# Hitching and Ditching in Libertaria **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 26, 2005, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065 "2005-10-26T21:29:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/21 "2005-10-27T15:50:41Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > ISTM that they have a contract, unless both parties agree to nullify it. But ISTM that the only thing in the contract that’s enforceable by a Libertarian judicial system is the “sharing all we own” part. If Larry or Linda leaves, they can’t take anything with them, unless the other allows it. That is an interesting take. I would have thought that it meant a fifty-fifty split, regardless of who leaves. It is sounding more and more like Libertaria has all kinds of laws to cover things not covered by explicit contract. People can always opt out of those laws by contracting otherwise (Larry and Linda could have mentioned in their marriage contract that “the first one to cheat on the marriage only gets twenty percent of the assets”), but otherwise, the laws say what specific terms in contracts should be interpreted to mean. Are there limits on what you can contract? Could I do the _Merchant of Venice_ pound of flesh thing? Could I sell myself into slavery? > [@](#): > > Of course, the spouse that ‘stays’ may have trouble collecting on any court decree, since in Libertaria, one has to pay for one’s own police service and all. That’s another question. Can I choose not pay for police service, and set up my own home defense? ISTM that even if I don’t pay, I am benefitting from the police protection for others in my neighborhood, because the police would arrest someone for committing crimes against both payers and non-payers. It is sort of like a “herd immunity” that people who don’t vaccinate their kids enjoy, without paying the “cost” of the very small risk of complications from vaccination. Interesting stuff - keep it coming! What about the children? Won’t somebody think about the children[sup]1[/sup]? Does the non-custodial partner have to pay child support, and if so, how much? Can those rights be contracted away? Do they get to pick which parent, and what role do the courts play in determining what is in their best interests? Regards, Shodan [sup]1[/sup]Sorry. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/22 "2005-10-27T15:55:24Z")
From what **Lib** was saying, it sounds pretty simple: the contracting parties can make whatever arrangements they want by voluntary contract. If something comes up that the contract didn’t cover, and the contracting parties can’t come to an agreement about it, the “jackbooted nanny” arbiters will step in and “solve their problems” for them. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/23 "2005-10-27T17:07:00Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > as I see it, the fee you pay for government includes the arbitration and the enforcement. What’s to stop me from contracting with a government that doesn’t work like that? Seriously - I’ve never understood this part: does Libertaria have some über-government that determines which micro-governments can contract with its citizens? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/24 "2005-10-27T17:22:03Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > What’s to stop me from contracting with a government that doesn’t work like that? I suspect nothing - if you can find one, or create it. > [@](#): > > Seriously - I’ve never understood this part: does Libertaria have some über-government that determines which micro-governments can contract with its citizens? I thought the only role of the über-government was to prevent coercion and deception. If you want to form some smaller association, the government of Libertaria doesn’t concern itself, so long as no deception is involved. Or don’t I see what you are asking? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/25 "2005-10-27T18:20:00Z")
I think if we add a little more into the situation, but only a little more, we gain something interesting. First, Linda was very wealthy when she came into the marriage; Larry was not. When they agreed to share everything, mostly they were agreeing to share Linda’s wealth. Second, their parting is so vicious that they cannot agree to an arbiter. Larry has turned bitter on women, and is convinced that a female arbiter is going to give everything back to Linda despite her infidelity; Linda is so irritated at Larry that, to spite him, she refuses to accept any arbiter unless she’s female. It’s possible that these situations are previously covered: the government with which they contract already has default contracts set up for property disbursement in divorces, contracts that apply only if there’s no more specific language in a particular marriage contract, and agreeing to be governed by this specific government means agreeing to all these default contracts. They may similarly have a process by which, if two disputing parties cannot agree on an arbiter, one is chosen randomly for them. But I’m not sure if that’s how it would work. I **am** skeptical of the idea that libertarianism would lead to greater personal responsibility–and I say this as someone who used to advocate an anarchism based on personal responsibility. As I’ve grown older, I’ve become less convinced that irresponsibility is a cultural value, and more convinced that it’s part of human nature. But that’s just a personal opinion, not something that I can argue with evidence. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/26 "2005-10-27T19:04:57Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > It is sounding more and more like Libertaria has all kinds of laws to cover things not covered by explicit contract. There could indeed be libertarian societies that have even more laws than the US (were such a thing possible). But Libertaria, in the sense of Lib’s ideal libertarian society, has only one law. > [@](#): > > Are there limits on what you can contract? Could I do the _Merchant of Venice_ pound of flesh thing? Could I sell myself into slavery? So long as all parties are rights bearing entities capable of giving meaningful consent (the definition of adult in Libertaria), and do so, then yes — it’s your body. Do what you want with it. > [@](#): > > That’s another question. Can I choose not pay for police service, and set up my own home defense? ISTM that even if I don’t pay, I am benefitting from the police protection for others in my neighborhood, because the police would arrest someone for committing crimes against both payers and non-payers. It is sort of like a “herd immunity” that people who don’t vaccinate their kids enjoy, without paying the “cost” of the very small risk of complications from vaccination. You must leave behind the notion of borders as lines on a map defining what a government claims. Libertarian government makes no claims to property ownership of any kind. No emiment domain. You are a citizen because you pay, not because of where you live. > [@](#): > > What about the children? Won’t somebody think about the children[sup]1[/sup]? Does the non-custodial partner have to pay child support, and if so, how much? Can those rights be contracted away? Do they get to pick which parent, and what role do the courts play in determining what is in their best interests? Like I told you before, there are threads already dealing with children in quite some detail. And that’s a lot of detail, too much for me to commit to discussing here. But you’re a smart guy. The underlying theory, briefly, is that a child is incapable of giving meaningful consent, and therefore the political relation between parents and child is unary in nature; that is, the parent is the sole consenting party. As such, the parent carries an obligation to provide for the child every necessity (yes, that can be arbitrated) until adulthood. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/27 "2005-10-27T19:06:32Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > From what **Lib** was saying, it sounds pretty simple: the contracting parties can make whatever arrangements they want by voluntary contract. > > If something comes up that the contract didn’t cover, and the contracting parties can’t come to an agreement about it, the “jackbooted nanny” arbiters will step in and “solve their problems” for them. No, like I explained before (is anyone reading anything? :D)), not every agreement is a contract and not every disagreement is subject to arbitration. But you are right that volunteerism is the key. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/28 "2005-10-27T19:08:59Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > What’s to stop me from contracting with a government that doesn’t work like that? > > Seriously - I’ve never understood this part: does Libertaria have some über-government that determines which micro-governments can contract with its citizens? Nope. Libertarianly speaking, a government is legitimized solely by the consent of those it governs. You may contract with any government (or none) that you believe most affects your safety and happiness. I think that the US Declaration of Independence captures the essence quite well: We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness – That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/29 "2005-10-27T19:10:23Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Second, their parting is so vicious that they cannot agree to an arbiter. I don’t follow that part of it. The very act of becoming a citizen of Libertaria entailed contracting for government arbitration of disputes. How could they breach that as well? ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/30 "2005-10-27T19:16:57Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > No, like I explained before (is anyone reading anything? )), not every agreement is a contract and not every disagreement is subject to arbitration. Right. Did I say it was? **If** two parties have a contract which is broken under conditions not covered by the contract, as in the OP’s hypothetical, **and** they can’t resolve it by mutual agreement, then it’s up to the arbiter. (And I think what **Daniel** was getting at is not that Larry and Linda are rejecting arbitration _per se_, which as you note is government-mandated, but that they can’t agree on which arbiter to go to. Presumably that would also have to be settled by an arbiter’s decision somewhere.) ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/31 "2005-10-27T19:33:11Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Right. Did I say it was? **If** two parties have a contract which is broken under conditions not covered by the contract, as in the OP’s hypothetical, **and** they can’t resolve it by mutual agreement, then it’s up to the arbiter. Okay. I misunderstood your “If something comes up that the contract didn’t cover, and the contracting parties can’t come to an agreement about it, the “jackbooted nanny” arbiters will step in and “solve their problems” for them.” I’m afraid the jackbooted nannies (whom they hired voluntarily, by the way) might cause them more problems than they solve. > [@](#): > > (And I think what **Daniel** was getting at is not that Larry and Linda are rejecting arbitration _per se_, which as you note is government-mandated, but that they can’t agree on which arbiter to go to. Presumably that would also have to be settled by an arbiter’s decision somewhere.) I don’t think they get to pick an arbiter. At least, I wouldn’t design it that way. I think a random one would be better because it could be the case that that acquaintance or something like that prejudices things one way or the other. (I know Larry and I hate/love him.) ---
**Author:** ![SusanStoHelit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@SusanStoHelit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SusanStoHelit)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/32 "2005-10-27T20:45:20Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > I suppose so. I’ve often thought about writing a novel, since a lot of people liked _Sarah’s Gold_, in which a visitor from Authoritaria is surprised to find that scenarios like this are almost nonexistent. I mean, you are positing two people who grew up in a society where all their lives they have seen the effects of being flippant and irresponsible about decision making. They have not seen government rescuing failed enterprises. They began studying personal finance in kindergarten. They have studied the history of their culture and understand that their decisions will have consequences. In Authoritaria, where government solves people’s problems, a couple might give more consideration to buying a car than to having children. But in Libertaria, they know that their obligations to their children means that their lives will change drastically. [hijack] **Liberal** , have you ever read anything by L. Neil Smith? I’m specifically thinking of [The Probability Broach](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0765301539/qid=1130445765/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-1719525-4879200?v=glance&s=books&n=507846). That book is pretty much exactly what you describe. It gets a bit preachy at times, but it was a good read overall.[/hijack] ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/33 "2005-10-27T22:07:59Z")
> [@SusanStoHelit](#): > > [hijack] **Liberal** , have you ever read anything by L. Neil Smith? I’m specifically thinking of [The Probability Broach](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0765301539/qid=1130445765/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-1719525-4879200?v=glance&s=books&n=507846). That book is pretty much exactly what you describe. It gets a bit preachy at times, but it was a good read overall.[/hijack] That does look interesting indeed. Based on your recommendation and the reviews at Amazon, I have ordered it. Thanks! ---
**Author:** ![SusanStoHelit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@SusanStoHelit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SusanStoHelit)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2005, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/34 "2005-10-27T22:28:04Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > That does look interesting indeed. Based on your recommendation and the reviews at Amazon, I have ordered it. Thanks! Let me know what you think of it. I’ve been trying in vain to convince my book buddies to read it. Sucker. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2005, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/35 "2005-10-28T00:10:33Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > I don’t think they get to pick an arbiter. At least, I wouldn’t design it that way. I think a random one would be better because it could be the case that that acquaintance or something like that prejudices things one way or the other. (I know Larry and I hate/love him.) That’s pretty much how it’s supposed to work here but, as in most societies throughout history, the wealthy and/or powerful can still “shop” for judges that tend to rule in their favor. What prevents this problem in Libertaria? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2005, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/36 "2005-10-28T00:16:54Z")
> [@SusanStoHelit](#): > > [hijack] **Liberal** , have you ever read anything by L. Neil Smith? I’m specifically thinking of [The Probability Broach](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0765301539/qid=1130445765/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-1719525-4879200?v=glance&s=books&n=507846). That book is pretty much exactly what you describe. It gets a bit preachy at times, but it was a good read overall.[/hijack] The author _is_ a bit idealistic, but I enjoyed the series of which this book is the first. My favorite is [_Tom Paine Maru_](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/034529243X/002-9141134-6416854?v=glance&n=283155&s=books&v=glance) , which details the extension of a Libertaian Utopia into the future. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2005, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/37 "2005-10-28T00:32:44Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > As such, the parent carries an obligation to provide for the child every necessity (yes, that can be arbitrated) until adulthood. This can be arbitrated? I’m a little confused: am I allowed, for example, to contract with a government that agrees that children may be beaten bloody so that they learn good manners, and if so, what may my bleeding-heart neighbor do when she sees me pull out the whip against my own child? Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2005, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/38 "2005-10-28T00:42:03Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > This can be arbitrated? I’m a little confused: am I allowed, for example, to contract with a government that agrees that children may be beaten bloody so that they learn good manners, and if so, what may my bleeding-heart neighbor do when she sees me pull out the whip against my own child? I guess it would depend on whether or not she belongs to the same Libertarian mini-governmental unit that you’ve voluntarily signed up with, doesn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2005, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/39 "2005-10-28T00:42:46Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > The underlying theory, briefly, is that a child is incapable of giving meaningful consent, and therefore the political relation between parents and child is unary in nature; that is, the parent is the sole consenting party. As such, the parent carries an obligation to provide for the child every necessity (yes, that can be arbitrated) until adulthood. Who decides which children are capable of giving meaningful consent and which aren’t? Might one government draw the line at 18, another at 21, another at 13, and yet another on a case-by-case basis? I apologize if this has already been covered in another thread - if so, please provide a link or some keywords to search for. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2005, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065/40 "2005-10-28T00:52:43Z")
> [@Mr2001](#): > > Who decides which children are capable of giving meaningful consent and which aren’t? Might one government draw the line at 18, another at 21, another at 13, and yet another on a case-by-case basis? > > I apologize if this has already been covered in another thread - if so, please provide a link or some keywords to search for. And might this not allow a parent to shop for a government that allows her/him the greatest leeway with regards to punishing a child, or could the child shop for a better government independently? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hitching-and-ditching-in-libertaria/328065.md?page=3)