Hacker News Reader

Comment by cleaver | Hacker News Reader

Serious question: Would it be safe to say that not all self-professed libertarians agree on the definition of libertarianism? I've suspected this is the case.

View on HN

Liberals and conservatives won't agree on their defintions either. Communism has been routinely redefined throughout history. A philosophy of society is always a malleable nebulous concept.

Yes, what's most important is that you're for freedom, whatever that means.

Libertarianism = Freedom. Communism = Freedom. Liberals = Freedom. Conservatives = Freedom. North Korea = Freedom. USA = Freedom.

Seriously what country isn't free? Who is against freedom?

Libertarians and communists are probably the only ones on this list who have actually made any attempts to define "freedom" in a consistent and location-independent way?

Libertarians, however, seem mongst the quickest to head straight to the No True Scotsman fallacy.

Because we actually believe in something. Most conservatives and liberals don't have a consistent moral philosophy so there is no point debating them.

I've been trying to narrow in on that consistent moral philosophy for various ism's. I'm not sure I've gotten very close in most cases except the general concept of tribalism. Every ism seems to be willing to bend the rules if it is perceived to be the common wisdom of the tribe.

An ever shifting mire of something which varies from libertarian to libertarian, all insisting the other isn't the real libertarian.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com