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.

Today's Dilemma

written by Aizat. (Ethics/Politics/Economics)


You might be wondering, why on earth I put on the title "Today's Dilemma" as I post my first blog here. Well, it might be somewhat confusing you, but the thing is, if we don't take this matter seriously to the extent for our own good, we are doom neglecting all "[t]he very rich families and individuals who compose the owning class who live mostly off investments: stocks, bonds, rents and other property income"(Parenti 6). The matter that I am talking about is referring to capitalism. Nowadays, capitalism is applied by pretty much all country in the world. Is it a good thing for us? In some sort of way, it is great, but the fact is, it brings a lot of disadvantages to the people as a whole. In class, we talk about how capitalism is some quite connected to the story of Frankenstein monster. Frankenstein monster was indeed created by human and that also went to capitalism which was also created by human beings. Usually, if we create something, we have the power to control them as we would love to. However, that is not what happened to both scenarios I stated earlier. Humans are now being control back by them. Humans being forced to work under them as in order to keep them alive as they think they were supposed to be. Look at the meaning of the capitalism itself in which it is an economic system where profit –making is more important than anything else. Based on that statement, capitalism's world do not necessarily care about our labor work, they only care about the profit we make out off our labor. Parenti writes in his "Democracy for the Few", he said that,"[u]nder capitalism, however, the portion taken from the worker is not visible. Workers are simply paid substantially less than the value they create. Indeed, the only reason they are hired is to make money off their labor." I am totally agree with the things he mentioning about and I have my own justifications for that support.
Let us remember back to the second short 10 minutes video clip that Prof. Perry showed to us during our last class, unless you guys are sleeping at that time. In that video, we could see how cruel it was actually capitalism did to us. Such company that worked under this capitalist system, gave a lot of sweet promises to the people of Jamaica, which most of them still living as in a third world country, where they can improve the quality of their lifestyle as so as their income if they willing to work under this such company. But then, as we watched the video much further, we saw that, these people had actually trapped to a massive tricks played by this capitalism based company, where the only reason these people being hired was to make money off their labor and not to make money for their own personal good. Consequently, the upper class people become richer and richer and the lower class people become poorer and poorer. So, as for me to end this conservation, let me say couple of things that can relate this matter to other. Where has our right missing? Don't us supposedly to have right as our main protector. If we say about right, don't we supposedly to have the right to live in a country where people's need is somewhat more important than anything else. As what Hospers said, "Individuals have the right to act as they choose unless their actions interfere with the liberty of others and other's men live are not yours to dispose of" (Hospers 319).Thinks about it.