Human beings have always had differing value scales and it is reasonable to expect that they always will unless they are forced into homogeneity by a coercive, central authority. Some people have no interest in consuming psychotropic substances, for instance. Others derive great pleasure from this and believe the benefits to outweigh the costs. What is of importance to a political and philosophical ideology is that one adheres to its basic tenets. The sole ethical tenet of libertarianism (as I practice it) is the NAP. Metaphysical beliefs and personal preferences are therefore irrelevant. Theoretically, a libertarian may belong to any group, consume any substance, or engage in any behavior and remain a principled libertarian so long as he doesn’t violate the NAP.
I agree.
Libertarianism is just about aggression and getting rid of the state nothing else.Whether you approve/disapprove of religion,homosexuality,swearing etc is irrelevant to libertarianism and only relevant to a philosophical discussion possibly backing up Libertarianism.I am very much opposed by various attempts I see to smuggle things like Anti-racism,conservatism,atheism etc intothe very definition of Libertarianism.If you want to hold any of those things fine but don’t limit and distort what Libertarianism is while doing it.
@Andrew Cain:
This is the case for ANY long term society, not just one predicated upon the NAP. I would join you in ardently advocating an array of cultural values beyond the NAP in the free market of ideas. The key to being a libertarian is to not attempt to make one’s cultural values state policy.
I Agree.A range of cultures,religions,beliefs would flourish and also die under anarcho-capitalism.It’s very likely ,you might not like them all.
This issue is the reason I’ve begun to drop the Anarcho-capitalist label since to me(and probably others) it seems to suggest that that’s the only social order that would exist in a Libertarian anarchy.I know this to be true.So now I use the term Libertarian Anarchist.