ethical for legal forces to torture criminal suspects... On which, if a crime is confirmed, they are exonerated. Which generates a very interesting motivational structure...
Where does he stand on on-the-spot-capital punishment for traffic infringements; with post-mortem infringements to be billed to the family ?
http://mises.org/library/libertarian-position-capital-punishment The above article written by Murray Rothbard says that punishment should match the crime. So execution for theft is wrong but a fine in proportion to the value stolen is right. But he also says that the choice of whether a murderer should be executed should be up to the relatives of the victim. Presumably an effective genocide would be free of consequence under a libertarian system as there are no relatives remaining. Also orphans could be freely killed and any murder that is not discovered for a few decades would have a good chance of being free of consequence as the relatives may have died of old age first. That on it's own makes the libertarian ideal of justice about as good as that of Saudi Arabia - which isn't a great criticism, being as good as Saudi Arabia is about the best thing one could say about anything libertarian. The real issue though is that there's no rights for individuals under libertarianism. If you divided the lost tax revenue from road deaths (estimates commonly range from $4M to $6M per person) by the number of people who are booked by speeding then you could probably justify "restitution" that is a large enough sum of money to make poorer people unable to afford food. People who are unable to pay for food after being fined could then be allowed to starve to death. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/