What do you think about the "Philosophy of Liberty"?

It fails to take into account structural social damage which prevents certain people from taking advantage of the same privileges that you are accustomed to.

I’m at work, so I’m unable to view youtube videos. But I believe that personal liberty is the basis upon which the US was founded, and therefore the ultimate ideal to which we should strive. It is the most basic of all human rights.

@pdworkin
How can people be prevented from exercising their liberty?

Securing as much personal freedom as possible has been my goal most of my life, which is why I live rurally and move ever closer to living off the grid. There are two kinds of liberty ~ civil and personal. If we’ve learned anything from history it’s that civil liberty has never been equal for all the people all of the time. Hell, it hasn’t been equal for a whole lot of the people yet! And so it remains elusive and always will. Any true philosophy of liberty would bottom line with ones self and begin with an open and free mind. Freedom, like charity, begins at home, and it’s our responsibility to protect our own.

Actually, I have an answer for you, but it would be endless, and exhausting to write. Briefly, though, history, culture, socio-economics, war, displacement, racial antagonism and many other sociological phenomena combine to establish a system of inequities where some people have less liberty to exercise, or less freedom to exercise their liberty. If you don’t think that are social disparities in this country that cannot be blamed on those whom they affect, then you are either not paying attention, or you are disingenuous.

Looks like an advertisement for Anarchy and against Democracy.

@pdworkin
I do not disagree that it is easier for some than others. I do think however that you are making the assumption that because it it not their fault that:
1) It must be someone else’s fault and
2) There is nothing that can be done besides government intervention.

There are plenty of misfortunes in this world, and they do not always have someone to blame. If you feel someone needs assistance, then free free to start a charity, I would be glad to help. But do not feel free to hold a gun to my head. That is not charity, it is theft.

We disagree on these issues, and we have differing fundamental philosophies about social and individual responsibility, so it is probably fruitless for either of us to try to convince the other.

@pdworkin: “it is probably fruitless for either of us to try to convince the other.”

discussion is only fruitless when none of the participants have an idea worth adopting.

@pdworkin
While I do disagree with you, It is not uncommon for me to change my mind.

@jackm in that video, I disagree with their definition of “life” being your future. if anything, your future is your liberty, the potential for new past. your past is your life, that is, whatever you can remember = your life. The present is the product of it all.

@ninjacolin
Well the point is that if you take some ones life, you take their future.

i know what they’re trying to say, i’m just arguing semantics because they’re basing conclusions on inexact metaphors.

a good argument is one that is irrefutable.

Sounds like the video is “pull yourself up by your own bootstraps” mythology.

lolol, we must be a tough crowd.

@Qingu
Did you watch it?

@jackm, nope, can’t watch videos now.

Well the video was interesting and I don’t disagree with the premise- that is that we need to stop empowering our leaders to act in a way that is in the interest of an elect few but which fails to take into account our morals. Yet this is a very complex issue and it demands that we sacrifice and accept less. Our entire system of capitalism is based on the premise that 20% of the “civilized” world holds 80% of its wealth. Of course our aggression is immoral.
Our entire system is immoral. We need access to goods, labor, resources and need to make sure that they flow unimpeded towards the West. Until people are willing to sacrifice “some” things we benefit from aggression even if it’s trickle down. We just don’t like to think that we have blood on our hands. This highly idealistic vision will take a revolution to accomplish but I like it and I’m willing to have less for the sake of the collective good.

You would be much better served listening to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxPUvQZ3rcQ&feature=related by Noam Chomsky.

He says that the terms libertarian and conservative has been corrupted in the U.S. Liberty as defined by the Tea Party and Libertarians like Rand Paul suggest that the government has no role in our laws and economy and that corporations should be left to rule themselves.

Of course that route will lead to a third world conditions.