Hans - Hermann Hoppe has sympathies towards neither.
I wonder if someone as myself were to draw similar observations that Hoppe does (like say, the interesting contrasts between Monarchy & Democracy), & get away with it simply because I have a different background, or phrase things differently, etc.
Would that make me a political science student, or a secretive infiltrator to the libertarian movement that requires nothing short of social witch hunting to drive me out?
Then again, I haven’t read everything Hoppe, so I might be talking from a limited amount of exposure.
Yet, I find very little blashpemy with seeing how monarchy & democracy, while both absolute poisons, differ from each other in both (relative to each other, but also relative to a stateless society) strengths & weaknesses. Wouldn’t this be more of a historical perspective?
The social venom seems to be both a bit of a double-standard & silly to me, is all.
I agree, I do not think there is anything contrary to libertarianism about Hoppe’s analysis, nor have I seen any serious attempts to refute it. I just think it’s part of a bigger reaction to Professor Hoppe.
Hoppe, indeed, highlights the point that he believes that as the state rests on public opinion it is of necessity to undermine the legitimacy of democracy. I can see few better ways of doing this than to compare it, and find it inferior to, monarchy. Monarchy, essentially being a relic of the past and a system of social organization that is not even considered anymore.
I don’t know. I mostly use my blog to put together thoughts on topics I consider important so I myself and others can draw some inspiration from them for future debates.
How do you “fight” for/against an idea if not that way? Demonstrating on the streets?
Sometimes I think I’m piling up a whole lot of opportunity costs by delving into these intellectual feuds as a layman without any stakes instead of improving my market value. I mean, there’s really not that much left to talk about anymore. We know that free markets tend to be superior in producing goods and services, we know that a society based on property rights tends to resolve conflicts more satisfactorily than one that is not - it’s like we’re sitting here, consuming all of our energy on discussing details of a hypothetical future society that we’re supposed to build.
By the way, if any moral objectivists are in need of a Two Minutes Hate, look at Stodle’s most recent YouTube publication. [;)]
Sure, maybe not, maybe. I just find it funny that some people invest themselves so heavily into ideological arguments on Web 2.0 properties.
Yeah, let’s just start building it already. I know my knowledge is not perfect, but I am hankering for some action!