Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: EBUCK
True, are you pro-gubment? Yes, I am: the markets fail to provide many important goods and services; only the government can do that.

Don't you understand that society is made up of individuals?

I think the lack of understanding is exhibited on your part.

In any system of entities --- from particles of matter, to goods-producing companies, to animals and human human being --- the whole is bigger than the sum of the constituents. The difference between the two is what is call synergy.

In application to society, it means that there are actions and interests of the community that are not represented by the individuals themselves, taken one a time.

It is the synergy that is missing in yours and most libertarian arguments.

215 posted on 05/02/2002 6:44:05 PM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies ]


To: TopQuark
In application to society, it means that there are actions and interests of the community that are not represented by the individuals themselves, taken one a time.
It is the synergy that is missing in yours and most libertarian arguments.

Ahhhh yes, -- the old classic communitarian 'synergy' argument. - You don't hear it from libertarians, because they believe in free republics, -- not big brother states.

228 posted on 05/02/2002 7:09:04 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies ]

To: TopQuark
Yes, I am: the markets fail to provide many important goods and services; only the government can do that.

If the market doesn't supply it and there is a demand for it the market will soon provide it. Which goods and services would you like the market to provide you that gubment provides at present?

I think the lack of understanding is exhibited on your part.

I don't quite understand your comment but I think you are trying to say I lack understanding.

Let me expand. A society cannot exist without individuals evne though individuals can exist without society. Gubment and society (by the liberal/religious definition) need individuals in order to survive. And individuals need freedom in order to survive (or at least better produce under these conditions which society needs as well). Therefore societies need to protect individual freedom to survive. A person controlled and directed for the bennifit of society will act as a robot (all except the very braiwashed). He will have no incentive to innovate adapt or produce because "he" will not bennifit from these actions.

In any system of entities --- from particles of matter, to goods-producing companies, to animals and human human being --- the whole is bigger than the sum of the constituents. The difference between the two is what is call synergy.

In application to society, it means that there are actions and interests of the community that are not represented by the individuals themselves, taken one a time.

It is the synergy that is missing in yours and most libertarian arguments.

This "synergy" (to use your term) is a natural occurance and effect of economic law and only works if voluntary. If working together benifits all concerned your synergey is in full swing. If working together benifits the elite but not the worker your synergy rapidly fails. In order for us to be a "community" the community must bennifit all involved. If the commuinity distributes bennifits to the unproductive, the un-willing, and the unlawfull your synergy fails again. That is the Libertarian philosophy as I understand it.
Libertarians are not anti-community, just anti-community control. Libertarians believe that the community should be a purely bennificial and voluntary "contract".

EBUCK

386 posted on 05/03/2002 11:39:23 AM PDT by EBUCK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson