I'm talking from a social perspective, only.

I was reading some Nietzsche earlier, and he makes a good point about how - prior to the Reformation - the State and religion had been fundamentally intertwined. Religion had a very strong political function. Ceremonies like baptism would ensure religio-cultural homogeneity, and the State would derive its legitimacy from a religious authority to rule.

However, the Reformation obviously strained that. My country, England, actually weathered the Reformation fairly well, and we ended up with a weird episcopal church that was a mismatch of Calvinism and Lutheranism. Even after the Reformation, though, we see this fundamental link with religion. It was so great that even after Charles I's Personal Rule, his execution, the establishment of the Protectorate and the existence of a Republican Army, a Parliament still offered the Crown to Oliver Cromwell.

The fall in religious legitimacy for the State gives rise to religious pluralism and severs the authority the State has over the people, leading to a rise in majoritarianism, utilitarianism and - as we've seen - democracy.

Yet, with many things besides just religion, we've seen time and time again that humans are just bad at being individualistic. The fair few are capable of it; capable of living a solitary, ruthless and ambitious life - the Nietzscheans and the Randians among us. But in Europe we see pluralism leading to religious fundamentalism, nationalism, social conservatism and other forms of "us v. them" collectivism.

Pluralism, essentially, dangerous pluralism that undermines the authority of the governments which hang over us. My question is, given this tendency for pluralism to arise, and conflict with it - particularly in times of crisis - which necessarily leads to the State lacking legitimacy and thus power, is widespread libertarianism actually viable?

I'm not arguing we should end democracy (although that'd be nice) and I'm not arguing for oppressive governments. But ever since the fall of religion, and the rise of secularism/pluralism, it seems we can't afford to place liberty as the goal of politics.

So, should we eradicate Islam?

I think so, yes. But I think all religion should be eradicated. Not necessarily in a jingoistic murika way, but we should certainly be enjoying a shift towards secularism right now - which we aren't.

If you're asking whether we're at war with Islam, not at war with terror? Then yes, we are. Should we actively destroy Islam? No. If that's an auxiliary effect to the fight against fundamentalists - then so be it.

Doesn't change the fact.

Of course not.

I'm just saying their existence doesn't negate the idea that we absolutely should focus on Islam and we absolutely should focus on the Middle East. Fundamentalism in places like France and my country are but a chip in the boulder.

The only thing that needs to change is more emphasis on punishment, such as 24/7 solitary confinement for murderers, gang members, and rapists

Because there's nothing like helping the probably mentally ill with utterly no human contact, right!

Yeah, no.

You rehabilitate those you can, and you keep the seriously mentally ill apart from society. Prisons, in their current form, shouldn't exist any longer.

You bomb a village to kill 5 jihadis, you kill 5 civilians in the process and that's five more families that will send their sons to fight the west.

That's not as important as the economic incentives at play. I think the true zealots - the absolutely rabid, fanatical, let's-establish-a-totalitarian-caliphate - are part of a relatively small power-bloc.

It just so happens that organisations like the Taliban pay well - like, really well. Better than the ANP or the ANA in Afghanistan.

A couple nukes in the East might do the trick just like it did to Japan.

And this is the part where I distance myself from your position.

You seriously don't understand the mind of a criminal, don't you? Stealing a car or burglarizing a house if it means a couple years in the pen isn't big of a deal for criminals because they look at the long-time rewards for their actions, including respect and a higher position of power within their organization

If beating up somebody means I would have influence, then I'd do it; same with everybody else

You also don't understand the level of corruption in prisons

Which is all indicative of a problem in the current system.

All the more reason for restoration and rehabilitation, not retribution.

I think I'd honestly fit better around Hobbes (if I were to seriously take the test) but I have no idea what his philosophies are.

This is Dustin btw, not Harlow.

Hobbes essentially created the idea of a social contract. He said, in order to avoid the simple, barbaric state of nature, people would contractually agree to a civil society in which the government has total sovereign authority. He basically supported the absolutism of government.

In saying that, he did believe all men were equal, should be allowed to do whatever the law explicitly forbids, and states that the authority must be representative in some way - which is why I didn't make him an out-and-out totalitarian.

Right means movement and freedom,

We're talking solely in an economic context here.

The horizontal axis is economics; the vertical, social.

SHUT IT, COMMIE

This is what I've got so far, mostly based off my own bookcase. It'd be great if you challenged some of my listings, as well as added your own based on any philosophers you're familiar with.

Yes.

I'd limit it to everybody except myself.

No. Universities should be allowed to charge what they want.

The issue is one of credential inflation, not the necessity of higher education. Most of the universities in my country don't trust the highest grade you can possibly get at A-level to accurately communicate your ability.

And we also have a target of 50pc of school leavers going to uni.

Qualifications are too easy, too many people are going to university, and the universities are losing their institutional freedom.

FUCK.

I will be promoted. It's just a matter of time.

It would really depend what mood I was in.

I'm leaning yes.