Jamesd-david Honig:Good cop,bad cop

[Marcel Popescu]

From: "mattd" <mattd at useoz.com>

> http://www.spunk.org/library/otherpol/critique/sp000713.txt

David Wieck's critique of Rothbard,
applicable to Libertarianism in general, will close this
discussion.

   ``Out of the history of anarchist thought and action
Rothbard has pulled forth a single thread, the thread of
individualism, and defines that individualism in a way
alien even to the spirit of a Max Stirner or a Benjamin
Tucker, whose heritage I presume he would claim - to
say nothing of how alien is his way to the spirit of
Godwin, Proudhon, Bakunin, Kropotkin, Malatesta, and the
historically anonymous persons who through their thoughts and
action have tried to give anarchism a living meaning.
Out of this thread Rothbard manufactures one more
bourgeois ideology.''[31]

[Mark] And this is supposed to be a CRITIQUE of Rothbard. "He doesn't agree
with my saints, so he's wrong.". Duh.

The stuff about Ayn Rand was nice, though:

<<More revealing, however, is why Libertarians retain the state.
What they always insist on maintaining are the state's
coercive apparatuses of law, police, and military.[29] The
reason flows directly from their view of human nature,
which is a hallmark of liberalism, not anarchism.
That is, Libertarianism ascribes social problems
within society (crime, poverty, etc.) to an inherent
disposition of humans (re: why Locke argues people leave the
``state of nature''), hence the constant need for
``impartial'' force supplied by the state.>>

This is one of the arguments used by Roy Childs: the politics in Objectivism
are in total contradiction with the rest, since they presume that humans are
bad, except when they are part of the (minimal, or even not so minimal)
government.

Mark