I just read, over the course of several days, #SlateStarCodex’s “Non-Libertarian FAQ” (years ago I had only skimmed it).
It is a brilliant text, as usual, and it reminded me why although I read and flirt at times with different ideologies I remain mostly a #moderate — why I don’t call myself a #libertarian or an #anarchocapitalist; but rather someone with libertarian sympathies, or perhaps a (classic) #liberal.
It reminded me why absolute #libertarianism or #anarchism as ideologies and moral systems, in particular, may feel rational, coherent, complete and desirable… without being any of those things.
Which does not imply, of course, that some specific governments nowadays would not do better by moving closer to the libertarian pole!
@tripu That FAQ looks very interesting, I will read it in full with an open mind.
That seems embarrassing, and I’ve been hearing about the sclerosis of #SanFrancisco for a while, too.
But I feel that proving a non-libertarian wrong in the abstract is indeed very difficult: #ScottAlexander is not arguing that governments and public agencies are always everywhere better than the private sector at everything they set to do — he’s showing that they are not always_worse_. This is intuitively obvious; ie none of the two extremes (absolute statism or #anarchocapitalism) is desirable.
If you’re a moderate, a centrist, or even a #minarchist, this comes as no surprise — no matter how many outrageous pieces of evidence you can collect to illustrate that “the other side” is sometimes inefficient, expensive, or even harmful…
@fidel But I’m very interested in that post in the making! :)
@tripu I'm still reading through it, already planning a longer-form blog post with some counterarguments, but for now I will leave here this anecdotal evidence that made me chuckle and facepalm today: https://twitter.com/balajis/status/1488988253411708931