Hi Rick! I'm just an anarchist (individualist and without adjectives). The reason I don't call myself a voluntaryist is because, if taken to it's logical conclusion, it has absurd, anti-freedom results, such as "voluntary" human slavery. "Hey, you signed a contract, there was no coercion". I think that's plainly wrong and immoral.
Hey, thanks for clarifying. I'm trying to learn more about various anti-statist philosophies to solidify my views. I suppose I disagree with your example because in a truly free society, one should be able to make choices which may harm themselves (smoke cigarettes, sell a kidney, enter contracts to become a slave, commit suicide, ...). Sure one might consider these choices to be bad, but wouldn't it be immoral to coercively interfere?
If the post you are commenting on is more than 30 days old, your comment will have to await approval before being published. Rest assured, however, that as long as it is not spam, it will be published in due time.
> I'm no longer a "voluntaryist"
ReplyDeleteI'm curious. What are you then? I can't seem to figure it out. I enjoy your posts though.
Hi Rick! I'm just an anarchist (individualist and without adjectives). The reason I don't call myself a voluntaryist is because, if taken to it's logical conclusion, it has absurd, anti-freedom results, such as "voluntary" human slavery. "Hey, you signed a contract, there was no coercion". I think that's plainly wrong and immoral.
ReplyDeleteHey, thanks for clarifying. I'm trying to learn more about various anti-statist philosophies to solidify my views. I suppose I disagree with your example because in a truly free society, one should be able to make choices which may harm themselves (smoke cigarettes, sell a kidney, enter contracts to become a slave, commit suicide, ...). Sure one might consider these choices to be bad, but wouldn't it be immoral to coercively interfere?
ReplyDelete