Paul I...
I appreciate your opinions, even your candid assessment of libertarians as
"foggy thinking fools" (certainly not the first time that label has been pinned
on me!). However, it seems I am an ultra foggy fool and misunderstand your point
completely or you need to learn a little more about libertarianism before making
a final pronouncement about the weather.
The English cow herder study you cite was obviously one designed to study the
impact of collectivism, i.e. no one owns property but rather it belongs to and
is shared by everyone, the State if you will. I would agree that that generally
doesn't work, and the fact that it doesn't work is born out in the experiment.
If the study proves anything, it proves that collectivism is inefficient, is
against human nature and that libertarian support of private property rights (as
it might apply to the herders) is in tune with human nature.
A libertarian would argue, and I think quite successfully in the context of the
experiment, that if, say, you had 10 acres and 10 herders and each herder
*owned* an acre, he or she would take much better care of it and be concerned
with its use and value over the long term. Does that make them selfish? I hardly
think so.
As for your statements suggesting that libertarians are selfish I would argue
that they are no more or less selfish than anyone else. Altruism, or being
concerned with the welfare of others, is ultimately manifested in one because it
makes him or her feel good for one reason or another. One might say that
altruism is human nature. Does that make a person selfish, because they do good
to feel good? I think not. In my opinion, it's one of Nature's most marvelous
feedback loops. Everyone acts, ultimately, in their own self interest, assuming
they are able to act freely. Who freely acts in a manner which makes them feel
bad or diminished in some way?
The state interferes with true altruism in that it forces people, sometimes
against their will, to do *good* things, thereby robbing people of the good
feelings they would get by performing the same action of their own free will. I
believe it is my responsibility to help others less fortunate than I am. I try
to use 10 per cent of my earnings in efforts to help others. But many don't do
this as they have been taught to believe the state is responsible for helping
others and they as individuals are no longer obligated to do anything on their
own. It is hard to blame them for thinking that way when Tax Freedom Day in the
USA is now somewhere around the end of May. I suggest that people become more
*selfish* when the state confiscates their money to *help* others, the state
assuming the people are not generous enough or smart enough if left to do so on
their own. It's sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy... treat people like they are
unkind and selfish and that's what you will get.
Paul, I am not thinking I will substantially change your mind about
libertarians, but I thought it important to at least clear up the
misunderstanding about the Tragedy of Commons cow herders experiment. And if, in
fact, I misunderstood your point, by all means please try one more time to help
me understand.
Regards,
Foggy Don
Paul I previously wrote:
<<What the Libertarians do not understand, in my view, in that their
philosophy of personal responsibility goes against human nature, as
proved 100 years ago by England's "Tragedy of the Commons" experiment with
dairy herders. >>
I previously wrote:
<<I am not familiar with the experiment you refer to... can you direct me
to a place where I can check it out?>>
Paul I replied:
<<It is well-documented in Sociology textbooks. My books are still boxed up,
so I cannot pull it out, but you shouldn't have any problem finding something
about it in a library.
In a capsule, some groups of English farmers formed a common area where
their herds could graze, thinking it was a better land-use plan. But because
it was a common area with no individual responsible for it, each farmer
allowed his herd to overgraze the area, trying to get as much for himself out
of the deal as he could. In the end, the overgrazing made the commons useless
to anyone for a while until it could recover.>>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 11/12/00 7:35:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> <<
> Paul I wrote:
>
> <>
>
> i don't understand.>>
> Poorly worded. What I mean is they are selfish but don't think they are.
>
>
> <<Libertarians are predomiantly white middle- to upper-class folks who
> want to protect what they have.>>
>
> True. But I believe just about *everyone* wants to at least protect what
> they have and most want to add to it... whether they be rich, poor or in
> the middle somewhere. However I don't believe it is right to employ
> force to take from some and arbitrarily give to others and/or use force
> to keep people from getting more (whatever the "more" may be for them).>>>
>
> I'm not sure I agree with that. Whatever happened to altruism?
>
>
> <>
> Libertarianism, like Marxism, is a utopian philosophy that, frankly, will
> never work on this planet.
> The problem with Libertarianism, for the most part, is that many men and
> women and most corporations do not care enough about you and me to be
> responsible for themselves. Libertarianism does not recognize the fact that
> some people are basically evil and out to take whatever they can get. Having
> covered more than enough murder trials as a journalist, I can assure you
> there are some people for whom the death penalty is not severe enough, but it
> is the best we can do as a society to protect ourselves.
> Furthermore, the environmental damage that such people and corporations can
> cause is often long-term and sometimes irreversible. What would the
> Libertarians have done with Saddam Hussein after he invaded, raped and
> pillaged Kuwait? And then tried to destroy the oil fields once it became
> apparent he would not be allowed to keep them?
> There is a need for a government that can regulate and intercede BEFORE the
> damage, rather than a lassez-faire approach that is only willing to punish
> people AFTER the damage is done.
> Sorry, but I regard Libertarians as foggy-thinking fools who do not live in
> the real world.
>
> Respectfully but candidly,
> Paul I
