Why the anti-egalitarianism?

[Brainpolice]

@GilesStratton

@Brainpolice

@GilesStratton

I don’t get the point of trying to claim egalitarianism for liberterianism. Yes it is correct if you use it in the sense of equal rights (although if we were all completely enslaved, we’d have equal rights) but nobody regards it in that way. It makes no sense to adopt a term that can mean equality in authority and equality and in material possessions. The fact is, neither are possible.

The state by it’s very nature is egalitarian in the widest sense of the word, it punishes the capable and rewards the mediocre. If you ask me the left libertarians are very keen to adopt the term so they can move from the idea of equality in authority to equality in the more widely understood sense of the word.

The state is not egalitarian by it very nature, the state creates and enhances massive inequalities not only in rights but in terms of oppurtunity, status and economic well-being. The state overwhelmingly harms the average person to the benefit of a small few, no matter what form it takes, and there is nothing particularly egalitarian about that. Even the welfare state is not actualy egalitarian in its structure or effects. I think you’ll have to go in a lot of intellectual circles to prove that the most centralized heirarchy in any society is egalitarian in nature. The notion that the state (a highly exclusive and coercive oligarchy based on massive inequalities in rights) punishes elites while rewarding the masses is absurd.

The state rewards mediocrity and punishes excellence. That’s egalitarian.

You’re just repeating yourself while ignoring everything I just said. The state leeches off of the masses to the benefit of special interest groups. That is not egalitarian, it is predicated on inequality and for all intents and purposes it intensifies any pre-existing inequalities in society. There is nothing egalitarian about a centralized coercive oligarchy in patronage with elites.