I always thought Jesus, being from Galilee, was a libertarian. I guess I am interpreting the scriptures incorrectly as are others who get the same idea when reading about him:
I too don’t think that religion is libertarian (though some are more libertarian than others within their limits). But I don’t think that’s a bad thing necessarily.
Though the psychiatry stuff that got filtered hrough the mass media always struck me at least as something with a point.
Also, Katie Holmes is from my home town and lived on the same block as me. Her mom still lives on the same block as my mom. Trivia.
Whoops, I got my futurist cults all mixed up. I was thinking of scientology.
How is a religion libertarian or not exactly? I didn’t know that we (using we loosely, maybe those who align with an-cap theory) supposed to align all our own spiritual beliefs with a political ideology. It’s really irrelevant, on a whole, whether or not someone believes one thing or another as an individual (or as a group, whatever the case is). Personally, with the past months, I find the cultural/spiritual side of my interest way more interesting than the economic/political. As an individual, I keep this in high regard.
Thank Christ libertarianism isnt religous…
Crap..
That structure seems to describe many of RJM’s posts on all subjects.
Religion is irrelevant to libertarianism, so why bring it up? no religion can obviously be non-libertarian, just look at the early Marxists or the Soviets..or the Objectivists … I am not a religious person at all but I really think you just made this to bash on religion, just leave it alone. So what if people find truth in the Bible? So what if people find truth by science? This whole religion -vs- non religion and how it applies to libertarianism is just one of the biggest pet peeves of mine. As a matter of fact, one of my first posts on here was on this topic https://forum.freecapitalists.org/t/libertarians-and-religion/9551
Thanks you for the post.
Perhaps the best approach with regards to religion in relation to libertarianism is to not make it an issue at all. They deal with separate aspects in a person’s life.
It is not right to insist on this religion being more libertarian than that religion; we are dealing with individual interpretations of religious matters, and each person will have their spin on the issue to suit their behavior or what they believe in the first place.
Within Christianity, we have those who reject the world and the social altogether (e.g. Kierkegaard), and we also have plenty of people associated with LVMI and LRC who see Christianity as relevant to social life starting with the family and extending to a voluntaristic community. It’s all about interpretations; blanket ‘Christianity’ ought to be seen as insufficient in understanding individual and social matters.
Not so. Kierkegaard - particularly in Fear and Trembling, sought to go beyond the ethical, whereas staying inside the ethical (ethical being social, basically). He simply thought of existence, and thus faith, as entirely individualistic.
Here are two articles I’ve co-written on C4SS on Romans 13 and Render Unto Caesar:
To reject a religion would be the most absurd and unnecessary thing to do. It’s a matter of bringing social structure to a whole - religion or not.
P.S. Mises Community needs to work better with Opera. Seriously. It malfunctions more than a central planned economy.
To reject a religion would be the most absurd and unnecessary thing to do.
Not really, why would anyone want to be associated with anything fringe, wrong, and intellectually dead; which is the state of any classical religion. If it can be disparaged it ought to be. We may have to put up with some left wing Protestant heresy “secular humanism”, because they still have teeth and backing and hence isn’t “fringe”. but this is not the case with anything that would classicaly be called religion. If it can be done, it is probably a better move to disasscoiate one self from incorrect views that carry no weight what so ever on anything important. The consequences of moving away from these things are virtually zero.
A bit off topic but, I always thought that it was odd that those who are more market oriented are more likely to reject evolution via natural selection, while those that are more statist, the exact opposite.
Indeed. Like I said, I have no idea how anyone could have a market maindset and see religion as anything worth caring about. This goes beyond even evolution and crazy Fundamentalism. I mean this is part of the problem though, when we have most people associated with “free makrets” taliking about magic, wizards, and gibberish on this stuff we look like fools and a half.
This is why disassociating oneself with these things is so important, it is counterproductive to anything in discourse.
EDIT
Subjective theory of value. Neuroscience, too, I guess. :3 Personally I am a Christian myself, and I find Christianity to be an entirely existential and entirely individualistic thing, whose social uses are to allow people to think about their own self, much like most of philosophy. There’s nothing wrong with that, until it crosses the line of dogmatism, much like any ideology.
But insulting a major cultural demograph by calling them wizards, magicians, and tagging thier beliefs as gibberish is really going to get you much further.
Think about what your stating here.
Furthermore it must be mindblogging for you folks to see Christian market-anarchists around here.
“taliking about magic, wizards, and gibberish on this stuff we look like fools and a half.”
You totally ripped that strawman a new one.
criticize religion and religious people all you want… Austrian economics has appealed to Christianity stronger than any other group, which is why ,most Austrian Economists that are professors have a job at a Christian school (Grove City, Hillsdale College, Loyola, University of Dallas,University of Angers in France, Francisco Marroquín University in Latin America )… but i guess that creates a more “loonier” image. I can’t believe people are so quick to judge one by their own religion… What a shame
Consistently libertarian, no. Big surprise, that’s why they are called religions. Has libertarian elements, yes, and many do.
Furthermore it must be mindblogging for you folks to see Christian market-anarchists around here.
It really kind of is, but I do notice it is an ever shrinking minority, particualrly among younger thinkers who are around much more information than previous generations.
But insulting a major cultural demograph by calling them wizards, magicians, and tagging thier beliefs as gibberish is really going to get you much further.
It is not a major demographic in the intellectual spheres in which things can be discussed. It hasn’t been since the well into the Enlightenment. It wasn’t meant to be an insult as much as it was an illustration as to how it comes it across in these types of things.
Besides all that demographics come and go; there were times when people cared about Crystal Clear Pepsi, Pac - Man, and Zeus. These people are no longer relevant, nor are their concerns. I am in a way saying that this type of thinking is on its way out, at least in the more developed parts of the world, so they aren’t worth that much consideration, and are in fact probably determental if you actually try to cater to them. This type of thing happens all the time.