"Freedom" thread or something

I see Lord of the Rings as a more important book to Libertarianism than Atlas Shrugged. 

Well it gets into personal value judgements so this isn't mean to be a proof or any sort of a strong statement. I guess I'll bullet point some of my thoughts.

1) Libertarianism is a economic/legal organization of society. Lost in the focus of this movement too much are ideas of cultural identity which become transient and unimportant. People in the libertarian movement seem to place the economic/legal organization as the crux of society. While this is certainly important and the goal of the movement itself, libertarians should hardly be limited (or even place precedence) to this over a cultural organization of society. The changes that allow oppressive governments to codify their actions are themselves cultural resting with the role people expect the government to play. LOTR deal a lot with maintaining culture and community in the face of changing outside conditions. The goal isn't a Luddite spurning of progress, but just remembering that human interactions and communities ultimately shape the political and economic landscape via government. Atlas Shrugged to me paints a picture of a society where economic and personal pursuits form the culture.

2) Just to throw this in as background rather than part of my argument, Rand hated libertarians.

3) I find the most important principle of LOTR to be Lord Acton's simple aphorism, "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely"

I don't think I really need to elaborate how this advice lines up with the tenants of libertarianism. I find this principle largely ignored in Rand's writing. She seems perfectly willing to apply it to a governmental institution, but she has no problems with private entities in the same respect. She ignores that historically as much as governments have been corrupt and decayed our economic system, 'big business' has sought to corrupt the government.

I guess those would be my two main points. Rand's work is obviously influential and has good stuff in it. I think LOTR strikes to the heart of the matter more efficiently and imparts other values I think Libertarians tend to forget.

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Well it gets into personal value judgements so this isn't mean to be a proof or any sort of a strong statement. I guess I'll bullet point some of my thoughts. 1) Libertarianism is a economic/legal organization of society. Lost in the focus of this movement too much are ideas of cultural identity which become transient and unimportant. People in the libertarian movement seem to place the economic/legal organization as the crux of society. While this is certainly important and the goal of the movement itself, libertarians should hardly be limited (or even place precedence) to this over a cultural organization of society. The changes that allow oppressive governments to codify their actions are themselves cultural resting with the role people expect the government to play. LOTR deal a lot with maintaining culture and community in the face of changing outside conditions. The goal isn't a Luddite spurning of progress, but just remembering that human interactions and communities ultimately shape the political and economic landscape via government. Atlas Shrugged to me paints a picture of a society where economic and personal pursuits form the culture.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. Culture is indeed important and often overlooked.

Equality 7-2521 wrote: 2) Just to throw this in as background rather than part of my argument, Rand hated libertarians.

Yes, and I've always found her attitude in that regard puzzling. From what I understand, she disagreed with them mainly on issues of international interventionism, but that seems like a small enough difference in philosophy that is shouldn't inspire such acrimony.

Equality 7-2521 wrote: 3) I find the most important principle of LOTR to be Lord Acton's simple aphorism, "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely" I don't think I really need to elaborate how this advice lines up with the tenants of libertarianism. I find this principle largely ignored in Rand's writing. She seems perfectly willing to apply it to a governmental institution, but she has no problems with private entities in the same respect. She ignores that historically as much as governments have been corrupt and decayed our economic system, 'big business' has sought to corrupt the government. I guess those would be my two main points. Rand's work is obviously influential and has good stuff in it. I think LOTR strikes to the heart of the matter more efficiently and imparts other values I think Libertarians tend to forget.

I never thought about it in this way, but you're quite right. The whole point of the book is that even those with the purest of intentions are utterly destroyed and corrupted when given too much power (the one ring.)

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Relevant Tolkien quote, 'My political opinions lean more and more to Anarchy (philosophically understood, meaning the abolition of control not whiskered men with bombs)—or to ‘unconstitutional’ Monarchy. I would arrest anybody who uses the word State (in any sense other than the inanimate real of England and its inhabitants, a thing that has neither power, rights nor mind); and after a chance of recantation, execute them if they remained obstinate! If we could go back to personal names, it would do a lot of good. Government is an abstract noun meaning the art and process of governing and it should be an offence to write it with a capital G or so to refer to people...

I never knew Tolkien's political views and am delighted to hear that he fancies himself an anarchist. This just made my day. I only wish Chesterton (whose writings and philosophy I generally adore) were so enlightened in this regard.

Equality 7-2521 wrote: I second the thoughts about Chesterton although I've read very little.

He has that very English type of attitude where he wants to be left alone to drink beer, and fight duels and tend to his property, but through centuries of habitual monarchy has come to accept taxes and a certain level of government intervention in the economy as inevitable and not such a bad thing.

I don't think an acknowledgement of the importance of culture necessitates an acceptance of cultures that we view as tyrannical or oppressive.

^I wholeheartedly agree.

Huh?

I think tempted would be a better word. The initial change of loyalties by Sauron was not due to any supernatural influence of Morgoth. 

I have read The Hobbit and LOTR. Haven't read the Silmarillion yet though it's gaining dust on my shelf...

I have heard Marillion though

Yes, Facebook in the hands of government. Couldn't sound better for liberty.