I disagree with some aspects of libertarianism promoted by virtually all libertarian bloggers. Thus I unsubscribed to almost all libertarian blogs. I began to criticise libertarianism since then. I took useless notes in hundreds of text files since I felt like it. I felt obsessed with the fallacies. I plan to integrate these notes in some writings. Below, I posted a possible outline of the free online book on libertarian fallacies. Almost all of the materials below did not show on my blog or any other author. So this outline does not repeat any of the fallacious ramblings on this blog.
I integrated 22 separate articles to this book as "chapters." I sorted these chapters so they would build up in order. I might also add 15 additional chapters in the Fallacies within Libertarianism section.
- The Abuse of Libertarian Theory
-
- The Fallacies of the Rule of Law
- Why do authority figures abuse the rule of law? What incentives does the system lack? Can we even interpret the law clear enough? Indeed, libertarians often refer to the U.S. Constitution and the non-aggression principle as the "rule of law." Politicians use the "rule of law" to legitimize their beliefs. Wikipedia editors, likewise, abuse the "rule of law" for their own interests.
-
- The Abuse of Libertarian Ethics
- Hans-Hermann Hoppe cites the "non-aggression principle" to justify closed borders. Likewise, some misapply the non-aggression principle for their own ends. Indeed, libertarian theorists cram their preferences with the non-aggression principle to promote their own interests.
-
- Libertarian Semantics
-
- The Confusing Labels of Libertarian Schools
- We often cannot attach any specific or concrete meaning to the words "liberal," "conservative," "capitalist," and "socialist." Despite such usual words, we also confuse terms such as "anarcho-capitalist." We found a surprising number of definitions of "anarcho-capitalism," from the broad meaning of the non-aggression principle, to the narrow, "hard propertarian" meaning resembling fascism.
-
- Ontological Nonsense
- In ontology, the "study of being," we take different positions on "rationalism," "empiricism," "physicalism," and "idealism." We will show the meaningless of these terms.
-
- The Semantic Abuse of Meta-ethics
- What does "objectivism," "subjectivism," "realism," and "nominalism" mean? Can we agree on a specific meaning of these terms? Can we "pick" a semantic interpretation of ethics such as "cognitivism" and "non-cognitivism"? No, we do not. Some will ignore this chapter as advocating "subjectivism" or "idealism," but we claim to not hold any position in meta-ethics.
-
- The False Dichotomy of Consequentialism and Deontology
- Many libertarians divide between consequentialist and deontological ethics. We will deny this false dichotomy.
-
- E-Prime and Libertarian Semantics
- Libertarians will often misrepresent others. How do we resolve it? Some will resort to redefining terms, while others avoid only those "controversial" terms altogether. We found a new method to do this. We resolve this by practicing a variety of English called E-Prime, which reduces labeling and ontological fallacies.
-
- Fallacies within Libertarianism
-
- The Slippery Slope of Lifeboat Scenarios
- Libertarians will often extort aggression in "extreme" cases of ethics as "lifeboat scenarios." However, they will often abuse it and unconciously label "lifeboat situation" to every subject that they repel. Indeed, many controversies orginate from lifeboat scenarios. Thus we will refine "lifeboat situations" to minimize ambiguity.
-
- The Fallacy of Subjective Indeterminacy
- When debating with some statists, we often go into debates on whether we should support the state to fund some "public goods" such as health care and housing. Many libertarians, however, will go into the slippery slope fallacy of "subjective indeterminacy" when debating about "public goods." Even with noting the multiple meanings of this term, we still take the risk of going into a version of the Sorites paradox.
-
- Market Forces and Cultural Preferences do not Mix
- Some will say market competition will increase "popularity." Some others claim that a product can "outcompete" others. However, we should never use the metaphor "competition" to describe social evolution. We often abuse free-market theory with social movements.
-
- The Theory of Popularity and Fringeness
- Why many so many people adore a belief or ideology and ignore others? Why does not the majority of economists practice Austrian Economics? Why typists avoid the Dvorak keyboard layout? We will claim the underlying factors of popularity, and the unpopularity of non-mainstream viewpoints.
-
- Why Do We Grow?
- What does it mean for the economy to grow? Does it mean increased labor productivity or increased use-value satisfaction of its individuals? Should we even consider individual productivity as a virtue? We will conclude "economic growth" as a nonsensical concept.
-
- Free-Market Manorialism: Why We All Rent and Invest Capital
- Some will argue "rent" will decrease, due to increased land availble and lower time-preferenecs. Some will predict land prices to increase, thus labeling the free-market as "manorialistic." However, we will all ubitiquously rent in a free market, whether we like it or not.
-
- The Myth of Regulatory Expansion
- Some net neutrality detractors, such as libertarians, oppose increased interventions on Internet service providers. However, they often oppose it for flawed reasons. Can citizens even restrain the state? Some will say no, and some will argue yes. The Public Choice Fallacy comes.
-
- The Economic-Demographic Myth and Sociobiological Evolution
- Ronald Reagan once claimed the free-market as "the best contraceptive." Ludwig von Mises and Mary Ruwart said the same thing. Should we accept that free markets reduce birth rates? Despite this fad, the opposite actually happens. Free markets increase birth rates, and economic planning reduces it. Also, due to sociobiological evolution, even a socialist society will increase birth rates in the long-run.
-
- The Dow Jones Fallacy
- Libertarian enthusiasts and economists capture stock market indices as a hobby. However, they fail to take account of the accuracy of the reporting. Can the Dow Jones measure the entire economy accurately? The Dow consists of the 30 privileged firms and biases itself on cartelized sectors of the economy. Simply no.
-
- Libertarian Traps
-
- The Ubitiquity of Policy Libertarianism
- Even many those libertarians who oppose electoral politics support some form of policy libertarianism, whether criticizing Obama as a person or promoting "welfare reform" as conservatives do.
-
- Obama Will Not Instigate Revival
- Many conservatives and libertarians alike, applaud Obama. They want Obama to mess the economy up so the general population will see socialism, in general, as a failure. However, Obama supporters will not blame socialism in itself, but will blame Obama for "mismanaging" and "bad policies." Just like how the Democrats do not blame Bush for the war, but blame the "mismanagement" or "bad intelligence." They do not criticize the war in itself.
-
- Against Anti-Federalism
- Almost all proponents of libertarianism, including many mutualists, support "states' rights" or defederalization of the federal republic. They will even support "local control of schools and health care" and every other thing.
-
- Radicalism and the Politicial Process
- Politicans fool more libertarians than we know. They will often fool even those who do not practice electoral politics. In the early stages of the campaign, politicians will often lie to attract the radical grassroots first, and then speak in a less and less rhetoric towards the end stages of the campaign.
-
- How Conservatives Deceive Libertarians
- Conservatives often speak of "deregulation," "less spending," and oppose "socialized medicine" that appeals to some libertarians. However, almost all of such terms have multiple meanings.
-
- The Libertarian Case Against Wikipedia
- Often, libertarians will get stuck in a bureaucratic institution called Wikipedia. Not suprisingly, they often get wound up on wasteful debates about changing the article titles, prescribing their own definitions of some libertarian terms, and putting non-mainstream knowledge and links which invites editors to revert. Besides those numerous false sockpuppet convictions, the editors lack many incentives to improve articles and accept contributions from dissidents other than to revert their edits.
-
1 comment:
strong ideas, but needs proofreading. Id like to read this book.
Post a Comment