Comments on: All Y’All Bitches Is Wrong http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/ Conservatism for punks. Wed, 17 Mar 2010 03:39:15 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Club Troppo » Freedom’s just another word for … ? http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-65572 Club Troppo » Freedom’s just another word for … ? Sat, 19 Dec 2009 23:14:10 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/#comment-65572 [...] Libertarian writer Todd Seavey disagrees. He writes that, "We will be far freer once feminism, like all egalitarian, anti-freedom philosophies, is relegated to the ash heap of history" Apart from writing that "feminism is bunk", Seavey insists that social norms have nothing to do with freedom. The key to understanding freedom, he argues, is understanding the difference between genuine coercion and social pressure. [...] [...] Libertarian writer Todd Seavey disagrees. He writes that, "We will be far freer once feminism, like all egalitarian, anti-freedom philosophies, is relegated to the ash heap of history" Apart from writing that "feminism is bunk", Seavey insists that social norms have nothing to do with freedom. The key to understanding freedom, he argues, is understanding the difference between genuine coercion and social pressure. [...]

]]> By: Social Libertarianism, & The Heart Of Freedom « Thoughts on Freedom http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-60938 Social Libertarianism, & The Heart Of Freedom « Thoughts on Freedom Tue, 17 Nov 2009 03:09:22 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/#comment-60938 [...] This is the continuation of an earlier debate between Todd Seavey & Keri Howley, which you may read here, here, here and here. Essentially Ms. Howley argued that libertarianism ought be concerned with maximizing freedom and autonomy, and as it is not only the state which impinges on these, but also various social forces, then libertarians ought to be concerned about them. Mr. Seavey, on the other hand, takes the more traditional line, that libertarians ought be concerned with the power of the state alone. Cato’s Will Wilkinson also entered into the debate, stating “If libertarianism is the view that coercion is never social or emotional, and that coercive limits to liberty are justified only in defense of private property, or in the enforcement of contracts, then libertarianism is false, and I am not a libertarian. If libertarianism is the view that human well-being is best promoted by ensuring “that every man may claim the fullest liberty to exercise his faculties compatible with the possession of like liberty to every other man,” then I am a libertarian. If this is a libertarian view, then the goal to minimize or abolish wrongfully liberty-limiting social norms is a libertarian goal.” (There are many other instances in the blogosphere of comments on this debate, particularly regarding the feminist points made, but you can find those for yourself!) I would strongly encourage people to peruse these posts however. [...] [...] This is the continuation of an earlier debate between Todd Seavey & Keri Howley, which you may read here, here, here and here. Essentially Ms. Howley argued that libertarianism ought be concerned with maximizing freedom and autonomy, and as it is not only the state which impinges on these, but also various social forces, then libertarians ought to be concerned about them. Mr. Seavey, on the other hand, takes the more traditional line, that libertarians ought be concerned with the power of the state alone. Cato’s Will Wilkinson also entered into the debate, stating “If libertarianism is the view that coercion is never social or emotional, and that coercive limits to liberty are justified only in defense of private property, or in the enforcement of contracts, then libertarianism is false, and I am not a libertarian. If libertarianism is the view that human well-being is best promoted by ensuring “that every man may claim the fullest liberty to exercise his faculties compatible with the possession of like liberty to every other man,” then I am a libertarian. If this is a libertarian view, then the goal to minimize or abolish wrongfully liberty-limiting social norms is a libertarian goal.” (There are many other instances in the blogosphere of comments on this debate, particularly regarding the feminist points made, but you can find those for yourself!) I would strongly encourage people to peruse these posts however. [...]

]]> By: Will Wilkinson on the naivety of Libertarianism – mutually occluded http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-26071 Will Wilkinson on the naivety of Libertarianism – mutually occluded Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:56:06 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/#comment-26071 [...] In the line of Kerry Howley’s spot-on debunking of the Libertarian philosophy, Will Wilkinson gives a succinct, reasonable dismissal of the Libertarian reduction of all political concerns to questions of ‘property rights’. Todd Seavey continues to argue that libertarianism just is the view that the only legitimate function of the state (if it has any legitimate function) is to protect property rights, and that sticking to this view saves us from confusing culture war politics. But the definition of legitimate property rights is confusing culture war politics. There is nothing especially clear-headed, “thin,” or even libertarian about emphasizing the inviolability of property rights. [...] [...] [...] In the line of Kerry Howley’s spot-on debunking of the Libertarian philosophy, Will Wilkinson gives a succinct, reasonable dismissal of the Libertarian reduction of all political concerns to questions of ‘property rights’. Todd Seavey continues to argue that libertarianism just is the view that the only legitimate function of the state (if it has any legitimate function) is to protect property rights, and that sticking to this view saves us from confusing culture war politics. But the definition of legitimate property rights is confusing culture war politics. There is nothing especially clear-headed, “thin,” or even libertarian about emphasizing the inviolability of property rights. [...] [...]

]]> By: Kerry Howley » Blog Archive » Does the Word “Feminism” Mean Anything? http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-23850 Kerry Howley » Blog Archive » Does the Word “Feminism” Mean Anything? Sat, 15 Nov 2008 23:53:00 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/#comment-23850 [...] Commenters here and here argue that the word feminism is “meaningless,” the evidence being that various people who self-identify as “feminist” nonetheless disagree about the way to best achieve gender equality. Held to the same standard every word denoting every ideology is just a chain of syllables. Adherents to the things we call “Christianity,” “Keynesianism,” and “Maoism,” as it turns out, have had their disagreements too. Somehow we manage to make meaning of it all. Ron Paul wants to shut the borders; I want to fling them open; no one ever says that the word “libertarian” lacks content. [...] [...] Commenters here and here argue that the word feminism is “meaningless,” the evidence being that various people who self-identify as “feminist” nonetheless disagree about the way to best achieve gender equality. Held to the same standard every word denoting every ideology is just a chain of syllables. Adherents to the things we call “Christianity,” “Keynesianism,” and “Maoism,” as it turns out, have had their disagreements too. Somehow we manage to make meaning of it all. Ron Paul wants to shut the borders; I want to fling them open; no one ever says that the word “libertarian” lacks content. [...]

]]> By: Ladyblog » Blog Archive » The Libertarian Feminist Debate http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-23767 Ladyblog » Blog Archive » The Libertarian Feminist Debate Fri, 14 Nov 2008 20:00:26 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/#comment-23767 [...] Anyway, for the past week or so, Howley and self-proclaimed punk-conservative Todd Seavey have been engaged in a back-and-forth on the issue of feminism and libertarianism, which Seavey would like to assure us young whippersnappers is an oxymoronal concept: The Kerry view is news to me, and I’ve been a libertarian for about twenty years now. [...] [...] Anyway, for the past week or so, Howley and self-proclaimed punk-conservative Todd Seavey have been engaged in a back-and-forth on the issue of feminism and libertarianism, which Seavey would like to assure us young whippersnappers is an oxymoronal concept: The Kerry view is news to me, and I’ve been a libertarian for about twenty years now. [...]

]]> By: PFJO http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-23715 PFJO Thu, 13 Nov 2008 19:17:05 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/#comment-23715 “If Todd wants to argue that women aren’t oppressed because they accept their assigned roles, he’d better be willing to accept the idea that governmental authority is not oppressive because most people don’t complain.” I find this quote irksome because of Ms. Howley's subtle intellectual con... the use of the word MOST. Truthfully, a government is only required because some people don't agree... and have to be forced. If those people agreed, then a coercive state would be unnecessary. If everyone accepted governmental authority then they wouldn't need it and would in fact be free... the issue is what happens to the dissenter? Can a woman, or anyone dissent from popular opinion and if so, are they coerced as a result? Social ostracization isn't the same as Coercion and until Ms. Howley understands that this is an absurd debate. “If Todd wants to argue that women aren’t oppressed because they accept their assigned roles, he’d better be willing to accept the idea that governmental authority is not oppressive because most people don’t complain.”

I find this quote irksome because of Ms. Howley’s subtle intellectual con… the use of the word MOST.

Truthfully, a government is only required because some people don’t agree… and have to be forced. If those people agreed, then a coercive state would be unnecessary. If everyone accepted governmental authority then they wouldn’t need it and would in fact be free… the issue is what happens to the dissenter? Can a woman, or anyone dissent from popular opinion and if so, are they coerced as a result?

Social ostracization isn’t the same as Coercion and until Ms. Howley understands that this is an absurd debate.

]]> By: ToddSeavey.com » Blog Archive » Feuding Political Couples http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-23610 ToddSeavey.com » Blog Archive » Feuding Political Couples Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:13:46 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/#comment-23610 [...] •…as noted by Will’s girlfriend Kerry Howley, who, as it happens, I’d been criticizing on this blog for completely unrelated reasons — namely for not seeing why feminism (in most forms) is fundamentally at odds with the diverse and inevitably inegalitarian (though not necessarily predictable) outcomes tolerated by libertarianism, which normally describes people as free so long as their property rights and bodily integrity are not violated. Kerry objected. I responded. Kerry objected again. [...] [...] •…as noted by Will’s girlfriend Kerry Howley, who, as it happens, I’d been criticizing on this blog for completely unrelated reasons — namely for not seeing why feminism (in most forms) is fundamentally at odds with the diverse and inevitably inegalitarian (though not necessarily predictable) outcomes tolerated by libertarianism, which normally describes people as free so long as their property rights and bodily integrity are not violated. Kerry objected. I responded. Kerry objected again. [...]

]]> By: Micha Ghertner http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-23554 Micha Ghertner Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:26:36 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/#comment-23554 Emily, There are many different strands of feminism, just as there are many different strands of libertarianism. If you would like some examples of how a partnership between the compatible strands might play out, see Roderick Long's and Charles Johnson's <a href="http://charleswjohnson.name/essays/libertarian-feminism/" rel="nofollow">Libertarian Feminism: Can This Marriage Be Saved?</a> Emily,

There are many different strands of feminism, just as there are many different strands of libertarianism. If you would like some examples of how a partnership between the compatible strands might play out, see Roderick Long’s and Charles Johnson’s Libertarian Feminism: Can This Marriage Be Saved?

]]> By: voluntarily paying my blog tax — of little consequence http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-23530 voluntarily paying my blog tax — of little consequence Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:17:17 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/#comment-23530 [...] ..which leads to this interesting snippet from a link in Will’s above post: Free people do all sorts of things you won’t like, and they are no less free (in any libertarian sense) for it. Claiming free people aren’t really free until you see certain patterned outcomes you like is the root of all tyranny and rhetoric unbecoming a libertarian. [...] [...] ..which leads to this interesting snippet from a link in Will’s above post: Free people do all sorts of things you won’t like, and they are no less free (in any libertarian sense) for it. Claiming free people aren’t really free until you see certain patterned outcomes you like is the root of all tyranny and rhetoric unbecoming a libertarian. [...]

]]> By: Against Fake Libertarian Clarity http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-23520 Against Fake Libertarian Clarity Tue, 11 Nov 2008 04:52:47 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/11/08/all-yall-bitches-is-wrong/#comment-23520 [...] This exchange reminds me that many (maybe most) self-styled libertarians think that libertarianism is, by definition, a philosophy that conceives of liberty as a lack of coercion, and, additionally, that coercion is something easy to understand. For these libertarians, just as one might decide to take up an interest in the plight of foreign war orphans, one might decide to be troubled by the fact that some people’s lives are stunted or ruined by arbitrary yet systemic exclusion, or by having the development of their interests and talents constantly discouraged and their aspirations and confidence constantly undermined. But these elective worries cannot flow from an interest in liberty, because liberty is about not being threatened with involuntary confinement in a small room, while these things are about being threatened with involuntary confinement in a small life. [...] [...] This exchange reminds me that many (maybe most) self-styled libertarians think that libertarianism is, by definition, a philosophy that conceives of liberty as a lack of coercion, and, additionally, that coercion is something easy to understand. For these libertarians, just as one might decide to take up an interest in the plight of foreign war orphans, one might decide to be troubled by the fact that some people’s lives are stunted or ruined by arbitrary yet systemic exclusion, or by having the development of their interests and talents constantly discouraged and their aspirations and confidence constantly undermined. But these elective worries cannot flow from an interest in liberty, because liberty is about not being threatened with involuntary confinement in a small room, while these things are about being threatened with involuntary confinement in a small life. [...]

]]>