fluxrazza

Just finished an article on exactly this. If we fail to realise the value of free speech we are no better than kangaroos: https://steemit.com/philosophy/@fluxrazza/the-case-for-free-speech

Ok - I think if we define welfare as ‘enforced charity’ (seems reasonable) then everything is dandy

Eek could go down a deep rabbit hole here. I class both charity and welfare as 'giving to the poor'. I view this as an investment on behalf of the giving individual in the future promise of the return of similar favours from others and in the future productive potential of the poor individual or family. In any rational investment the risk/reward payoff must always be considered. As I argue in the article I think outsourcing the investment decisions to a centralized government is a fragilizing mistake. On the concept of nation states generally I think they should exist (I like flags) but have minimal necessary power. It's a tradeoff between an ordered tribe and fragilizing tyranny (and the more homogenously intelligent the tribe the less tyranny you need to enforce order). We have had periods in a our history where we showed that nations could survive with separation of welfare and state. Using the minimal necessary power idea, let's go back and try that again.

Hi Thanks for the reply. I appreciate your advice about the value of (honest) salesmanship. I've attempted to make an objective reasoned argument as to why separating welfare and state is a good thing for a society. I've tried to do this is in a manner that goes further that calling upon the non-aggression principle as divine truth. It is an extension of a previous piece I wrote making the 'Case for Freedom' - attempting to explain why we have our inbuilt intuitions that freedom is important. There I argue through the lens of fragility and antifragility, ideas proposed by N N Taleb. I thought this was worthwhile as I hadn't seen the concept spelled out in such terms previously. In the comments to that piece I was asked about applying the general 'freedom is good' argument to specific topics (speech was mention). I chose to start the specific explorations with the topic of welfare. I operate under the principle that I write what I find interesting to write about. It helps me clarify my thoughts. Obviously I would love it if others were interested too - but I can accept it if they are not! Cheers

Hi all I've become a big fan of Stefan's podcasts over the past 6-12 months. He, along with other prominent thinkers, has opened my eyes to powerful ways of viewing the world. I've attempting to start contributing some ideas of my own. I feel like I am merely pulling ideas of intellectual 'giants', but it has been fun nonetheless. I've been doing this primarily on the blockchain blogging site steemit.com. It's a great concept and I recommend supporting the platform. My latest piece on there is titled 'The Case for Freedom - Welfare Edition' Feel free to check it out Cheers Ryan