Prometheus 6

A side effect of all the nonsense that developed around S-Train is that I've encountered a number of people I'd have in no way met under the general circumstances in which I operate. Publicola is a blogger who focuses on the rights of individuals and in particular the Right to Arms—the capitalization is his, and semantically it indicates he deals with it as a high principle.Based on his comments here, I believe his position is the most Libertarian I've ever encountered personally. There are several longish comments there, but I believe the the essential position is:

1. All human collectives have requirements based on the nature and focus of their activity
2. All human collectives, as all things, change over time
3. All human collectives impose on human freedoms in some fashion to insure their continuance because they require specific behaviors of the members that may not be of their own choosing in exhange for some benefit
4. All human collectives eventually change such that the imposition on the freedoms of their members is greater than the benefits received
5. All human collectives should therefore be limited such that their impositions are not allowed to dominate human freedoms

Pretty tight, huh? Libertarians have my permission to lift the description.

Now, this line of reasoning makes a nice, heretically sealed self-supporting value system. I do have a couple of problems with it. To begin with I believe the system is derived specifically to provide rational support for the Right to Arms. I believe the perception of the Right to Arms as high principle…or perhaps intense desire, or perceived need…came first. As such I see it as entirely optional, one of several ways to attain the desire or fulfill the need…and frankly I have no truck with high principles. High principles strike me as anither set of laws and hence indicators of some collective view if not an actual collective. Further evidence high principles have a collective root is Publicola's mention of a "Right to Arms world." I believe the Right to Arms is an artifact of the specific collective we exist within.

There are other issues, but I've learned to take things one step at a time.

Of course, none of this says anything about my opinion of the Right to Arms, which I was specifically asked. My opinion is, if anyone has it I want it too. It's a physical safety thing.