Charlie Hebdo: Gun attack on French magazine kills 12

[mistermack]

Not really. There's nothing in individual liberty that prevents or opposes working together with others. It merely has to be a voluntary association rather than a compulsory one.

And that's where the bollocks starts to show.
If others work together, and you don't, you are immediately at a disadvantage.
Then their band gets bigger and bigger, and they declare that they are in charge and you have to obey the laws that they pass. And then your ''liberty'' is fucked.

[MrJonno]

The only way civilization exists is by individuals having to do at times things they don't want to do. What you have to do is as important as what you choose to do in any decent place to live

[Seth]

Not really. There's nothing in individual liberty that prevents or opposes working together with others. It merely has to be a voluntary association rather than a compulsory one.

And that's where the bollocks starts to show.
If others work together, and you don't, you are immediately at a disadvantage.

Indeed. Thus the Libertarian principle of "rational self-interest" which guides the actions of rational persons with respect to cooperation with others for the betterment of society and societal stability.

Then their band gets bigger and bigger, and they declare that they are in charge and you have to obey the laws that they pass. And then your ''liberty'' is fucked.

Indeed. Thus the Libertarian principle of "rational self-interest" which guides the actions of rational persons with respect to active participation in the structure and function of government in order to control the size and influence of government to maximize personal liberty within a framework of ordered liberty for all.

[Seth]

The only way civilization exists is by individuals having to do at times things they don't want to do. What you have to do is as important as what you choose to do in any decent place to live

All Libertarians require is that there be rational justification for the necessity to perform those onerous or unpleasant duties of society and that they be permitted to decline to participate in such efforts if they also choose not to use or enjoy the benefits of society and civilization that accrue through those efforts. Libertarians understand that most people are rational beings and will act rationally in their best interests in cooperating with others to maintain and pay for the necessities of government. Libertarians simply insist that such participation be voluntary, not compulsory. They do so because they recognize that the best way to control the size and influence of the necessary evil of government is to make it as toothless as possible consistent with ordered liberty, in large part by allowing every individual to decide for themselves what services and functions of government need to be paid for.

In this way government is constrained by a very direct plebecite of the people. If I don't like the program that government is asking me to pay for, then I don't have to pay for it. It therefore becomes incumbent on government to a) only propose programs that are reasonable and necessary; and b) government must spend its time and energy convincing the taxpayers that the cause is worthy of their financial support.

If legislators fail to so convince the public, then the project doesn't get funded, nor should it get funded. Legislators are representatives of the People, not their masters. Therefore it is up to legislators to do only that which the People approve of, and there is no better way to control an out-of-control government than to pull the purse strings and strangle political ambition by denying it the money it needs.

This is precisely what the new Congress is going to do to Obama to constrain his unlawful and unconstitutional executive actions. Since all fiscal bills must originate in the House of Representatives, which is in Republican hands, and must be approved by the Congress, which is in Republican hands, the Congress can now "defund" anything it disagrees with that Obama is or might try to do that Congress believes trenches upon Congressional authority.

The Libertarian model does the same thing except at the level of the individual citizen, who can agree (contract) with the government to pay a tax for a project that the taxpayer believes is worthy and necessary, or who can disagree with the project and refuse to fund it with his money.

It's an elegant way of controlling the size and scope of government, which is a very necessary tool to prevent tyranny.

Many of you are angry at the fact that the UK government funds the Church of England. Wouldn't it be nice if you could opt-out of paying that portion of your taxes?

[mistermack]

a framework of ordered liberty for all.