Recognising civil unions is not liberal. The state has no right to know who is sleeping with whom - only reason marriage should be recognised by the state is so that there is a clear hierarchy in terms of who gets your assets when you die.
And by keeping it as a civil union you’re making a conscious choice that you won’t inherit each others assets. And so the state doesn’t need to know about your union.
"And by keeping it as a civil union you’re making a conscious choice that you won’t inherit each others assets." - Aah! My implicit assumption was that once you recognise it as a civil union, inheritance and other stuff can be taken care of.
I resonated with it so much. Do you think Libertarianism would work in rich countries, where people could afford basic daal & chawal. I don't think in India any party has been close to social Libertarianism
Yes, it could work in those countries. But even there, some obvious issues would pop up. Say, what would one do to pull the section of society that is relatively less privileged? With the tech revolution and knowledge economy, if your stance is education shouldn’t be subsidised, then how would an underprivileged move forward?
The Scandinavian countries are a useful example here. They are among the most business-friendly in the world, yet they never dismantled subsidised education or healthcare. Even Friedman proposed a negative income tax as a universal floor. The ones that worked best quietly kept the safety net.
Recognising civil unions is not liberal. The state has no right to know who is sleeping with whom - only reason marriage should be recognised by the state is so that there is a clear hierarchy in terms of who gets your assets when you die.
And by keeping it as a civil union you’re making a conscious choice that you won’t inherit each others assets. And so the state doesn’t need to know about your union.
"And by keeping it as a civil union you’re making a conscious choice that you won’t inherit each others assets." - Aah! My implicit assumption was that once you recognise it as a civil union, inheritance and other stuff can be taken care of.
I resonated with it so much. Do you think Libertarianism would work in rich countries, where people could afford basic daal & chawal. I don't think in India any party has been close to social Libertarianism
Yeah, in India no party has been close to this.
Yes, it could work in those countries. But even there, some obvious issues would pop up. Say, what would one do to pull the section of society that is relatively less privileged? With the tech revolution and knowledge economy, if your stance is education shouldn’t be subsidised, then how would an underprivileged move forward?
The Scandinavian countries are a useful example here. They are among the most business-friendly in the world, yet they never dismantled subsidised education or healthcare. Even Friedman proposed a negative income tax as a universal floor. The ones that worked best quietly kept the safety net.