Has there been any notable "academic" responses to Molyneux's "How (not) to Achieve Freedom", or has be been significantly ostracized from academia as to not warrant such an analysis or response?
http://www.fdrurl.com/HNTAFPDF
It directly seems to "prove" that the Mises Institute, Ron Paul, etc are going about our common goals in the wrong ways.
I'd argue Ron Paul has done more to create anarcho-capitalists than he has.
And by and large, a vast majority of people now go to his site... because of Ron Paul's actions.
His failure is that he believes Ron is only about political action. He's attacking a strawman, and that's where he fails.
What's Ron do? Educate. How's he do it? With concise soundbites, since he's in the msm - it's an age of manufactured consent. He does well, and ultimately guides people to places like the Ludwig Von Mises Institute. He is as radical as possible. Abolish the CIA, FBI, FED, Dept. of education, Dept. of Labor anyone? That's just for starters. Ron is in the mainstream, well as close to it as possible.
What's Steph do? Educate. How's he do it?... On youtube and his own website. Pretty easy to take pot shots from that position.
Having said this, I have already got this downloaded and am still yet to listen to it. But I have listened to his other talks on the issue.
A few pages of reading and I am unimpressed.
It's just an attack on libertarianism.
For instance: "It could easily be argued that by the time a Libertarian president is in office, the majority of society will be pro-libertarian, and so willunderstand and support even the aggressive and violent actions that will be required to shrink the power of the state."
why is violent action necessary to shrink the state?
Is it so violent to put into law "we will no longer steal money from people in the form of an icome tax" or some thing like that?
"Just as religion promises untestable rewards in the hereafter – and steadfastly avoids any rational tests of its promises – so politicallibertarianism promises a magical future liberation from state power through its ability to infiltrate and overturn the evils of powerfulorganizations – yet steadfastly resists any rational tests of its promises."
1. So what?
2. People act based on rationales. They believe that this method is effective. Prove that it is ineffective for achieving the goals of those individuals who chose to do it.
...
I'm interested in seeing the author's proposed methods of achieveing the "libertarian ideal"
another goodie:
"There comes a time in every man’s life when he has to stop blaming other people."
Clearly, it's my fault that people somewhere in Africa are being slaughtered. Should I just man up and take responsibility for it? Give me a f*cking break.
The appeal to "charity" is a truly ironic one. First, it is hardly "charity" to take wealth by force and hand it over to someone else. -Rothbard
Oh man, the chapter on academia in that book was just terrible. I mean it was laughably bad.
Wes Cooper:has be been significantly ostracized from academia as to not warrant such an analysis or response?
Huh? Molyneux isn't an academic.
Anyway, this paper by Block discusses some of the issues. Basically, libertarian academics are just getting restitution, so teaching at a government university doesn't contradict their principles.
LibertarianAnarchy.com - Government is immoral, unnecessary, and doesn't work!
Sage:Anyway, this paper by Block discusses some of the issues. Basically, libertarian academics are just getting restitution, so teaching at a government university doesn't contradict their principles.
Which is nonsense. I love WB on some things but on justifying voting and taking state money, I am forced to facepalm.
If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap