Active Entries
- 1: ebike under the rainbow
- 2: In which a dog attack gets me 40 dollars and maybe delayed trauma
- 3: Life by candle-light
- 4: some meal costs vs alternatives
- 5: stainless steel convert
- 6: One mask forward, two masks back
- 7: welp, SWG Discord
- 8: packing philosophy
- 9: overshoes followup
- 10: rain shoe covers
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
Style Credit
- Base style: Abstractia by
- Theme: White Lace by
Re: Non-Coercion Principle
Date: 2007-11-26 08:05 (UTC)From:But to the point. I do not doubt a person can be "good" and be a libertarian. If a libertarian or any other follower of an extremist ideology, be that radical environmentalism, communism or ultranationalism, can truly be "reasonable" to the commonly accepted and yet very vague sense of what is perceived to be reasonable would be, I'm not so sure.
I mean, I did military service with a fascist. National socialist probably would be even more accurate. I liked and respected him as a person and a friend, ans still do, but there's no way I can think of his political beliefs as "reasonable". I can understand them, and I can understand why he believed in them, but that doesn't make them reasonable. Another of my friends was and is hard-core Christian, baptist. I can understand and respect his beliefs too. But they aren't reasonable, because it isn't based upon a reasonable, rational, pragmatic assessment of how the world works and how people work.