Libertarianism in any practical manner would need to be built on the carcus of a society that already built all the necessary infrastructure for a functioning society.
@@Philosonomics "what private property is" is subjective. Furthermore, it is incalculable, viewed as objective and treated as if it's subjective again. Whilst society in some regards strives towards making it objective, it introduces trade-offs and coercion in so doing.
@olivern.karlsson3927 Private property has a clear legal definition and framework in most societies. That can vary across cultures... Can you explain what you mean by ""what private property is" is subjective"" and how it introduces coercion by striving to towards making it objective? I'm not sure I'm following the full point of what you're saying. Thanks for reaching out here mate, I'm genuinely interested in this line of though
As someone who comes from an area of the world where there is no government involvement (Swat Valley, KPK, Pakistan), I can confidently say it works and it doesn't. Where I'm from, every structure you see was built by an individual. Every hospital, every school, road, etc. (and this includes the power grid). The government is so incompetent that all it can do is try to take money from locals without doing anything in return. But there is a catch... There is no security without a tribe of people. There is no safety (in regards to both physical, financial, and social) without a tribe of people. There is no mandate to improve anything, and anyone trying to do so in a public space is condemned (they can still do so on their private property). If a stable, non-corrupt government is in power, I think that would be preferable to what I saw, but a stable, non-corrupt government might not be possible in Pakistan, so our form of tribal libertarianism is the default. As far as I can tell, that is the only form of libertarianism that has existed anywhere in the world.
Wow, thanks very much for that detailed story of personal experience. When you say they try to do something on public property they are condemned. I'm curious how something new would be built on unused/unowned/unoccupied land and what the process of that would be if at all... And how a large scale operation like a hospital is done and agreed upon. Would love to hear more about that. I've heard ancient Iceland thrown around as an example of an AnCap society but have researched that too deeply. I think most libertarians that are more radical than the minarchist advocate for contractual convent communities, Hans-Herman Hoppe has laid out some work in this area. Also services would be provided by private entities, the fire department would be replaced by multiple competing business with rating systems. Same would apply for defence/police so it' wouldn't have to be solely tribal like defence. Thanks again for the great comment
@@Philosonomics I read up on contractual convent communities. It perfectly describes what I've experienced. This is, in fact, the norm for most rural Pashtun communities (think tribal Afghanistan where central governments aren't possible). Police forces are made up of mostly paid volunteers, but the locals are heavily armed and can quickly form defensive militias. Each neighborhood has its own armed watch rotation every night, separate from the police, and this is fully voluntary and unpaid. Fire departments are formed in the same way, rather than as a business. Those services operate almost as charities with each individual in the community voluntarily giving funds, similar to how mosques operate. Funnily enough, the medical field is the one that operates most like a business-to-business market. Hospitals act as a marketplace/bazaar for individual doctors, nurses, pharmacists, radiologists, etc. rather than as a single formal entity. The "hospital" is just the building where they are based. One thing to note is that the police have very little power. There are instances where the tribe will easily overpower police. Tense standoffs have occurred with the police usually backing down and offering to negotiate with the tribal elders. On some occasions, full shootouts do occur. As for your question on how unused public land is made useful by individuals, it's almost a first-come-first-serve basis. So long as there are no other parties that have a greater claim or greater purpose for it, then it usually defaults to whomever was there first. If someone wants to build a school or mosque on it, it will almost always go towards that purpose instead. This tactic of building public services is often used by competing rivals to sabotage each others' expansion plans. It works in the favor of the community, but can hinder economic growth. The condemnation comes in when it is immediately useful land and you claim it for yourself. That is considered a big insult to the community. Only land that is unusable and made usable is considered fair game (a clear example is a rough mountainside that is unclaimed and made into farmland through labor, very few would think to get involved in that case). This obviously isn't tolerated for roads/waterways, but beyond that, so long as you don't cause harm to other peoples interests, the community generally accepts the use, or rather, they are indifferent to its use.
Agree with his logic 100% but logic also tells me that it’s too late to implement most (if not all) of his ideas…. There’s elements that are already gaining traction but for all of it to work and you really break it down all he’s saying is to trust the natural world. I feel pretty confident that the harshness of the natural world that we’re part of (if you weren’t born a narcissist) won’t ever be accepted by the majority at this point, making it all pretty much pointless.
@@mathewkelly9968 Pretty much. Libertarians don't really believe in society like normal humans do. Their ideology is Enlightenment for people that don't understand Enlightenment. Its like loving Thomas Jefferson, without understanding Locke.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Libertarianism in any practical manner would need to be built on the carcus of a society that already built all the necessary infrastructure for a functioning society.
Are you saying force or coercion is a necessity at some point in the evolution of every/any society?
@@Philosonomics "what private property is" is subjective. Furthermore, it is incalculable, viewed as objective and treated as if it's subjective again. Whilst society in some regards strives towards making it objective, it introduces trade-offs and coercion in so doing.
@@Philosonomics If I may ask, do you believe that there is an objective criterion by which private property is established?
@@Philosonomicslike you 'libertarians' won't end up using force and coercion too 😂
@olivern.karlsson3927 Private property has a clear legal definition and framework in most societies. That can vary across cultures...
Can you explain what you mean by ""what private property is" is subjective"" and how it introduces coercion by striving to towards making it objective? I'm not sure I'm following the full point of what you're saying.
Thanks for reaching out here mate, I'm genuinely interested in this line of though
As someone who comes from an area of the world where there is no government involvement (Swat Valley, KPK, Pakistan), I can confidently say it works and it doesn't.
Where I'm from, every structure you see was built by an individual. Every hospital, every school, road, etc. (and this includes the power grid).
The government is so incompetent that all it can do is try to take money from locals without doing anything in return.
But there is a catch...
There is no security without a tribe of people. There is no safety (in regards to both physical, financial, and social) without a tribe of people. There is no mandate to improve anything, and anyone trying to do so in a public space is condemned (they can still do so on their private property).
If a stable, non-corrupt government is in power, I think that would be preferable to what I saw, but a stable, non-corrupt government might not be possible in Pakistan, so our form of tribal libertarianism is the default.
As far as I can tell, that is the only form of libertarianism that has existed anywhere in the world.
Wow, thanks very much for that detailed story of personal experience.
When you say they try to do something on public property they are condemned. I'm curious how something new would be built on unused/unowned/unoccupied land and what the process of that would be if at all... And how a large scale operation like a hospital is done and agreed upon. Would love to hear more about that.
I've heard ancient Iceland thrown around as an example of an AnCap society but have researched that too deeply.
I think most libertarians that are more radical than the minarchist advocate for contractual convent communities, Hans-Herman Hoppe has laid out some work in this area.
Also services would be provided by private entities, the fire department would be replaced by multiple competing business with rating systems. Same would apply for defence/police so it' wouldn't have to be solely tribal like defence.
Thanks again for the great comment
Id also be interested in an expansion maybe the youtuber could interview you or something
@@Philosonomics
I read up on contractual convent communities. It perfectly describes what I've experienced. This is, in fact, the norm for most rural Pashtun communities (think tribal Afghanistan where central governments aren't possible). Police forces are made up of mostly paid volunteers, but the locals are heavily armed and can quickly form defensive militias. Each neighborhood has its own armed watch rotation every night, separate from the police, and this is fully voluntary and unpaid. Fire departments are formed in the same way, rather than as a business. Those services operate almost as charities with each individual in the community voluntarily giving funds, similar to how mosques operate. Funnily enough, the medical field is the one that operates most like a business-to-business market. Hospitals act as a marketplace/bazaar for individual doctors, nurses, pharmacists, radiologists, etc. rather than as a single formal entity. The "hospital" is just the building where they are based.
One thing to note is that the police have very little power. There are instances where the tribe will easily overpower police. Tense standoffs have occurred with the police usually backing down and offering to negotiate with the tribal elders. On some occasions, full shootouts do occur.
As for your question on how unused public land is made useful by individuals, it's almost a first-come-first-serve basis. So long as there are no other parties that have a greater claim or greater purpose for it, then it usually defaults to whomever was there first. If someone wants to build a school or mosque on it, it will almost always go towards that purpose instead. This tactic of building public services is often used by competing rivals to sabotage each others' expansion plans. It works in the favor of the community, but can hinder economic growth. The condemnation comes in when it is immediately useful land and you claim it for yourself. That is considered a big insult to the community. Only land that is unusable and made usable is considered fair game (a clear example is a rough mountainside that is unclaimed and made into farmland through labor, very few would think to get involved in that case).
This obviously isn't tolerated for roads/waterways, but beyond that, so long as you don't cause harm to other peoples interests, the community generally accepts the use, or rather, they are indifferent to its use.
Agree with his logic 100% but logic also tells me that it’s too late to implement most (if not all) of his ideas…. There’s elements that are already gaining traction but for all of it to work and you really break it down all he’s saying is to trust the natural world. I feel pretty confident that the harshness of the natural world that we’re part of (if you weren’t born a narcissist) won’t ever be accepted by the majority at this point, making it all pretty much pointless.
So who is funding their own hospitals , medical research , utlities etc ? Libertarism is a joke 😂
Who funds them now?
@@mathewkelly9968 Pretty much. Libertarians don't really believe in society like normal humans do. Their ideology is Enlightenment for people that don't understand Enlightenment. Its like loving Thomas Jefferson, without understanding Locke.