(Return to main path)

Libertarians usually talk as though their theory can be easily applied to the real world. I'm not so sure that is true. It seems to me that if we are to take it seriously, we have to think about the cases in which the rights they often talk about cannot be applied. I've already mentioned one case: when the current distribution of wealth and income is greatly influenced by a long history of injustice. And there is another case to consider. What happens to libertarian rights in catastrophic circumstances? 

Suppose we are talking about the spread of AIDS in Africa, and up comes the question of prices and patents for medicines developed in the rich countries. Should we honor those patents if it means that large populations will be wiped out? My point is that libertarians ought to consider the possibility that circumstances are not always 'normal.' A history of injustice or confrontation with catastrophe are cases that may require us to deviate from the rules that apply to normal cases. Maybe normal circumstances are actually the exception? Who knows?