, 11 tweets, 2 min read
My Authors
Read all threads
This is a good example of how people cannot for the life of them comprehend that libertarianism is not meant to be a philosophy of everything. Let me explain.
Libertarianism in itself is not a philosophy for how to live. For instance, for the question "should I make a particular donation to charity or not?" libertarianism says nothing. "Should I have sex before marriage?" Libertarianism says nothing. "Should I recycle?" Nothing.
Libertarianism by design can support many different ways of living. It answers the question, "how can we enable human beings to flourish, given their own definition of flourishing?" "How can we enable the pursuit of happiness, given each individual's definition of happiness?"
In my opinion, the core principle of libertarianism (the answer to the above questions) is that things should not be done to people without their consent. This is hugely consequential, because unfortunately people often violate other people, ignoring whether they consented.
But this alone is not morality! This is what people get confused about (and I think some so-called libertarians get this wrong too). Consent is only the baseline, the prerequisite.
People can consent to things that are incredibly bad for them, things that they should not consent to. Libertarianism itself doesn't label these things as bad. That's ok! Libertarianism is meant to be paired with other philosophies - philosophies on how to live.
So let's say someone is making very bad choices, very bad *consensual* choices. How can a libertarian help them? A libertarian will not try to use force to get the other person to stop. That includes the enforcement power of the state. But, every other method is available.
A libertarian can try to persuade the person, can try to make the person feel heard, can try to provide better environments for the person, and can try to provide physical and monetary aid and alternatives to their behavior.
Here's the unexpected part - A person can also consent to constraints on their future self. Let's say you want a monk's life, with little temptation around you. You can build those communities, and those communities can have strict rules.
These strict rules are only imposed on people who consent to the rules on entering the community. (There are also of course concerns about brainwashing, and power imbalances, and how consensual our choices really are.)
But here's the bottom line: you can build your anti-porn community under libertarianism. You can build your porn-lovers-unite community under libertarianism. It's not that libertarians don't care about porn. it's that the philosophy only precludes the use of force without consent
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Enjoying this thread?

Keep Current with Kate Sills

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!