Why Is AC/Libertarianism So Bothersome?

[Coffee]

I mostly lurk on this board, and occasionally post. I have one question, though:

Why is it true that there are consistently threads regarding aspects of AC or libertarianism? Why do either of these ideologies arouse so much discomfort as to be put to the test at all times?

I don't know...it just feels like there should be an AC/Libertarian FAQ to head some of the clutter off at the pass.

[Dan.]

The FAQ idea has been proposed any number of times, and there even was one in the works at one point. I'm not really sure what happened to it.

[Skidoo]

I nominate Shake as the most competent scholar to compile an FAQ of AC. Even though he can be a twit sometimes, he's got a feel of the real deal about him, unlike many of his pseudo-intellectual poser comrades.

[hmkpoker]

The problem with a FAQ is that the people for whom it is intended (lurkers who suddenly try to debunk Austrian theory with poorly thought-out, previously discussed examples) are too impetuous to read the FAQ in the first place.

EDIT: as to why these ideas arouse so much discomfort, I think it's because whenever two people pit vastly different economic systems against each other, one's advocacy of system A appears like an act of aggression against the supporter of system B. When you are a strong believer of individual sovereignty who thinks that aggression against your private property should be swiftly punished, it makes it very hard to be civil with a socialist who is trying to do what you would see as aggression. And vice-versa; I'm sure that liberals dislike hearing support for a system that denies goods, services and equality to those whom they believe need it more.

[AlexM]

Shake was trying to put a FAQ together, but Iron decided that no post by Shake would be stickied, no matter how necessary to the forum, so it was abandoned.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
Why do either of these ideologies arouse so much discomfort as to be put to the test at all times?

[/ QUOTE ]

The basic idea behind ACism and to a lesser extent libertarianism is that taxation is theft and that theft is immoral. Most people like to believe that what they're doing is "good." In fact, that's the whole idea behind many people's support of stuff like universal health care and the like is that it's a "good" thing. Obviously when people point out that they're using "evil" methods to accomplish their "good" thing, they're going to be more than a little aggitated. People don't like to be shown the negative consequences of their behavior and most people have convinced themselves that taxation isn't even theft at all, despite the fact that it very obviously is, so when it's pointed out to them it makes them very, VERY uncomfortable to have reality poking into their beliefs.

[natedogg]

I think there are two main reasons why some people have very strong reactions to the concepts of libertarianism.

1. Most people are sheep and hate responsibility. The very idea of a system that leaves them responsible for themselves is frightening to most people. To be fair, most people *are* fairly incompetent.

2. Most people so completely misunderstand the theories that they imagine the incompetents would starve under such a system, and they can't abide the thought of it.

So basically, the strong reactions are either "oh my god I'd starve in that system" or "oh my god somebody else might starve in that system".

Both of these reactions stem from the fact that the vast majority of people can't or won't take responsibility for themselves.

natedogg

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
When you are a strong believer of individual sovereignty who thinks that aggression against your private property should be swiftly punished, it makes it very hard to be civil with a socialist who is trying to do what you would see as aggression. And vice-versa; I'm sure that liberals dislike hearing support for a system that denies goods, services and equality to those whom they believe need it more.

[/ QUOTE ]

The sovereignty of the individual was precisely why the republican form of government of the United States of America was established.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When you are a strong believer of individual sovereignty who thinks that aggression against your private property should be swiftly punished, it makes it very hard to be civil with a socialist who is trying to do what you would see as aggression. And vice-versa; I'm sure that liberals dislike hearing support for a system that denies goods, services and equality to those whom they believe need it more.

[/ QUOTE ]

The sovereignty of the individual was precisely why the republican form of government of the United States of America was established.

[/ QUOTE ]

The form of government enshrined in the Constitution that is now almost completely ignored by the federal government? The Founding Fathers made a very good attempt at building a government to protect the invidual, but ultimately, they failed.

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When you are a strong believer of individual sovereignty who thinks that aggression against your private property should be swiftly punished, it makes it very hard to be civil with a socialist who is trying to do what you would see as aggression. And vice-versa; I'm sure that liberals dislike hearing support for a system that denies goods, services and equality to those whom they believe need it more.

[/ QUOTE ]

The sovereignty of the individual was precisely why the republican form of government of the United States of America was established.

[/ QUOTE ]

The form of government enshrined in the Constitution that is now almost completely ignored by the federal government?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, the form of government established through the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution which is now ignored by the federal government only to the extent that the sovereign power in this county, i.e. the People, permit it.

[ QUOTE ]
The Founding Fathers made a very good attempt at building a government to protect the invidual, but ultimately, they failed.

[/ QUOTE ]

They did not fail. Had a system of "anarcho-capitalist" plutocracy been put in place instead, we might as well have never fought the Revolutionary War.