I did it! I subscribed. Under my own brazen name. Soon I will join the ranks of eagerly awaiting subscribers anticipating the mailman's delivery near the end of every month
( Read more... )
The point I was making is that a libertarian society where the exlusive right to one's own private property is recognized would tend to be one of a culturally conservative culture. Not because of any dictates but because that would be how things would naturally develop. Without the welfare state, families and churches would reassume their natural roles as the primary institutions of social support. The welfare-social security state as well as public schools promote shortsightedness, parasitism, egalitarianism, and moral relativism while systematically undermining the authority and roles of institutions that promote farsightedness, individual responsibility, heirarchy, and immutable and eternal absolute laws such as families, churches, and private enterprise. While such bourgeois institutions, without interference from the state, would be the dominating influences in a libertarian society, the right to discriminate against those of undesirable and countercultural behavior on one's own property would also once again be recognized as an inherent property right. Granted, anyone that wanted to allow and practice values that were not culturally conservative would be free to do so on their own property, but since the places of higher culture and character would tend to be the more wealthier places and since anyone not of that culture could not use the state to force such a culture to accept them, assimilation into a culturally conservative culture would occur. Moral relativism, democracy, egalitarianism, and forced acceptance is not compatible with a private property system. I understand you may not want to focus on all of that, and that's fine. But I personally feel the difference between the more left libertarians and the more paleo libertarians is too big a difference to ignore. I was not talking specifically about your affiliation with playboy, which is your personal business but on a more philosophical level. Have a nice day.
He's wealthy because there's a big demand for what he puts out. I think there's a large stock of wealth in this country due to relatively laize fair policies through much of the country's early history. The welfare state needs that built up wealth to feed off of in order to exist at all. As the culture degenerates in part because of the welfare state, the demands of the culture change as well. Much of that wealth can then be diverted to people who supply the things the degenerated culture now wants in a larger supply than before. He is wealthy in at least some part because of bourgoeis culture that made the wealthy economy he tapped into possible to begin with. Primitive tribes that spend all their time dancing around naked tend to not be very prosperous. When I talk about bourgoeis culture, I'm talking about civilization itself. Now humankind being what it is will always demand the stuff he puts out. I'm not sure the market would be as big and open in a libertarian society though.
Bourgeois culture is not incompatible with sex.bashowApril 30 2006, 21:11:31 UTC
While it is quite true that a libertarian, i.e. capitalist, society would lead to a culture of ever lowering time preference, and hence ever lower frequencies of high time preference behaviors like alcoholism, drug addiction, and hedonism, it is *not* true that a libertarian, "Bourgeois" as you put it, culture is incompatible with drinking, drugs, and sex.
Rather it is the *prohibition* against these things that causes a counter-cultural backlash that leads to obsession and high time preference *abuse* rather than use.
Underage drinking prohibitions yield teenage fascination with alcohol and binge drinking throughout high school and college, leading to lifetime problems with alcohol for many. These problems are not seen in cultures where children are raised with alcohol as a social norm.
Similarly, drug prohibition leads to young people having to enter the criminal underworld, and using ever more potent street drugs of uncertain quality and dosage, or huffing paint thinners or industrial solvents. And we are saddled with an ever more drug obsessed culture.
In an analogous fashion, cultural taboos and state mandated prohibitions against nudity and sex, especially regarding young adults, lead those subjects to become a focus of fascination, and we spend an inordinate amount of time on them. As a result we end up with promiscuous teenagers, teenage pregnancy, STDs, lives casual sex, hedonism, and in more extreme, bizarre sexual perversions, addictions, and worse.
Bourgeois culture is not incompatible with alcohol, drugs, or sex. All of these things are part of human nature. Since libertarianism is derived from axioms of human action, to claim that it is incompatible with human nature is a contradiction.
Rather, a libertarian culture will lead to low time preference ways of interacting with alcohol, drugs, and sex, i.e. everything in moderation. Bourgeois culture is not incompatible with a glass of wine, smoking a joint, or perusing a Playboy. These things in moderation represent the epitome of Bourgeois culture.
Re: Bourgeois culture is not incompatible with sex.bashowApril 30 2006, 21:42:00 UTC
I agree with most of what you say. I think human nature can cause us to do lots of destructive things. It is only when people are able to restrain their immediate natural urges for greater future gains that civilization can progress. I don't think things like sex is not part of human nature. I never said that. I do think that in a libertarian society sex would be a more private thing . Certainly sex and alcohol is compatible with bourgeois culture but only within boundaries. My point is that such a culture would not be as permissive and tolerant.
Have a nice day.
Reply
Reply
Reply
"According to MRI, the median age of male Playboy readers is 33, with a median annual household income of approximately $58,000..."
Not exactly trailer trash...
Reply
Reply
Rather it is the *prohibition* against these things that causes a counter-cultural backlash that leads to obsession and high time preference *abuse* rather than use.
Underage drinking prohibitions yield teenage fascination with alcohol and binge drinking throughout high school and college, leading to lifetime problems with alcohol for many. These problems are not seen in cultures where children are raised with alcohol as a social norm.
Similarly, drug prohibition leads to young people having to enter the criminal underworld, and using ever more potent street drugs of uncertain quality and dosage, or huffing paint thinners or industrial solvents. And we are saddled with an ever more drug obsessed culture.
In an analogous fashion, cultural taboos and state mandated prohibitions against nudity and sex, especially regarding young adults, lead those subjects to become a focus of fascination, and we spend an inordinate amount of time on them. As a result we end up with promiscuous teenagers, teenage pregnancy, STDs, lives casual sex, hedonism, and in more extreme, bizarre sexual perversions, addictions, and worse.
Bourgeois culture is not incompatible with alcohol, drugs, or sex. All of these things are part of human nature. Since libertarianism is derived from axioms of human action, to claim that it is incompatible with human nature is a contradiction.
Rather, a libertarian culture will lead to low time preference ways of interacting with alcohol, drugs, and sex, i.e. everything in moderation. Bourgeois culture is not incompatible with a glass of wine, smoking a joint, or perusing a Playboy. These things in moderation represent the epitome of Bourgeois culture.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment