The most interesting part of the left-wing responses to the assortative mating dilemma is to talk about another topic.
They fully accept that government cannot go around regulating whom people marry despite the fact this is a major source of inequality.
The reason why this inequality is acceptable because they acknowledge implicitly the point that Nozick made about how the inequality came about is important. If the inequality is the result of people exercising their rights, the inequality is just
Last night, debate teams from Victoria University at Wellington and from Canterbury squared off to debate the moot, “This house would ban people with university degrees from marrying each other.”
It was great fun. Vic had the affirmative and did a fantastic job with it. Canterbury won, partially because the affirmative wasn’t able to show it would be enforceable without substantial offsetting harms.
Matt Nolan, of TVHE fame and who’s finishing up his thesis on inequality, was one of the the panellists after the debaters had finished; I was the second. I’ve copied my speaking notes below, but delivery varied a bit. I think the debate was videoed; I’ll update this post with it when it’s available.
You might have come in tonight scratching your heads a bit about tonight’s moot. The proposed policy is obviously absurd: a far more intrusive extension of the state into people’s lives than most…
View original post 1,142 more words
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments