We clearly need this page here.
- LibertarianismAndConservatism
- I think most self-proclaimed "libertarians" are really "propertarians" : OnPropertarians
- CriticismsOfRightLibertarianism
- LeftLibertarian
- Social production of libertarianism : http://www.crookedtimber.org/archives/001997.html
- BleedingHeartLibertarianism
- RobinHanson
- ChangingCulture
- VirtualStates / TheCollapseOfTheEmpire
- BitCoin / CryptoCurrency / Ethereum / CryptoAnarchy
- Good piece suggesting there are multiple libertarianisms, but which could almost be described as multiple conservatisms are each asserts a particular balance of freedoms and responsibilities : http://www.techcentralstation.com/072004C.html
: Interesting that it also points out that modern libertarianisms which reject a traditional morality of Locke or even Hayek, turn to a teleology or consequentialism to justify personal or PropertyRights.
- I just wanted to add two cents that the only liberatarians i've met are land-owning peoples who plainly don't want to pay property tax. bah! - HeatherJames
- Libertarianism and FreeWill : http://www.juliansanchez.com/20030501_notesarch.html#200359434
- Critiques : http://world.std.com/~mhuben/libindex.html
They like AustrianEconomics
See also :
Quora Answer : What reservations do you have about libertarian principles?
Libertarians have a flawed economic metaphysics which divides the world into "market" on one side and "government" on the other.
They don't seem to understand[1] that
a) property rights need to be created by a social agreement which gives them legitimacy.
b) property rights need to be policed by someone willing to use violence to enforce them because there will always be some people who disagree with the current property distribution.
So, in practice, only a government (or equivalent wielder of violence) can create a market. There isn't a big divide between markets and governments at all. All economic systems are mixes of free-trade and free-association within the parameters of enforced codes of behaviour. And what's important is for us to find the right mix, which best works for people and supports our values. Not to pretend that we can do without one side or the other. And not to close our minds to the fact that property-rights can and need to be designed / negotiated to get the society we want. They are not some eternal given thing which can only be the way they are.
[1] Of course, some do understand and do recognise the need for minimal violence-wielding government. But then they lose all their moral attraction (and claims to freedom and non-coercion etc) and become mere defenders of a particular property regime.