Hans Hoppe, for having worked at a state funded institution .. University of Las Vegas at Nevada
Robert Higgs for having worked at the University of Washington
Thomas Woods for having been associated with Suffolk County Community College
My point is not to criticize these individuals, but to try to get a better idea of what constitutes support for aggression in the eyes of most people? Does accepting a government paycheck imply you support aggression even if you publish papers criticizing it, or not? And what about academics that work in private institutions that receive a large amount of government money indirectly via state and federal government subsidized loans etc? Do working at institutions such as that make one a hypocrite? Where is the line?
Actually the issue of where the line is between being a hypocrite and having to deal with in order to get around you have to use government funded roads wasn’t addressed as much as I’d like it to have been. If you think that issue was covered then fair play, don’t post on this thread. But the focus seemed to revolve around the acceptability of taking welfare and-or student loans so long as you used that money to write articles criticizing the state etc. The issue of at what point does participation with the state constitute hypocrisy wasn’t fleshed out that much.
And FYI.. I indeed am a hypocrite. I have a private sector job and a public sector one. There are considerations in life more important at this point to me than purity on my part. I’m not willing to sacrifice certain things to pass a purity test at this point.
Well, the intent of the thread isn’t to necessarily criticize them. At this point it’s still “on the one hand and on the other hand” for me. And I would be a hypocrite if I took the moral high ground in this matter as part of my income, as stated before, does come from a government job in the field of education. And what qualifies as semi-government institutions? Dairy farmers, people who work at places like GE or Archers Daniels Midland? People whose jobs are protected from competition due to tariffs?
“Well, the intent of the thread isn’t to necessarily criticize them.”
“Necessarily” lol… Then what is the reason of naming them?
Could your goal have not been achieved by stating the general conditions & situation - as has been done in threads linked elsewhere.
"And I would be a hypocrite if I took the moral high ground in this matter as part of my income, as stated before, does come from a government job in the field of education. "
If government completely nationalised the education field, better yet - not just that, but say you’re in the Soviet Union - you are required to become a martyr or sacrifice your principles and be a hypocrite?
It’d be great if you’d had taken the time to read other discussions on this matter than opening it up again like that.
“Actually the issue of where the line is between being a hypocrite and having to deal with in order to get around you have to use government funded roads wasn’t addressed as much as I’d like it to have been.”
See above. But really, so everybody in this thread - nay, this whole forum - actually, it must be pretty much the entire libertarian movement, are hypocrites by your rationale. Just amazing… it is called the purist deviation fallacy.
I don’t think they are hypocrites. They are all working in the private sector now. If they were still in the public sector, I think they would have a hard time making their case against the state.
The problem with Rothbardian pragmatism is that it isn’t logically consistent with Rothbardian principles. In fact, libertarianism as a system valuing non-aggression, really isn’t very compatible with short run, high time preference pragmatism at all. You could say, libertarianism is truly the long run social approach.
Sorry if this was covered elsewhere, but what do you think of private sector workers who deal with the government, such as contract analysts for an aerospace firm?
I wouldn’t choose that career path, but I am not interested in judging others. My only concern is whether someone is acting in a manner that promotes market outcomes, if they are a libertarian or market anarchist. Matching means and ends.
See above. But really, so everybody in this thread - nay, this whole forum - actually, it must be pretty much the entire libertarian movement, are hypocrites by your rationale. Just amazing… it is called the purist deviation fallacy.
Yes, to a certain extent or other everyone is a hypocrite I suppose. Everyone is forced to use state funded services at at least some point in his life. Perhaps of better way of rephrasing the issue is not whether people are hypocrites but how much hypocrisy is necessary.. But yes, I think we’re all hypocrites.