Friday, July 27, 2012

Sometimes I feel like Gene Callahan is the only libertarian that gets it

Posted by dkuehn at 8:54 PM
Here. (Calm down - I said "sometimes").

...choose to read that parenthetical how you wish.

11 comments:

  1. AnonymousJuly 27, 2012 at 9:27 PM

    Gene a libertarian? I don't think that he'd agree with that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob MurphyJuly 27, 2012 at 10:28 PM

    Right Daniel--Gene doesn't consider himself a libertarian.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallahJuly 28, 2012 at 11:13 AM

      The presidential election test that was going around considers me one. Walter Block would consider me a "pinko." Me, I don't care what you call me, just don't call me late for dinner! -- Gene "King of Corn" Callahan

      Delete
    2. Lord KeynesJuly 28, 2012 at 11:42 AM

      It appears that for the pure Rothbardian anarcho-capitalist even Hayek was an evil interventionist.

      Wear it as a badge of honour.

      Delete
    3. Bob RoddisJuly 28, 2012 at 12:28 PM

      Three cheers for "Lord Keynes" and his tireless fight against a prohibition upon the initiation of violence against the innocent.

      Delete
    4. AnonymousJuly 28, 2012 at 4:48 PM

      Actually Gene, Walter spoke pretty fondly of you in a conversation that I had with him.

      LK, most Rothbardians that I know like Hayek's economics, but don't like his political philosophy. I surely wouldn't say that they see him as evil. I mean, for the most part I consider myself a Rothbardian (for the time being), but there are many things that I don't agree with from Rothbard (such as some of his ethics). Ultimately, what Rothbardians tend to see in statist thinkers is a double-standard for the state, especially regarding violence.

      Delete
  3. Jonathan Finegold CatalánJuly 28, 2012 at 3:22 AM

    Given that I've generally said that the State evolved spontaneously and "naturally" from human society, I don't think Gene is the only one that "gets it" (even sometimes). But, that the State evolved spontaneously it doesn't mean that it's nature, once evolved, became something different compared to other institutions that evolved out of spontaneous order (like the market), and it doesn't mean there can be alternatives.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 28, 2012 at 6:36 PM

      I imagine that you meant to type "can't" rather than "can" when talking of alternatives.

      I think that I am in agreement with all that the state was birthed somewhat spontaneously, but it certainly doesn't follow from that that the evolution of the state is a constant (that it will always be repeated if one were to begin at time zero), or that the social order cannot or will not evolve away from the state-order.

      There are many things that evolved to their current condition, but that doesn't justify their existence on all grounds, nor does it presuppose a constant state of being or predetermined evolution.

      Delete
    2. Jonathan Finegold CatalánJuly 29, 2012 at 3:58 AM

      I agree with the second paragraph. It's as if people think there is a sociological law that requires the state to evolve out of stateless society.

      Delete
  4. PrateekJuly 28, 2012 at 12:38 PM

    I find it funny that Daniel's post about Gene's post got more responses than Gene's post.

    By the way, Prof. Callahan, did you know that when "Lord Keynes" was organizing a list of bloggers classified by their political views, you were the only one under "Miscellaneous"?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Bob MurphyJuly 30, 2012 at 11:01 AM

    Prateek wrote:

    I find it funny that Daniel's post about Gene's post got more responses than Gene's post.

    You will laugh much in life, then.

    ReplyDelete

All anonymous comments will be deleted. Consistent pseudonyms are fine.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)