"I have one question: if huge social change (of the sort that would allow government welfare programs to become non-government programs) were not in the offing, would you support the government version instead, for the most part?"
Well... to a point. I'm no revolutionary.
However, I don't see things changing without some kind of pressure on the state to concede its powers to us little folks. Sometimes, it needs to be encouraged. For me, it's ok that it take us a while to get there gradually, so long as we do get there eventually, and so long as there is actual progress and not just the illusion of it (which is often the case, IMO). Think evolution rather than revolution.
I don't know if that sufficiently answers your question, but I can expand, if not.
Keep in mind, I was not so much trying to engage you in any kind of debate about the merits of libertarianism (socialist or whatever). My intention was more to explain the difficulty in analyzing libertarians as a group, because they are simply way too diverse... most anarchists and "anarcho"-capitalists hate each other, for example.
I appreciate your way of thinking though. I think we are mostly in agreement about *that* kind of "libertarian" and I could add quite a bit to your criticism :)
no subject
"I have one question: if huge social change (of the sort that would allow government welfare programs to become non-government programs) were not in the offing, would you support the government version instead, for the most part?"
Well... to a point. I'm no revolutionary.
However, I don't see things changing without some kind of pressure on the state to concede its powers to us little folks. Sometimes, it needs to be encouraged. For me, it's ok that it take us a while to get there gradually, so long as we do get there eventually, and so long as there is actual progress and not just the illusion of it (which is often the case, IMO). Think evolution rather than revolution.
I don't know if that sufficiently answers your question, but I can expand, if not.
Keep in mind, I was not so much trying to engage you in any kind of debate about the merits of libertarianism (socialist or whatever). My intention was more to explain the difficulty in analyzing libertarians as a group, because they are simply way too diverse... most anarchists and "anarcho"-capitalists hate each other, for example.
I appreciate your way of thinking though. I think we are mostly in agreement about *that* kind of "libertarian" and I could add quite a bit to your criticism :)