[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]Dabba wrote:
Anarchy, at least market anarchy, can be thought of as a subset of libertarianism. There is no one true “libertarianism”.[/quote]
So what?
I’m not asking for wholesale life changes - anarchists, for example, would have to use public streets or be subject to liability for trespassing.
I’m asking for a modicum of intellectual integrity in practicing what you preach, because if you don’t, you’re a hypocrite. This is particularly true if you are an extremist, as Rothbard most certainly was.
That makes two of us, but I bet the explanation isn’t so good for Mr. Rothbard.
No they weren’t, and libertarians aren’t worried about monopolies at any rate. Rothbard had every opporunity at entering this market (and had already done so); the problem was his “product” in the market - academic “studies” expounding the idea of “anarchism” - was not in demand.
Rothbard tried to sell a product no one wanted. By all accounts, it looks like he went seeking a government handout to keep fueling his “studies” when the private market wouldn’t buy what he was selling.
Debunking anarchism? It’s self-debunking. Humans are not compatible with it, don’t want it and have never wanted it. The burden, really, is on the anarchists to explain why, in the face of refutation of thousands of years of recorded human behavior, anarchism is viable. No one has. Rothbard hasn’t, nor has anyone in these forums.
There’s no arrogance on my part - I am not claiming to “be awesome”. All I am claiming is that the day when Rothbard’s quackery got a fair hearing has long since passed, because all intellectual development must, at some point, move past discredited or flawed ideas. We don’t owe Rothbard’s ideas an open mind or “another shot”, and you are just upset that someone won’t grant some level of respect you think owed to Rothbard’s work because you like the guy, not for any substantive reason.
That ain’t how it works.
I see this trend among many libertarians - this desire to have all ideas “equalized” or else it is unfair. It’s not. Rothbard’s ideas are the equivalent of phrenology or flat-earth ideas, and treating them as anything different is adolescent and intellectually dishonest.[/quote]
I had a long response typed out, but I’m honestly getting bored with this topic and it’s obviously going nowhere. Look, I don’t think taking a job at a university is hypocritical since it is a legitimate job (not to mention most of his stuff was privately funded), but I DO agree with you that he was a hypocrite and out of line in writing that article.
