Originally Posted by tonton
I don't think so. I think he honestly feels it would be for the greater good to let some people be really really poor and downtrodden. Lower labor costs and all. Who cares if they can't afford bread and water. The rich people will be charitable. Riight.
Libertarians believe the greatest opportunity for universal prosperity and happiness lies in freedom rather than slavery - liberty rather than servitude.
Libertarians hope for a time when mankind will have progressed beyond the need for government - when the primary form of government is self-government.
In order for that to happen, though, the people themselves will have to overcome greed, selfishness, lust, anger, pride, and other destructive and aggressive tendencies. But no matter how hard you try, you cannot bring that change about by force. You just can't. It's been tried to varying degrees since the beginning, and it has never, ever worked.
You cannot force people to be charitable, because the minute you deprive them of their agency to make that decision on their own, it ceases to be charity and instead becomes servitude.
Libertarians ask: why not try a different approach, for once?