tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post172723951737614745..comments2023-11-22T01:14:54.298-08:00Comments on amor mundi: Will You Go Galt With Me?Dale Carricohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02811055279887722298noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-81397526669336742052009-04-23T11:23:00.000-07:002009-04-23T11:23:00.000-07:00In a comment thread to Dale's blog post
"...In a comment thread to Dale's blog post<br />"Problematical Posthumanistical"<br />Saturday, June 02, 2007<br />http://amormundi.blogspot.com/2007/06/problematical-posthumanistical.html<br /><br />Michael Anissimov complained:<br /><br />"Out of a couple hundred singularitarians, there are only three I<br />know of that are libertarians. . . Many, many are Democrats.<br /><br />So as we can see, your associating singularitarianism with right-wing<br />politics is obviously wrong. I would like to ask you to please stop<br />doing it."<br /><br />To which Dale replied:<br /><br />"Fat chance."<br /><br /><br />So, should "libertarianism" be lumped together with "right-wing politics"?<br /><br />Well, George Lakoff, in _Moral Politics<br />seems to think so:<br /><br />"Libertarians see themselves as forming a separate political category,<br />neither liberal nor conservative, but something unto itself.<br />An analysis. . . suggests that their view of themselves is not<br />entirely accurate. . .<br /><br />Consider a variant on [the "central conservative model"] that is<br />pragmatic in the extreme, that is, think of a conservative who sees<br />the pursuit of self-interest as the principal end, and conservative<br />morality (self-discipline, self-reliance, etc.) as a means to<br />that end. Someone who is extremely pragmatic will be willing<br />to sacrifice aspects of conservative morality if it interferes<br />with the pursuit of self-interest. Now imagine such a pragmatic<br />conservative having the moral focus: noninterference by the<br />government. So far as I can tell, this is what a "libertarian" is,<br />namely, an extremely pragmatic conservative whose moral focus<br />is on noninterference by the government. In short, a libertarian<br />is two steps away from a mainline conservative.<br /><br />Such a person will believe that free enterprise should be as<br />unrestricted as possible. . . He will be very much against<br />social programs, taxation, government support of education and<br />the arts, government regulation, and gun control. But the<br />libertarian's moral focus on noninterference by the government<br />and his extreme support of the pursuit of self-interest will<br />make him a radical advocate of civil liberties. He will oppose<br />any governmental restrictions on free speech, pornography, abortion,<br />homosexuality, and so on. He will probably support the rights<br />of women, gays, and minorities to equal opportunity, but<br />be strongly against affirmative action on the grounds that it<br />gives individuals things they haven't individually earned.<br />He will most likely be pro-choice on abortion, but not believe<br />that the government should pay for abortions. And since he<br />gives priority to the pursuit of self-interest over the rest<br />of the conservative moral system, he will not have the moralism of<br />mainline conservatives; the seven deadly sins may not be sins<br />for him. . ."<br /><br /><br />Despite Anissimov's complaint to Dale from two years ago,<br />he seems to take a different view of the matter in his most<br />recent "Accelerating Future" blog post -- his use of the phrases<br />"immortalist libertarians" and "libertarian transhumanism" seems<br />to suggest he's talking about more than three out of "hundreds".<br /><br />http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/michael/blog/<br /><br />Peter Thiel talks about stuff at Libertarianism Unbound magazine. <br /><br />> I remain committed to the faith of my teenage years: to authentic<br />> human freedom as a precondition for the highest good. I stand against<br />> confiscatory taxes, totalitarian collectives, and the ideology of<br />> the inevitability of the death of every individual. For all these<br />> reasons, I still call myself “libertarian.”<br /><br />Like most immortalist libertarians, Peter wants to connect together immortalism<br />with libertarianism, boosting libertarian transhumanism. In transhumanism,<br />the battle between socialists and libertarians is one of endless “excitement”<br />to old-timers and confusion to journalists trying to report on the movement.<br />----------------------------------<br /><br /><br />Who are these "old-timers" of whom Michael speaks? My guess:<br /><br />Subject: Those classic Extropians<br />From: [jimf] on 17/04/2006<br /><br />Last September [2005], I wrote to a net-acquaintance mentioning a<br />Yahoo group called "Neoclassical Extropians" that I'd been<br />invited to join a few months earlier:<br /><br />> [He wrote back:]<br />><br />> I take it "classic" means something like Good Old-Fashioned Libertarian <br />> Extropy, and is where the embattled hardliners withdrew to get away from <br />> communitarian devils like me as well as all the noise on extropy-chat?<br /><br />Precisely.<br /><br />Moderation is up-front and heavy-handed, with a<br />hard-edged, nasty tone, and [the moderator] does<br />not hesitate to pull the plug on people who piss<br />him off.<br /><br />I'm only a member (as of 25 May 2005) because [a friend]<br />(who joined 24 May 2005) invited me. My presence is actually<br />in violation of the list rules, because lurkers aren't<br />supposed to be allowed, and I've never posted. So I<br />fully expect that sooner or later [the moderator] will houseclean<br />and I'll be booted. . .<br /><br />Well, surprise surprise -- I managed, last week, to get booted off<br />the Yahoo "Neoclassical Extropians" list (owned by martial-arts<br />and gun enthusiast Russell Whitaker) after only one week of active<br />participation! . . .<br /><br />[Along the way, I got feedback such as:]<br /><br />> Suggesting that someone of the stature of Ayn Rand was "probably a<br />> nut case" is far beyond what I find remotely acceptable. Following<br />> up by guessing what sort of "nut" she might be is egregious.<br />> Quoting such a creature as Dale Carrico and his "libertopian" slam<br />> finishes disqualifying you from being worth my time to talk with. I<br />> did not come to this list to endure such outrageous crap.<br /><br />[and]<br /><br />> As listowner, I can say that being libertarian/anarchocapitalist are<br />> hard prerequisites here first. Regardless of one's views on Rand. . .<br />> I think [jimf] was indirectly making a broad, smirking swipe at<br />> libertarianism.<br />><br />> I'm not interested in providing him a venue for that kind of entertainment.<br />><br />> I've already told him to either leave the list or be removed by me.<br /><br />[The moderator also didn't like my use of emoticons. ;-> ]jimfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04975754342950063440noreply@blogger.com