From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Sat Aug 11 2001 - 09:17:57 MDT
KPJ wrote:
>
> It appears as if Mike Lorrey <mlorrey@datamann.com> wrote:
> |
> |I said that military service should be mandatory and a maybe on free
> |immigration. I believe that without significantly large national
> |professional fulltime (i.e. mercenary) military, that every person
> |should be equipped and capable of acting in their own defense and that
> |of the political unit they belong to. A libertarian society mandates
> |each individual be skilled in military matters, else they are
> |externalizing their defense costs on others. I believe the quiz, in this
> |instance, is therefore incorrect.
>
> I believe you have made a slight mistake in your analysis above.
>
> A libertarian society would wish to refuse membership for those who do
> not fill their requirement for membership. If a membr of such a society
> did not (a) equip and train for armed combat, or (b) pay some police force
> company to do that, that member would simply state its wish to refrain
> from defending itself, a somewhat unusual request, but still a perfectly
> valid request from any free entity. We should not wish to abridge that
> members way to live its life.
I frankly oppose living near individuals who think its fine to outsource
their self-defense needs. Outsourcing ones self defense is the FIRST and
greatest step to serfdom. If your right to life is inalienable, the
responsibility for the individual to defend that life themselves is
similarly inalienable. Delegation of self-defense is enslavement. This
is the most important ethic of libertarianism, which many overlook. They
think 'ooooh, self-ownership is great', but think that the
responsibilities entailed can be subcontracted. Not so.
>
> You stated your wish to live as a member of a corporeal entity, a nation
> as it were, built on mandatory service to the collective.
No, I did not.
> Others may wish
> to use the market economy model instead, and hire specialists for their
> security services. As you do not, it indicates your rightwingedness, a
> tendency to view your local group as an extended family, instead of a
> market, which would be the libertarian market economy model.
No, I do not treat my 'local group as a family'. What I say is that your
right to life cannot be treated as a commodity, by you or anyone else.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:09:44 MST