Why does 'war' happen?

[Stephen_Forde]

@liberty student

@Stephen

And what is collectivism exactly?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collectivism

Collectivism is a term used to describe any moral, political, or social outlook, that emphasizes the interdependence of every human in some collective group and the priority of group goals over individual goals. Collectivists focus on community and society, and seek to give priority to group goals over individual goals.

Then any organization would be considered a collective. I still don’t see how collectivism is necessary or sufficient to cause war.

[Stephen_Forde]

@liberty student

@Stephen

@Marko

What war was caused by overpopulation exactly?

WW2.

You do realize that Hoppe does not subscribe to your Malthusian outlook, right?

More Mises & Rothbard than Hoppe.

[Marko]

@liberty student

@Marko

So your definition of collectivism is the Wikipedia definition? Charming.

1. You have not provided a definition.

2. You asked for a definition. I provided one.

3. It is intellectually dishonest of you to criticize the source and not the definition itself.

1. You did not ask for it.

2. Many thanks. But you’ll note I did not ask for just any definition but specifically for the definition you subscribed to.

3. Possibly. But it is clear this definition is not the libertarian definition. Collectivism is not about goals, it is about rights. Players on a basketball team pursue the goal of a collective group, are we to think this makes them collectivists? Does it means libertarians are not permitted to play team sports? Nonsense.

[Marko]

@Stephen

That was the point of asking the definition. Usually when one gives a definition, it becomes obvious whether or not there is an inherent property in a system which brings about a specific result. Unfortunately, your LvM quotes don’t resolve the problem.

LvM is not able to provide a satisfactory definition of collectivism because as a utilitarian he does not subscribe to a rights based morality.

[liberty_student]

@Marko

2. Many thanks. But you’ll note I did not ask for just any definition but specifically for the definition you subscribed to.

When did I indicate that was not my definition?

@Marko

But it is clear this definition is not the libertarian definition.

There is no “libertarian definition”.

@Marko

Collectivism is not about goals, it is about rights. Players on a basketball team pursue the goal of a collective group, are we to think this makes them collectivists? Does it means libertarians are not permitted to player team sports? Nonsense.

Team sports are by definition collectivistic. If they were individualistic, then they would not be team sports.

Fallacy of composition.

[Marko]

Does playing a collective sport make one a collectivist? Yes or no?

[liberty_student]

@Marko

Does playing a team sport make one a collectivist? Yes or no?

When they are playing the team sport, yes. When they are doing something individualistic, no.

[nirgrahamUK]

participating in a team sport is not the same as acting from an ideology that subsumes individuals beneath abstract constructs of society/the-collective

so no.

[Marko]

@nirgrahamUK

participating in a team sport is not the same as acting from an ideology that subsumes individuals beneath abstract constructs of society/the-collective

so no.

Yeah exactly. And the reason why individual can be subsumed by collectivists is because of their claim that the collective is a bearer of special rights which override the rights of individuals.

[DD5]

@Stephen

Let me put it this way. ‘Collectivism causes war’ is not really a good explanation. Without some justification which demonstrates how it is necessary or sufficient to bring about war, it belongs in the same non-sequitur category as ‘greed causes inequality’.

That was the point of asking the definition. Usually when one gives a definition, it becomes obvious whether or not there is an inherent property in a system which brings about a specific result. Unfortunately, your LvM quotes don’t resolve the problem.

Collectivism is when the individual and the product of his labor belongs not to himself but to a group, i.e., a tribe, a state. The group can dispose of the individual in any way they choose for the benefit of the group. The group is always the end and the individual in just a means.

The decision to go to war is theretofore always a collective one. The costs of war are dispersed on all members of the tribe (usually unequally) so those who want to go to war and think they can benefit from it do not have to personally bare the cost.

In an individualistic society where all property is privately owned, it is hard to imagine why property owners would ever voluntarily be willing to risk their own property (and lives) and incur such high financial costs on their enterprises.

I see this as the root cause. The rest is secondary and is just a manifestation of the tribal/collectivist mentality, for example, land and resource disputes, religion, nationalism, etc.. they are all products of the tribal/collectivist mentality.

[Marko]

@DD5

The decision to go to war is theretofore always a collective one. The costs of war are dispersed on all members of the tribe (usually unequally) so those who want to go to war and think they can benefit from it do not have to personally bare the cost.

In an individualistic society where all property is privately owned, it is hard to imagine why property owners would ever voluntarily be willing to risk their own property (and lives) and incur such high financial costs on their enterprises.

I see this as the root cause. The rest is secondary and is just a manifestation of the tribal/collectivist mentality, for example, land and resource disputes, religion, nationalism, etc.. they are all products of the tribal/collectivist mentality.

Which would mean everyone who ever fights in a war is a collectivist which in turn would mean it is impossible for libertarians to fight which would mean it is impossible for libertarians to defend against aggression which would mean a free society is a pipe dream and a state is needed to defend society against outside threat, which would mean collectivism is a necessary evil.

[nirgrahamUK]

Marko, its not fair to use DD5’s exposition of the springs to initiating warfare as if it was a statement from him regarding issues of defence.

[Marko]

But the way to defend against continuing aggression which is already taking place is to initiate warfare. It is called a rebellion. People can indeed go to war out of individualistic, libertarian impulses.

To deny this, is to deny yourself the right to defend against this type of aggression.

[nirgrahamUK]

@Marko

The way to defend against continuing aggression which is already taking place is to initiate warfare.

initiate as in “start to/commence with” not “be the first to/originate”

[liberty_student]

@Marko

People can indeed go to war out of individualistic, libertarian impulses.

War is not a libertarian solution. Secession is.

[Stephen_Forde]

@DD5

Collectivism is when the individual and the product of his labor belongs not to himself but to a group, i.e., a tribe, a state. The group can dispose of the individual in any way they choose for the benefit of the group. The group is always the end and the individual in just a means.

Well, I can see how the state fits the bill. I can’t see how a tribe or family does though. An individual voluntarily engaging in division of labour or participating in an organized activity is not collectivist, assuming your definition.

@DD5

The decision to go to war is theretofore always a collective one. The costs of war are dispersed on all members of the tribe (usually unequally) so those who want to go to war and think they can benefit from it do not have to personally bare the cost.

In an individualistic society where all property is privately owned, it is hard to imagine why property owners would ever voluntarily be willing to risk their own property (and lives) and incur such high financial costs on their enterprises.

In primitive tribal war, the benfits of reducing the overall population accrue to all the survivors, not just some. So there is a reason for everyone to voluntarily engage in the activity.

[Stephen_Forde]

@ Justin Laws

Another good reference is Joseph Salerno’s Imperialism and the Logic of War Making. (audio)

[rekk1986]

Because of conflict of interests, this is the reason why war always occurs. I think it’s a true