I have yet to understand how the "right to starve" is a moral virtue in spite of many, many libertarians and anarcho-capitalists attempting to explain it to me.
I've always considered libertarians to be almost my exact antithesis politically. Everything they believe in just absolutely baffles me. The beliefs are extremely self-centric with no consideration for anyone else's well being. I'm not sure if they just have a lack of empathy or what.
I hold with the claim that history judges a society by how it treats its least fortunate citizens. For example, Greece and Rome are credited with remarkable advances in human progress but both societies are described as particularly brutal to its least fortunate citizens. History doesn't ignore the brutality when it makes its assessments.
I don't hold with comforting the comfortable. The United States was built on the premise that we're stronger collectively than we are individually, and I absolutely agree with FDR when he reminded us that necessitous men are not free men. So I support things like a Universal Basic Income, universal healthcare and all those socialist principles that free market advocates abhor. If you're not free to contribute to society according to your talents rather than how according to the dollar value of your skills, then you're not really free.
I have yet to understand how the "right to starve" is a moral virtue in spite of many, many libertarians and anarcho-capitalists attempting to explain it to me.
I've always considered libertarians to be almost my exact antithesis politically. Everything they believe in just absolutely baffles me. The beliefs are extremely self-centric with no consideration for anyone else's well being. I'm not sure if they just have a lack of empathy or what.
That's been my perception as well.
If I may, I'm curious. What's your opinion on the subject? I get you're against, but I want to know why :)
I hold with the claim that history judges a society by how it treats its least fortunate citizens. For example, Greece and Rome are credited with remarkable advances in human progress but both societies are described as particularly brutal to its least fortunate citizens. History doesn't ignore the brutality when it makes its assessments.
I don't hold with comforting the comfortable. The United States was built on the premise that we're stronger collectively than we are individually, and I absolutely agree with FDR when he reminded us that necessitous men are not free men. So I support things like a Universal Basic Income, universal healthcare and all those socialist principles that free market advocates abhor. If you're not free to contribute to society according to your talents rather than how according to the dollar value of your skills, then you're not really free.