Calling Jerry Searcy: Do you agree with Charles that CATO is good source for Libertarian?

Calling Jerry Searcy: Do you agree with Charles that CATO is good source for Libertarian?

Rick
Rick

December 28th, 2003, 3:55 pm #1

Do you agree with Charles Platt on CATO being an excellent source for Libertarian and libertarian thinking?
Quote
Share

Rick
Rick

December 31st, 2003, 3:10 am #2

Lock and Adam Smith are, as pointed out by an article linked on the CATO site, important to understanding the origins of libertarianism. [+]. I'll ask Jerry to respond here as to whether he's familiar with Locke and Adam Smith and what if he thinks the "invisible hand" is valid idea. I should think that he would and that all libertarians would. I find it interesting the libertarians don't seem to often refer to Locke and Adam Smith, however. It's also interesting the Gottfried Leibnitz wrote a treatise about human nature that was a direct response to Locke. So we know Leibnitz was opposed to Locke, yet we're not really hearing much about Leibnitz these days either.

So Jerry, are you familiar with at least the names Locke and Smith?
Quote
Share

Hazel Stone
Hazel Stone

December 31st, 2003, 5:39 am #3

Most libs think highly of Smith and Locke but you won't see a lot of references to them for much the same reason that you won't hear a lot of engineers referring to Edison. In economics, both the Chicago Schools and the Austrian Schools ("schools" as in "schools of thought") trace their roots to Smith. Philosophically, the natural-law libs typically trace their roots to include Locke (among others).

The invisible hand is still around, but over the years it's grown and morphed to human action, spontaneous order, and (more recently) to evolved systems, distributed intelligence, and self-organizing systems.
Quote
Share

Rick
Rick

December 31st, 2003, 11:48 am #4

Thanks Hazel for answering for Jerry. I agree that the descendents of Locke and Smith would be the self-organizing systems people. I would question Locke's association with Natural Law, however. And I would ask you how Leibnitz fits into the picture because it's become apparent to me that Leibnitz's approach is diametrically opposed to Lockes' and Smiths. If it's not Leibnitz's ideas that are opposed to Lockes and Smiths then whose are, in your view?
Quote
Share

j.t. searcy
j.t. searcy

January 11th, 2004, 2:37 am #5

Do you agree with Charles Platt on CATO being an excellent source for Libertarian and libertarian thinking?
Yes!
Jerry
Quote
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

January 11th, 2004, 1:53 pm #6

How would you describe your affinity with articles found at CATO? Are you in agreement with pretty much everything coming from CATO or do you find yourself, at times, in serious disagreement?
Quote
Like
Share

j.t. searcy
j.t. searcy

January 11th, 2004, 11:21 pm #7

I am not familiar with the sum total of their writings. If they oppose the Iraq war, for example, I am in disagreement with them. There might very well be other writings of theirs that I disagree with.

Libertarians are only human. The Libertarian philosophy would not bring about utopia! I believe only RATIONAL anarchy would bring us as close to utopia as is possible. The real thing only exist in Christian and Islamic myth!
Jerry
Quote
Share

j.t. searcy
j.t. searcy

January 12th, 2004, 12:09 am #8

Lock and Adam Smith are, as pointed out by an article linked on the CATO site, important to understanding the origins of libertarianism. [+]. I'll ask Jerry to respond here as to whether he's familiar with Locke and Adam Smith and what if he thinks the "invisible hand" is valid idea. I should think that he would and that all libertarians would. I find it interesting the libertarians don't seem to often refer to Locke and Adam Smith, however. It's also interesting the Gottfried Leibnitz wrote a treatise about human nature that was a direct response to Locke. So we know Leibnitz was opposed to Locke, yet we're not really hearing much about Leibnitz these days either.

So Jerry, are you familiar with at least the names Locke and Smith?
Yes and yes.
Jerry
Quote
Share

j.t. searcy
j.t. searcy

January 12th, 2004, 1:58 am #9

Thanks Hazel for answering for Jerry. I agree that the descendents of Locke and Smith would be the self-organizing systems people. I would question Locke's association with Natural Law, however. And I would ask you how Leibnitz fits into the picture because it's become apparent to me that Leibnitz's approach is diametrically opposed to Lockes' and Smiths. If it's not Leibnitz's ideas that are opposed to Lockes and Smiths then whose are, in your view?
Who is opposed to Locke & Smith? Here are but a small
sample whose actions I am familiar with : F.D.R., Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, Tricky Dick, George Bush Sr., Dubya, everyone in the current congress except Ron Paul, Rick Potvin, ever governor in the U.S., almost the total population of elected officials (there is a handful of elected Libertarians...though to small & obscure local offices) almost everyone I personally know,...etc, etc.
Jerry
Quote
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

January 13th, 2004, 3:35 am #10

Do you agree with Charles Platt on CATO being an excellent source for Libertarian and libertarian thinking?
I will prove, beyond any doubt, that CATO supports policies that denude the USA of important productive skills and capacities and is, therefore, treasonous. By discrediting CATO in this one area, the entire Libertarian hoax will be exposed for what it is-- a backdoor assault on the the United States and the integrity of true freedom and progress. Cryonicists who associate themselves with libertarian values are being sucked in, as dupes, by the singular notion that not being forced into anything constitutes freedom. Well if you don't produce your own manufactured products, you're going to be forced into buying them from someone else, right? Bingo. This ideological torpedo will sink the intellectual integrity of libertarian minded cryonicists and "force" them to retract their politics and to adopt the freedom oriented, production valued Classical notion of protectionism and regulated trade. This, in turn, will provide the foundation for progress that is of vital neccessity to cryonic recovery and increasing anti-mortality.

Quote
Like
Share