Libertarianism and Society

written by Aizat. (Ethics/Politics/Economics)

Speaking about libertarianism, how does it relate to the matter of ethic's integrity and to humans in general? As we strain our brain in finding out the answers to the question, let’s hear out what Hospers main point of view regarding libertarianism in "What Libertarianism Is," he upholds two ideas central to libertarianism: "(1) Individuals own their own lives. They, therefore, have the right to act as they choose unless their actions interfere with the liberty of others to act as they choose. (2) The only appropriate functions of government is to protect human rights, understood as negative rights." In such a way, I agree with Hospers up to the point where we as human beings have the right to do almost everything that we want as long as our actions do not violate others humans right. For me, this is what the real meaning of freedom. Freedom is truly not something that will halt you from doing things that you like, things that can also be looked upon as intrinsic good. For example, if you like to stand for hours rather than sitting on a chair or lying down on bed, I as people around you have no right to prevent you from doing that although it may seem to me that your action is unprofitable. In this case, that is what defines intrinsic goods as Hull writes in his "An Introduction to Issues in Computers, Ethics, and Policy," in which "[t]his "intrinsic good" is something which is good in itself, and does not require justifications by other things. Instead, the intrinsic good is the justifications for why those other things are good"(Hull 14). Back to libertarianism, Hospers' main principal idea can be subdivided to several others way of stating it which are also something that I agree on most of them. According to Hospers, we are not the master of anyone else, and we are not the slave of anyone else. Since I born to this world thanks to the effort of my mother and father and it has got nothing to do with anyone else, specifically people with no whatsoever relation to me, so then, what are their qualification to say that I am their slaves, and vice versa. Hospers added that other men's live are not yours to dispose of. Well, he simply means that we cannot do or take something that others have put their energy on and work for their entire life. I agree no less than that. However, although I agree with Hospers and his libertarian's belief, I cannot accept his overall conclusion that the only appropriate role of government is that of the protector of the citizen against aggression by other individuals. If that so, what is the use of forming a government when their functions are so limited to the extent in which government cannot established laws protecting particular person against themselves. Following to that libertarian view regarding government role, do we still need a Presidential Election or in other words, do we need a leader to lead our country? For me, I would definitely say yes.