My thoughts on libertarianism and anarchism…

Posted on August 19th, 2008 by Brian.
Categories: Writing.

If you know what the words in the title of this post mean (and God bless you if you don’t) then you might want to read what I wrote here. It’s in response to a weblog that I came across in which a person who was giving away a certain thing (I won’t go into the details of what the thing was) had written something of his political or life’s philosophy, of which many of my friends in the past have believed something similar. Anyway, I wrote a response to what he had written because I felt compelled to. Maybe it will benefit someone else to read it, so I’m posting it here.

In response to http://an-archos.com/about:

“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” -John 8:32

Nice WP plugin. Interesting but (and forgive me) naive social philosophy. I don’t know if I have it in me to start a debate right now… not sure if I should — well — I suppose I could say that there is no such thing as true freedom in a material sense of the word. We can only approximate it, and even then it’s deceptive because it’s like a double-edged sword. On one side it plays into a libertine ideal with human creation and accomplishment as its seeming end, the other side leads to complete depravity and a loss of the will to the lusts of the senses and flesh. Ultimately the flesh wins out, because “freedom’s” ultimate goal is truly nothing more than to satisfy the desires of the flesh — which can never be accomplished. It simply enslaves the human spirit and soul into a never-ending battle with material and sensual need, which is something you are currently witnessing as your philosophy plays itself out as the political mantra of today’s culture and society.

Freedom has come to represent the human “right” to carry on selfishly and without any regard to morality or decency. Oddly enough, the worldly pursuit of it ends as a negation of the human will, the assertion of which was actually the goal it had initially set out for itself. At its best it will leave you living like a backwoods transcendentalist, which is a selfish and Godless pursuit if ever there was one. Humans are invariably a fallen and devolving creature, and without the intervention of God Himself, will ultimately lead themselves to doom — with, or “without” the influence of decent political leaders. True freedom — or the lack thereof — is a spiritual matter at its core. Liberty and “happiness” can and will only be found in having a personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ, the messiah, The Saviour — however offensive that may seem to one’s intellectual sense.

Regardless, may God bless you in your search and I truly hope and pray that you eventually come to know what it is you are looking for. Thanks again for the cool plug-in.

Humbly and earnestly,

Brian

p.s. You truly cannot serve two masters at once, and to believe you are serving none at all is to be serving the devil, whether you believe it or not. Only God knows what is best for humanity and unless you know (and obey) His will, then you are simply shooting in the dark, no matter how good you believe your intentions and understanding to be.

p.p.s. Not that it matters, but I considered myself to be a libertarian and an anarchist in the past. I did study a fair amount of political philosophy and I remember it was disputed as to whether or not true anarchy, like true democracy, was even possible. It appears as if no matter how much society attempts to beset itself of leadership, leaders (or tyrants) just keep popping up out of the woodwork… like flowers or weeds I suppose…

p.p.p.s. “In terms of libertarian anarchism that would require every individual taking full responsibility for their own well being whilst always recognising a mutual benefit in the well being of others.” – Interesting statement, but communism shows us that humans in their natural state will often fail to recognize the mutual benefit in the well being of others when the self is seemingly put at risk. I say seemingly because perceived risk is a subjective thing, whereas most humans consistently see themselves as being “at risk”, we have this (although well-intentioned) objective rarely being realized in actuality. On the other hand, acting in an effort to realize some mutual benefit to oneself seems rather loveless to me. I understand the logic behind collective action, but it requires certain environmental conditions to be constantly met. In the absence of coercion, and in terms of game theory, the cheating individual always wins in a game where the winning strategy benefits the whole to some extent, yet the cheater to a slightly greater extent. Honestly, I’ll give you the fact that people appear to be “selfless” in this way when most, if not all of their basic needs are being met, but strip them of those comforts (or the possibility that they may never be realized in this lifetime) and the system breaks down entirely, and becomes one in which individuals are coerced into acting accordingly. …anyway, I’d rather not take any of these up as talking points… unfortunately, your ideals are based on a significant misrepresentation of whom and what we are as human beings, unless you assert that some of us are in fact “demigods” and are somehow exceptions to the rule… in which case I will tell you that you need to re-read what I wrote above (in my first postscript) a few times at least…. anyway, that’s a lot of p.s., and I feel like I’ve said a lot here. If you’ve made it this far, I appreciate you taking the time to read it. God bless you and forgive me if I’ve misspoken in some way.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

4 comments.

Albie

Comment on August 19th, 2008.

Wow! You are certainly verbose. To begin with, let me state that I am not a philosopher nor, have I studied it in great detail. Having said that, here is my take on it. I am reminded of that Ideal plane of existence Plato wrote of, that exists somewhere between what is perfect and, what is real, with love bridging both. If perfection is what we search for, it can be argued, reality is where we exist.

When we love, we get rid of our own desires and live as God wants us to live. When we share kindnesses with each other, we we become “Godly” in nature if not in fact. If we master being “Godly” then we ascend to Heaven and share in the perfection OF God. We do not become Perfect AS God.

Aristotle on the other hand, believed that perfection is a relative term and, that each of us can achieve our own level of perfection and exist in our own ideal plane. Most people who are not Christians believe that way. “Do as you will”; the anthem of the church of Satan. Every time someone gives in just a little bit, the line between both planes is blurred and people believe themselves to be AS God.

So, all things considered, there is only one question to ask? Did you use the plugin or, did you refuse to do so? If you did, your virtue was compromised. If you didn’t, then you can honestly say you have one foot in reality and the other in that ideal plane.

You will never get to Heaven if you compromise your beliefs.

Albie

Brian

Comment on August 20th, 2008.

Well, interesting response Albie, and putting my verbosity aside as best I can here goes:

I’m not sure to what extent I was “philosophizing” with the guy who wrote the webpage. I mean if there is something I said that seemed like rhetoric, then tell me, because that would be a sin, otherwise I’d like to know what exactly it is you’re not agreeing with.

As far as Plato, or Aristotle are concerned, it’s been a long time since I read either of them, so I can’t clearly remember what their theological ideas consisted of, if I ever understood them at all.

Regardless of a man or woman’s desire to achieve those “ideal planes of existence”, they simply can’t be achieved by us, without the help of God, which is why God attributes righteousness to us when we have faith in His Son’s death and resurrection, which gives us entrance into heaven, in terms of reality. Romans chapter 4 shows us this is true:

What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? ‘Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.’ Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:

‘Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered; Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.’

Outside of having faith in the One who justifies the ungodly, I don’t know what a person would have to do to in order to enter into a right relationship with God, or to be saved, assuming this is what you mean by having an entranceway to heaven.

So unless you disagree with that, I don’t know what using the plug-in has or hasn’t to do with my entrance into heaven. Even if using it was considered a sin, which seems to be what you are saying, I am sure that God would forgive me of it once He made me aware of that fact, and I’ve repented of it.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that although I’ve been saved by the grace of God through the blood of Jesus Christ, and righteousness has been attributed to me for that, I still don’t consider myself a “sinless” person, and yet I don’t believe that my ability to live in a sinless state (which is what I’m understanding you to mean by compromising my beliefs) has something to do with whether or not I enter into heaven; although in terms of experience, sin will undoubtedly affect my relationship with, or experience of God, and it certainly does have negative consequences, salvation is by grace from faith in Jesus alone, and has nothing to do with my ability to keep the law, or to be a “good” person.

I guess my next questions are: 1. assuming I’m correct in what I think you’re asserting, why do you think it’s a sin for me to use the plugin? 2. Do you believe that there is something we need to do (i.e. be good enough, have enough love, be sinless) aside from having faith in Jesus, in order to be saved?

Please forgive me if I misinterpreted what you were trying to say Albie, I did read it a few times, but maybe I missed something. God bless you.

With love,
Brian

p.s. I didn’t mean to offend anyone’s intelligence by what I’d written. I usually don’t write much of my own opinions on things because I’m afraid of deviating too far from what the Scriptures say. I also don’t mean to sound intellectual or “verbose”, but I try to use words that get my point across as best as possible… again forgive me if it seems like I was trying to sound impressive or intellectual, and if I was wrong in what I said, please make every effort to correct me.

Brian

Comment on August 20th, 2008.

You know Albie, your comment caused me to re-read what I wrote again and I agree with you that it sounds verbose and rhetorical, maybe even mean-spirited. I didn’t mean for it to sound that way, but it definitely does. I hope that anyone who reads it forgives me for that, because that’s not right, and my intentions weren’t to convince you or anyone else of something that isn’t true just for the sake of sounding smart.

I would delete it if it didn’t serve as a reference to the rest of our discussion, but I don’t think I can delete the one I posted on the other website. Again, please forgive me if I sound like a jerk, I didn’t mean to (I guess we never do).

Albie

Comment on August 20th, 2008.

Brian, I love verbose people! I enjoy conversing with people who do more than use a small vocabulary. I am saddened when people chose to use only a few words when some gorillas have 250 word vocabularies so, it was not meant as a put down but rather as a pleasant change of pace for me.

I did not mean to say that you were being philosophical. I read your post and the post on the other guy’s web page and was reminded instantly of both Plato and Aristotle. I agree with you in everything you said; though frankly, I have never met an anarchist nor do I fully understand (beyond the definition) what they really are.

Your views (like mine) appear to be platonic. We both think there is something better out there (Heaven). It is that plane of existence where we live as we were created; without sin or, earthly desires. We live in God’s peace with those who chose to fight the good fight.

In your p.s, you started by saying “You truly cannot serve two masters at once” For that reason, I asked whether you used the plugin. Were it my choice, I would not use the plugin if I did not agree with the principles of the person that created it. By using it, I would be agreeing in principle if not in fact. It is those choices we make on a daily basis that reflect who we are and what we believe. Do I fudge that number? Do I fib this time? Do I speak in general so that the person I am speaking to cannot take it personally. And, by saying that “You will never get to Heaven if you compromise your beliefs”, I simply meant that by your belief in God, strengthened by your virtue, can get you to Heaven; one choice, one one stand, one step at a time; consider it a friendly reminder, if at all.

Judging by what I know of you and, surely what you have posted I believe you have your head screwed on straight. I like that you take sides. So do I!

Peace,

Albie

Leave a comment

Comments can contain some xhtml. Names and emails are required (emails aren't displayed), url's are optional.




Copyright (C) 2008 Brian Piltin. All rights reserved. Theme by Nick Iliadis

-->