Discussion on right-libertarianism

Yes right Libertarianism is possible thatcher did it when she privatised public industries and I believe UKIP under Farage were economically Libertarian.

Hello everyone,

I just wanted to see what the general thoughts of UK-ish students were on right-libertarianism as a political philosophy?

Does anyone on TSR believe it is possible and politically practical? And if so, is it an ideal political viewpoint to aim towards?

Personally, I am a right-libertarian so I am eager to see how many others exist on TSR.

I don’t agree with it, morally, philosophically nor practically.

What are your reasons for these disagreements?

Well their whole philosophy is based on the idea that we have no obligations to society, when clearly all the success anyone has achieved has been the result of not just themselves but other people too. Without certain obligations to society- society becomes inherently unfair and unstable.
As yes, if there was a right wing libertarian society there would be a whole chunk of the population who ironically would not be ‘free’ at all.

No, it's not practical.

It's like communism in that it appeals to a small minority of young people. In the case of libertarianism, it is typically middle class boys. But most of them mature and grow out of it as they gain some genuine life experience and a better understanding of political ideology.

The fact that mentioned fairness is interesting - surely any conception of fairness is completely arbitrary and therefore not meaningful as a point of debate? Fairness is not an absolute variable that can be quantified.

Libertarians do not argue that we necessarily have no obligations to each other; only that we have no obligations to the STATE, these two things should not be conflated... many libertarians support charity as a means of replacing welfare for example.

Therefore I believe that your two points, that “libertarians don’t care about others” and that a libertarian society would be “unfair” are unfounded and therefore false.

I am a working class boy studying political ideology at degree level at one of the best academic institutes in the country, I’m also a proud libertarian - nice bait.

Do you believe people should have equality of opportunity- and if not, why not? Note this can only be done effectively by a state and organising a social contract that way.
Secondly, saying people should give to charity or that they can help people in their own way is not an obligation- it’s something which is voluntary.

The impracticality is that nobody really cares how "big" the government is, which is something you libertarians like to bring up all the time.

The free market has been the most progressive and disruptive force in history by means of free trade and open borders, which is a result of the free market's insatiable desire for cheap workers. There is a greater good than serving the interests of the GDP, internationalist moneymovers/corporations and that's something libertarians don't have an answer for. I'll only accept a "free market" when it is restrained by nationalism.

I do believe that we should have equality of opportunity yes, but I disagree that the state is the only way to achieve that as I believe we all are a blank slate in the state of nature.

The social contract is a myth with no real basis behind it apart from a.) God (in the lockean version) b.) Absolute totalitarian government (in the Hobbesian version) or c.) assertions about “love” backed up by no evidence, facts or observations in the Rousseauian version.

A voluntary obligation does exist, look up the definition.

Oppression by STATE = bad.

Oppression by corporate entity = good.

Right Libertarianism is an inherently and deliberately blinkered ideology.

I don’t understand what you mean we are all in a ‘blank state’ in a state of nature...
The very idea of an obligation is that you are required to do it.

The blank slate is one of John Locke’s key political ideas and I’m quite surprised that you have such a strong opinion on this topic without being familiar with the relevant literature:

“Tabula rasa (Latin for blank slate) refers to the epistemological idea that individuals are born without built-in mental content and that therefore all knowledge comes from experience or perception. Proponents of tabula rasa generally disagree with the doctrine of innatism which holds that the mind is born already in possession of certain knowledge. Generally, proponents of the tabula rasa theory also favour the "nurture" side of the nature versus nurture debate when it comes to aspects of one's personality, social and emotional behaviour, knowledge and sapience.”

Also you’re wrong on obligations, by definition it means you are OBLIGED to do it, (aka it’s the right thing to do) but no one is putting a gun to your head and saying you have to do it, people who refuse to honour their obligations are absolutely dicks but I strongly disagree with the principle that we should force obligations onto the unwilling.