Difference between revisions of "The Machinery of Freedom/animated lecture"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(saving work) |
(saving work) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Claims== | ==Claims== | ||
| − | * The term "liberalism" was stolen by the enemies of liberalism; modern libertarians are the true liberals. | + | * The term "liberalism" was stolen by the enemies of liberalism; modern libertarians are the true liberals. ([[/transcription#1|¶1]]) |
| − | * Libertarianism (formerly called liberalism) is the philosophy that supports [[small government]] and [[free market]]s. | + | * Libertarianism (formerly called liberalism) is the philosophy that supports [[small government]] and [[free market]]s. ([[/transcription#1|¶1]]) |
| − | * Libertarianism holds that the function of government is to do a few things that can't be done by individuals associating voluntarily in private markets: | + | * Libertarianism holds that the function of government is to do a few things that can't be done by individuals associating voluntarily in private markets: ([[/transcription#2|¶2]]) |
** police | ** police | ||
** courts | ** courts | ||
** national defense | ** national defense | ||
| − | * [[Anti-governmentism/private is better|Where the same thing can be done either by government or privately, private is | + | * [[Anti-governmentism/private is better|Where the same thing can be done either by government or privately, private is usually better.]] ([[/transcription#3|¶3]] [[/transcription#16|¶16]] [[/transcription#21|¶23]] [[/transcription#30|¶30]]) |
| − | * The basic functions of government can be handled privately: | + | ** objection: This ignores the fact that there are some things government does better and private organizations do worse. While it may be that the REA/AA scheme will in fact do better than government, we can't assume that this will be so just because "private is better". |
| + | *** response: For the most part, Friedman does support his conclusions with reasoning. | ||
| + | **** objection: It just needs to be understood that this reasoning is necessary. We can't just ''assume'' that the private organizations will do better than government because they are private organizations. | ||
| + | * (Main argument) The basic functions of government can be handled privately: | ||
** '''police''' (enforcing laws) | ** '''police''' (enforcing laws) | ||
*** individuals hire private firms (rights enforcement agencies - REAs) to protect their rights and settle their disputes with other individual | *** individuals hire private firms (rights enforcement agencies - REAs) to protect their rights and settle their disputes with other individual | ||
| − | **** objection (DF): conflict between REAs | + | **** objection (DF[[/transcription#6|¶6]]): conflict between REAs |
| − | ***** response: violence is expensive -- REAs are not likely to use it to settle conflicts because in the long term it's a losing proposition with uneven results | + | ***** objection detail (DF[[/transcription#7|¶7]]): REAs will use violence to settle their disputes |
| − | ****** objection (W): What if an REA is unreasonable? | + | ******* response (DF[[/transcription#8|¶8]]): violence is expensive -- REAs are not likely to use it to settle conflicts because in the long term it's a losing proposition with uneven results |
| − | ****** objection (DF,W): What if two REAs can't agree on an arbiter? (e.g. what if one REA's customers prefer a death penalty, while another REA's customers are opposed?) | + | ******** objection (W): What if an REA is unreasonable? |
| − | **** | + | ***** response (DF[[/transcription#9|¶9]]): REAs will hire arbitration agencies (AAs) to settle their disputes with other REAs |
| − | + | ** '''courts''' (making laws) - handled by arbitration agencies (AAs) | |
| − | + | *** objection (DF[[/transcription#11|¶11]]): who will enforce the use of AAs and adherence to their decisions? | |
| − | + | **** response: the [[discipline of constant dealings]] | |
| − | + | ***** objection (W): ...which requires a highly stable, non-transient society | |
| − | + | *** objection (DF[[/transcription#17|¶17]],W): What if two REAs can't agree on an arbiter? (e.g. what if one REA's customers prefer a death penalty, while another REA's customers are opposed?) | |
| + | **** response (DF[[/transcription#18|¶18]]): an argument that has something to do with raising prices in response to demand and/or buying the acquiescence of the other and/or its customers. This doesn't really answer the question. | ||
** <s>national defense</s> (not covered) | ** <s>national defense</s> (not covered) | ||
* It's okay for different sets of people/entities to operate under different sets of rules, because: | * It's okay for different sets of people/entities to operate under different sets of rules, because: | ||
** any rules applicable to any given interaction can be worked out and agreed to non-coercively via this method | ** any rules applicable to any given interaction can be worked out and agreed to non-coercively via this method | ||
| − | ** rules will be more closely tailored to the needs of the people ruled by them | + | ** rules will be more closely tailored to the needs of the people ruled by them ([[/transcription#20|¶20]]) |
* Rules created by private negotiation will be better than those produced by government because {{l/sub|private is better|anti-governmentism}}. | * Rules created by private negotiation will be better than those produced by government because {{l/sub|private is better|anti-governmentism}}. | ||
* Private markets produce better products than socialist systems do -- "we expect markets to produce better cars than socialist systems". | * Private markets produce better products than socialist systems do -- "we expect markets to produce better cars than socialist systems". | ||
Revision as of 16:29, 23 December 2014
Claims
- The term "liberalism" was stolen by the enemies of liberalism; modern libertarians are the true liberals. (¶1)
- Libertarianism (formerly called liberalism) is the philosophy that supports small government and free markets. (¶1)
- Libertarianism holds that the function of government is to do a few things that can't be done by individuals associating voluntarily in private markets: (¶2)
- police
- courts
- national defense
- Where the same thing can be done either by government or privately, private is usually better. (¶3 ¶16 ¶23 ¶30)
- objection: This ignores the fact that there are some things government does better and private organizations do worse. While it may be that the REA/AA scheme will in fact do better than government, we can't assume that this will be so just because "private is better".
- response: For the most part, Friedman does support his conclusions with reasoning.
- objection: It just needs to be understood that this reasoning is necessary. We can't just assume that the private organizations will do better than government because they are private organizations.
- response: For the most part, Friedman does support his conclusions with reasoning.
- objection: This ignores the fact that there are some things government does better and private organizations do worse. While it may be that the REA/AA scheme will in fact do better than government, we can't assume that this will be so just because "private is better".
- (Main argument) The basic functions of government can be handled privately:
- police (enforcing laws)
- individuals hire private firms (rights enforcement agencies - REAs) to protect their rights and settle their disputes with other individual
- objection (DF¶6): conflict between REAs
- objection detail (DF¶7): REAs will use violence to settle their disputes
- response (DF¶8): violence is expensive -- REAs are not likely to use it to settle conflicts because in the long term it's a losing proposition with uneven results
- objection (W): What if an REA is unreasonable?
- response (DF¶8): violence is expensive -- REAs are not likely to use it to settle conflicts because in the long term it's a losing proposition with uneven results
- response (DF¶9): REAs will hire arbitration agencies (AAs) to settle their disputes with other REAs
- objection detail (DF¶7): REAs will use violence to settle their disputes
- objection (DF¶6): conflict between REAs
- individuals hire private firms (rights enforcement agencies - REAs) to protect their rights and settle their disputes with other individual
- courts (making laws) - handled by arbitration agencies (AAs)
- objection (DF¶11): who will enforce the use of AAs and adherence to their decisions?
- response: the discipline of constant dealings
- objection (W): ...which requires a highly stable, non-transient society
- response: the discipline of constant dealings
- objection (DF¶17,W): What if two REAs can't agree on an arbiter? (e.g. what if one REA's customers prefer a death penalty, while another REA's customers are opposed?)
- response (DF¶18): an argument that has something to do with raising prices in response to demand and/or buying the acquiescence of the other and/or its customers. This doesn't really answer the question.
- objection (DF¶11): who will enforce the use of AAs and adherence to their decisions?
national defense(not covered)
- police (enforcing laws)
- It's okay for different sets of people/entities to operate under different sets of rules, because:
- any rules applicable to any given interaction can be worked out and agreed to non-coercively via this method
- rules will be more closely tailored to the needs of the people ruled by them (¶20)
- Rules created by private negotiation will be better than those produced by government because private is better.
- Private markets produce better products than socialist systems do -- "we expect markets to produce better cars than socialist systems".
- Objection: it's not clear what definition of "socialism" he's using here.
- Europe (especially Sweden) is often called "socialist", but they produce pretty good cars.
- Objection: it's not clear what definition of "socialism" he's using here.
Pages
- /transcription: a complete transcription of the lecture in the video