Friday, April 14, 2017

All of the Topics I Have NOT Covered



I have a confession to make.  There are many topics related to libertarian theory, application of theory, and state aggressions that I have written little, if anything, about.  It seems to be a grave shortcoming on my part.

Let’s run through a list; consider these as potential titles for these non-existent posts:

·        Drug Laws: This One Should be Easy
·        The Age of Majority: Drinking Alcohol
·        Is Second-Hand Cigarette Smoke a Violation of the Non-Aggression Principle?
·        Filing for a Tax refund?  Is This Theft?
·        Can a Deed Restriction Exist in a Libertarian World?
·        Is Torture Ever Justified?
·        To Spank or Not to Spank; That is the Question
·        If Ayn Rand is Wrong, Do I Want to be Right?
·        Privatized roads: a Path to Extortion?
·        Minimum Wage: a Living Wage or a Dying Wage?
·        “Anything Peaceful.”  Is That Really all the NAP has to Offer?
·        Without Free Will, is Man Truly Free?
·        How Far Below the Surface and in the Sky Do my Property Rights Extend?
·        Is Homesteading the Only Legitimate way to Claim Property?
·        Corporations and the NAP?  Discuss
·        The Benefits of Free Trade: DUH.
·        Getting Groped by State Actors, Pros and Cons
·        Environmental Regulation: a Detailed Examination
·        If I Blast My Outdoor Stereo Really Loud only for REALLY GOOD MUSIC, is it an NAP Violation?
·        All I Need to Know About the NAP: “Get Off My Lawn!”
·        Does the NAP Extend to Non-human Mammals?
·        “Papers, Please.” 
·        My Neighbor has a Smoker.  Can I Hate Him for an NAP Violation, or only Because He Never Invites Me Over to his Parties?
·        Can one Hate the State and Still Walk on Sidewalks?
·        School Choice?  I Thought Everything with the Word “Choice” was Libertarian!
·        “Fiscally Conservative, Socially Liberal” – the Slogan of Every American Politician since…well, Forever.
·        If I Prevent Someone from Committing Suicide, Am I Now Obligated to Care for Him for the Rest of His Life?
·        What is the Proper Way for a Libertarian to Punish His Child?
·        24601 (aka Jean Valjean) Stole a Little Bread for his dying Nephew; Was Nineteen Years in Prison Enough?  A Libertarian Speaks Out
·        He Said Mean Things to Me; Can I Put Him in the Libertopia Hoosegow?
·        A Private Market for Organs: Is this Off-Key?

Well, that’s enough for now.  I am sure even this list is only scratching the surface. 

You see, it isn’t that I don’t have a view on many of these things.  In some cases, I find these topics rather trivial – how-many-libertarian-angels-can-dance-on-the-head-of-a-mosquito kind of thing.  In other cases, there are people far more qualified than I am to write on these; the topic is already fully covered. 

Mostly, the reason I don’t write about such things is because I choose to write only about things that interest me – I am not writing for an audience although I am tremendously and truly grateful that others find value in my work.  Some may view my choices as not very important, or might view that I ignore the truly important.  You are free to hold that view; I am free to ignore you.  Because I really don’t care what you think about my choice of topics.

Anyway, I hope this addresses the issue.

16 comments:

  1. Neighbor's smoke from smoker into my property and no invites?
    Trivial?
    Obviously the only solution is to take his brisket.
    It is brisket, right?
    Definitely not trivial in Texas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brisket for sure, although there is always room for some sausage!

      Delete
  2. "Because I really don’t care what you think about my choice of topics."

    Good for you. You should write about what interests you at the time you write a post. I do. I write when I have time and when I am motivated enough to do so. It gets more difficult as time goes on.

    Keep at it. Do what you want. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Benefits of Free Trade: DUH

    I will borrow one of your titles. [Is this a violation of NAP?]

    My problem with this is the definition of Free Trade. The standard definition is that Free Trade is trade with no tariffs, quotas or other government restrictions. But this means that trade being carried out by government is called Free Trade. The biggest example of this is Chinese Communist Party Owned Industries which together would make the Communist Party of China the biggest “free trader” in the world

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government-owned_companies_of_China.

    A extreme but not hard to believe example of the definition would declare that if the Chinese secret police were to execute a political prisoner and then sell their body parts to the Cuban medical system then this is an example of free trade as long as there were no quotas or tariffs involved

    My definition of Free Trade is trade between free people.

    So my definition would exclude anything owned by the Communist Party of China, it would exclude anything supported by selective cheap loans provided by the US Federal Reserve or World Bank etc etc, So anything supported or financed or owned by government is out.

    But that is not how government defines Free Trade when it is imposing its definition of free trade on the world.

    Rant Off, I will now retire back to my troll cave.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Because I really don’t care what you think about my choice of topics."

    I take umbrage at this. (Not upset, really. Just running a bit low on umbrage.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope wherever you take umbrage, the two of you enjoy yourselves!

      :-)

      Delete
    2. It's never fun. Umbrage always takes things the wrong way.

      Delete
  5. You didn't even mention the NMAP (The non micro aggression principle). :)
    I feel unsafe now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No one ever said that this site is a safe space!

      Delete
  6. Not exactly related to the subject, but I thought I should pass this on. I occasionally eat at Boston Market. Not a huge fan, but sometimes want something different. I ate at one in the Phoenix area last night, and I used their wifi to check email, etc. I thought you might find it interesting that their wifi network prohibited me from connecting to your website, labeling it as a scam website. This was not true of similar saved sites on my phone like lewrockwell.com, targetliberty.com, etc. fwiw

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At least I finally made someone's "list." I was feeling left out....

      Delete
  7. I may have read everything you've written since Lew Rockwell started posting your blog, and it's the only site where I try to read all of the comments..

    As far as I'm aware, you're the only writer that completely grasps the NAP(and can count angels if you want to) knows it's limitations, and is actively writing about it!
    I read everything you write because of this this unique perspective.

    Not that you care but I would love to read what you think about Ayn Rand. I started out with her and I thought she had "the answer" but I think she failed where all variants of libertarianism fail, providing meaning and purpose.





    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “…I think she failed where all variants of libertarianism fail, providing meaning and purpose.”

      I believe there are people who have written more authoritatively on this distinction of Rand vs. libertarianism than can I, but your statement offers the context for my view…

      Both libertarian theory and objectivism fail to provide “meaning and purpose.” The difference between the two is that Rand insists (and the word “insists” grossly understates her attitude on this) that there is no meaning or purpose outside of individual self-interest guided by reason alone. Objectivism offers, it seems to me, the logical extreme extension of the Enlightenment.

      Libertarian theory does not make a claim that it provides “meaning and purpose.” Libertarianism does not claim to be a philosophy of life. Libertarian theory leaves room for humans to be human in the best sense of the term. In perhaps the most distinct difference, libertarianism leaves room for God (or whatever religion / deity you might choose). Many of the more thoughtful and mature libertarian thinkers make this clear in their writing and speaking.

      Try bringing up God in Rand’s living room in New York – you will become instantly a pariah.

      Delete
  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Libertarian theory does not make a claim that it provides “meaning and purpose.” Libertarianism does not claim to be a philosophy of life. Libertarian theory leaves room for humans to be human in the best sense of the term. In perhaps the most distinct difference, libertarianism leaves room for God (or whatever religion / deity you might choose)."
    I see this now, but it's basically a secret to people on the outside. Many libertarians use/market it as a form of self actualization. Much like Objectivism.

    "Many of the more thoughtful and mature libertarian thinkers make this clear in their writing and speaking."

    You're one of the first writers I've read stressing this. Also, "Irrepressible Rothbard" has been a huge eye opener! Its as if he is writing right now, on current events.....mind blowing

    ReplyDelete