Tuesday, May 10, 2016

Consequences that are Unintended, Therefore Invisible to Certain Libertarians

First off, I found this over at Chateau Heartiste [link]:

Higamous, Hogamous, Civilization Is Monogamous

If that's hard to read, you can probably make it out better at the original blog, which you ought to go to anyway, to get Chateau Heartiste's commentary on it [link].

Now my commentary on it all:

This comes along at a good time, as I just finished a post on Spergy Libertarians (Spergitarians) [link], AKA left-libertarians, leftitarians, liberaltarians, etc., and you know what they would say about polygamy — that it's perfectly all right as long as it doesn't violate the NAP. A phrase I'm heartily sick of. This is, because, outside of dormitory bull sessions, i. e. in the real world where objective reality rules, there are things other than initiated force and fraud, that can screw up a whole society before you can say Jack Robinson Lysander Spooner.

Now, as I pointed out in the last post, the Founding Fathers were mostly very much aware that we had the good fortune to be a derivative of British culture, pretty libertarian to begin with, and that cultural norms, like marriage customs and religion could either encourage or impede freedom. Oh, occasionally, Jefferson got a little flaky and said things like:

"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."

But there he really wasn't advocating shipping in Muslims or Hindoos or whatever in great numbers, just allowing for freethinking. And as far as that goes, he of course was right.

And of course the idiot open-borders advocates, whether they call themselves libertarians or liberals or neoconservatives, are basically approving of polygamy and child marriage, incest, and, hell, cannibalism, because if you don't restrict immigration, you're going to get polygamists, pedophiles, practitioners of cousin marriage or closer, and cannibals. And not outliers, either. You're going to get neighborhoods full of such practices, because there is no magic dirt, and people don't change into other kinds of people when they cross the border.

Actually, though, the Jeffersonian attitude works pretty well as long as you don't have open borders, and keep the customs and morés of Western Civilization, which have produced the modern world. Libertarians who don't realize that are either fools or phonies who do realize it but who want to be fashionable.

And when Third-World behavior prevails, we will be a Third-World country, and there will be no room for libertarianism — Or even liberalism, or conservatism, any more.
Quibcag: In the tree we have Inuyasha and Kagome, of, naturally, Inuyasha (犬夜叉)


  1. I think even John Stossel (at WND?) asked what's wrong with cousin marriage. Hey, who doesn't need kids with -15 IQ points and medical problems out the gate?

    CS Lewis considered the parallel of a Convoy. Libertarians are concerned about the non-controversy of ships not hitting each other, but there is also whether the ships themselves are seaworthy, and the direction and destination of the convoy.

    I can only think of "Grass Roots Tyranny" covering Homeownerous associations - hey, if they fill the board, and they vote for Sharia...

    But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. He never heard of the Aztecs, maybe the first Shylocks or bleeding heart (aw, cut it out!) liberals with pyramid schemes.

  2. I have heard this same critique {I think from Dr. Michael Huemer} on utilitarian-ism. It works perfectly well for people that are already grounded in values from the Judaic-Christian values.