Are libertarians selfish?

Yes

33 (82.5%)

No, I value my money too much

5 (12.5%)

No, if I don't get freedom no one does

1 (2.5%)

I hate freedom (Nathyn)

1 (2.5%)

Total Members Voted: 21

[freedom geek]

Let us see if libertarians are as selfish as nathyn seems to think they are.

[Zhwazi]

I'll apply it in the furthest sense I think it's applicable and say I'd give money and other support to help people free themselves even though I could never be them.

[alkanen]

Sure, out of purely selfish reasons.

If people in another country get more liberty, they'll be able to contribute to the world economy in a more efficient manner, which will undoubtedly make me better off in one way or another.

[John Shaw]

If by selfish you mean rational self interest, then yes.

If by selfish you mean yielding to every irrational whim no matter how dangerous it is to oneself or others, then no.

[Zhwazi]

A suggestion for all future polls: Do not ask one question in the thread title and then ask a different question that would get a different answer from the same person in the poll question field, because a lot of people are going to vote based on the question in the topic title and skip the poll question field, throwing off your results.

[voodoo]

These are false choices.  Donating won't help someone else attain liberty.  Keeping my possessions ferreted under my mattress won't help someone else attain liberty.  The only way to help someone attain social and economic liberty is to trade with them.

[Zhwazi]

Donating won't help someone else attain liberty.

If you donate a gun to someone who needs to defend themself you are absolutely helping someone else attain liberty. Assuming you aren't making them dependent, and that they truly want liberty, donating does help. You say the only way to help them is to trade, but what helps them is the increase in value that they get (something they also get if you give them something for free), not trading per se.

[freedom geek]

Sure, out of purely selfish reasons.

If people in another country get more liberty, they'll be able to contribute to the world economy in a more efficient manner, which will undoubtedly make me better off in one way or another.

Assume they're in another universe so no trade.

[alkanen]

Assume they're in another universe so no trade.

Would I have to build the one-way multi-universe teleporter myself?

[voodoo]

Donating won't help someone else attain liberty.

If you donate a gun to someone who needs to defend themself you are absolutely helping someone else attain liberty. Assuming you aren't making them dependent, and that they truly want liberty, donating does help. You say the only way to help them is to trade, but what helps them is the increase in value that they get (something they also get if you give them something for free), not trading per se.

"Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day.  Teach a man to fish..."

"You get what you pay for."

If someone does not have the liberty to use the gun to defend himself, by donating the gun to him I've given him the tool to spend the rest of his life in prison or die trying.  I can donate all sorts of things to somebody and have them not only not increase his wealth but be a de facto liability (such as the gun).  Other things I can donate have exactly zero value to him.  The only things that may help him are consumables so the "help" only lasts as long as they do.

"Yay.  The food you gave me helped me stay alive long enough to defeat an oppressive government!  Now, I'm hungry."

Sure, out of purely selfish reasons.

If people in another country get more liberty, they'll be able to contribute to the world economy in a more efficient manner, which will undoubtedly make me better off in one way or another.

Assume they're in another universe so no trade.

So, no donations either, right?

[Ed]

Hell yeah I am.

[ladyattis]

I voted I hate freedom due to temporary insanity.

-- Brede

[mikehz]

I hope libertarians are selfish. As Ayn Rand said, rational self-interest is a virtue.

Can you imagine the hell of a world where most people weren't selfish? In that case, having more than another person would be evil. To be good, you'd have to give away all of your stuff until you had less than everyone else--and then they would be the evil ones, and would have to give THEIR stuff away...

The evil Christian ideal of selflessness leads to ever increasing poverty and a downward spiral as each person strives to be better by living their life for someone else. Instead, each person should strive to attain the best they can for themselves. By doing that, you end up helping everyone.

[bonerjoe]

I thought the question was "are libertarians selfish". So I voted yes.

[Lindsey]

If by selfish you mean rational self interest, then yes.

If by selfish you mean yielding to every irrational whim no matter how dangerous it is to oneself or others, then no.

This.