This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
I think it's a notable subject; this is one of the most contentious subjects in libertarian ideology. EVCM (talk) 14:56, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm wondering if it can't be covered in sufficient depth in either the libertarianism or anarcho-cap articles? Just not sure we really need to multiply articles or relatively minor sectarian disputes.--Bsnowball (talk) 07:51, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
I just found out this article survived AfD discussion I thought I was watching it but evidently wasn't and missed that discussion. My main problem is a) the article was started by a banned user and edited by at least one of his now banned sock puppets (he emailed me he is pro-sock puppetry) and b) the assertion that Anarcho-capitalism and minarchism are the two distinct strains of libertarianism. is, as the tags I just put in say: [dubious – discuss][unreliable source?] See Libertarianism article. I wish we could decide on some lingo besides left and right (which too vague and carry too much emotional and intellectual baggage) to separate pro from anti-property libertarians. Since property is the main difference (leading to lots of other differences of course) that would make sense. Then both the libertarianism article and this one could specify that anarcho-capitalism vs. minarchism is a pro-property distinction. Any major libertarians who make those distinctions? Maybe we have to start promoting them more :-) Thoughts? Carol Moore 13:48, 15 October 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc
Carol you have offered no reason to doubt the sources cited other than the fact that you dislike what they say; I added the sources personally (so, assuming I am not another sock :), you need notbe concerned about their reliability on that score. On the question of distinctions in libertarianism, as I said in the deletion discussion, just because you can divide libertarians neatly into two mutually exclusive groups (ancaps and minarchists) does not mean that there are not other ways of dividing them. For example, utilitarian/deontological libertarians, pro/anti-revolutionary violence, "work within the system" vs anti-electoralism are all distinctions one or the other of which the vast majority of libertarians could be categorised. There's no reason we can't cover all of these, if there is verifiable coverage. So in essence what I am saying is that the subject of this article is a legitimate topic of inquiry for the encyclopaedia. the skomorokh 14:52, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
My problem is the "the" in the first sentence "are the two distinct strains of libertarianism." Take out the "the" and it is far less annoying and I'm not motivated to find other distinctions claiming to be the main distinction.
The problem with sock puppets is that it does start to make one paranoid about who is and isn't one, especially when there is discussion of contentious issues in an article. But I guess all administrators have to do is check IPs of every possible sock puppet (including me, ho ho ho) and eliminate the innocent that way. :-)
I actually put up a note about the banned User:Aldrich Hanssen and his old sockpuppets, and the fact that he seems to have a new IP and 3 or 4 new sock puppets and is busy creating questionable material, some of which you have edited agreeably in the last few weeks, FYI. It's to ask for libertarians opinions on whether such blatant defiance of wikipedia rules is uncool to libertarians. See here for my comment. Opinions welcome. For sheer audacious mongering, it's reminiscent of Sarah Palin talking about when she "takes charge" of the Senate... Carol Moore 23:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc