Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

I'm a libertarian, please don't hate me.

Page 2 of 7 [ 98 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

10 Oct 2012, 5:23 pm

marshall wrote:
Me too. Screw the polar bears. Those godless killing machines!


They aren't harmless things, you know. They kill you if you get too close.



AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

10 Oct 2012, 6:14 pm

TallyMan wrote:
Maybe I should mention that the OP is no longer a member of WP due to her bad behaviour elsewhere on the site.
I had a feeling she was a troll after giving me and others personal attacks for no apparant reason on another thread.


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

10 Oct 2012, 6:15 pm

The polar bears will survive no matter what those who wish to panic everyone wants them to believe.

Plants grow well in the warmth and not so well in the cold. It's no accident that mankind went from being hunter-gatherers toward an agricultural lifestyle 8,000 years ago when it was substantially warmer than today. The real disaster is cooling.

Furthermore, we are about 15,000 years into the current interglacial warm period. The last few interglacial warm periods were apparently substantially shorter than what we have already seen in this one. When the interglacial warm period ends and the ice returns, be ready for most of mankind to starve to death. If Global Warming delays the next ice age or keeps it from happening, mankind will be the big winners.

People with ASDs are especially benefited by Global Warming. When the world cools down as the next ice age settles upon us, there won't be much room for anyone who cannot become productive members of their clans at young ages. If you aren't able to contribute to the survival of your clan in your early teens, it's going to be difficult for your clan to justify supporting you.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

10 Oct 2012, 7:06 pm

eric76 wrote:
The polar bears will survive no matter what those who wish to panic everyone wants them to believe.

No. They will be put to justice. Soulless cold-blooded killers they are.

Image



Hopper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Aug 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,920
Location: The outskirts

10 Oct 2012, 7:09 pm

Anyway, libertarians. Right wing ones, I mean. This problem with The State (in theory, democratically accountable), but no concern at all with the private (individual or corporate) amassing of power. I mean, what's that all about?

China Mieville wrote:
“libertarianism,” that peculiarly American philosophy of venal petty-bourgeois dissidence.

Libertarianism is by no means a unified movement. As many of its advocates proudly stress, it comprises a taxonomy of bickering branches–minarchists, objectivists, paleo- and neolibertarians, agorists, et various al.–just like a real social theory. Claiming a lineage with post-Enlightenment classical liberalism, as well as in some cases with the resoundingly portentous blatherings of Ayn Rand, all of its variants are characterized, to differing degrees, by fervent, even cultish, faith in what is quaintly termed the “free” market, and extreme antipathy to that vaguely conceived bogeyman, “the state,” with its regulatory and fiscal powers.

Above all, they recast their most banal avarice – the disinclination to pay tax – as a principled blow for political freedom.

...

Libertarianism is not a ruling-class theory. It may be indulged, certainly, for the useful ideas it can throw up, and its prophets have at times influenced dominant ideologies–witness the cack-handed depredations of the “Chicago Boys” in Chile after Allende’s bloody overthrow. But untempered by the realpolitik of Reaganism and Thatcherism, the anti-statism of “pure” libertarianism is worse than useless to the ruling class.

Big capital will support tax-lowering measures, of course, but it does not need to piss and moan about taxes with the tedious relentlessness of the libertarian. Big capital, with its ranks of accountant-Houdinis, just gets on with not paying it. And why hate a state that pays so well? Big capital is big, after all, not only because of the generous contracts its state obligingly hands it, but because of the gun-ships with which its state opens up markets for it.

Libertarianism, by contrast, is a theory of those who find it hard to avoid their taxes, who are too small, incompetent or insufficiently connected to win Iraq-reconstruction contracts, or otherwise chow at the state trough. In its maundering about a mythical ideal-type capitalism, libertarianism betrays its fear of actually existing capitalism, at which it cannot quite succeed. It is a philosophy of capitalist inadequacy.

Libertarianism’s nemesis, “the state,” is no less abstract. This is particularly so for libertarianism’s seasteading wing, for whom the political entity “the state” is bizarrely geographically literalized. Their intent is to slip the surly bonds of earth not up but sideways, beyond littoral borders. It is a lunatic syllogism: “I dislike the state: The state is made of land: Therefore I dislike the land.”


From: http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/332 ... g_utopias/



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

10 Oct 2012, 7:13 pm

WHEN POLAR BEARS ATTACK...



Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,398
Location: Houston, Texas

10 Oct 2012, 8:57 pm

You have nothing to worry about (from a fellow Libertarian).


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!


Kvornan
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 3 Oct 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 245
Location: Thailand

11 Oct 2012, 12:06 pm

Have no fear. I'm also Libertarian.

Keanu Reeves (Neo from The Matrix Trilogy) & Christina Ricci(Wednesday from Addams Family) are also Libertarian..



AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

11 Oct 2012, 12:27 pm

Well, looks like the OP's banned but I'll say it for the sake of it. Why cater to arrogant dips**ts who hate you just for having different views?



outofplace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jun 2012
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,771
Location: In A State of Quantum Flux

11 Oct 2012, 1:44 pm

I'm a libertarian in many respects, but I still see the need for a minimal number of government programs and policies to protect those who can't care for themselves due to disability. Likewise, I also support the minimum wage since it is one of the few things that keeps us from having shantytowns like most of the countries that produce our consumer products have. Pure Libertarianism, like pure Marxism, looks wonderful on paper. However, when you look at what would actually happen were you to enact it in it's totality, you start to see it's flaws.


_________________
Uncertain of diagnosis, either ADHD or Aspergers.
Aspie quiz: 143/200 AS, 81/200 NT; AQ 43; "eyes" 17/39, EQ/SQ 21/51 BAPQ: Autistic/BAP- You scored 92 aloof, 111 rigid and 103 pragmatic


Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

11 Oct 2012, 1:58 pm

Hopper wrote:
Anyway, libertarians. Right wing ones, I mean. This problem with The State (in theory, democratically accountable), but no concern at all with the private (individual or corporate) amassing of power. I mean, what's that all about?


If you look at what libertarians actually stress, many are as much an enemy of corporatism (which is what we really have now, not capitalism). They believe that everyone should have the right to make a success of things, and that there should be some safeguards so that the strong don't crush the weak. A level playing field, if you like.

I consider myself a libertarian, but hardline, doctrinaire libertarianism repulses me.



outofplace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jun 2012
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,771
Location: In A State of Quantum Flux

11 Oct 2012, 2:04 pm

Tequila wrote:
Hopper wrote:
Anyway, libertarians. Right wing ones, I mean. This problem with The State (in theory, democratically accountable), but no concern at all with the private (individual or corporate) amassing of power. I mean, what's that all about?


If you look at what libertarians actually stress, many are as much an enemy of corporatism (which is what we really have now, not capitalism). They believe that everyone should have the right to make a success of things, and that there should be some safeguards so that the strong don't crush the weak. A level playing field, if you like.

I consider myself a libertarian, but hardline, doctrinaire libertarianism repulses me.


Agreed. I think it can just be stated that all powerful entities are repressive by their very nature and should never be trusted.


_________________
Uncertain of diagnosis, either ADHD or Aspergers.
Aspie quiz: 143/200 AS, 81/200 NT; AQ 43; "eyes" 17/39, EQ/SQ 21/51 BAPQ: Autistic/BAP- You scored 92 aloof, 111 rigid and 103 pragmatic


Hopper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Aug 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,920
Location: The outskirts

11 Oct 2012, 2:09 pm

Capitalism is corporatism. That's how it looks in practise. Read the thing I linked to.

As Mr Mieville noted, there are a lot of sects within it, as there are in any political ideology. But generally they want a minimal state, only there to enforce contracts and property rights. So when money (and thus power) accrues to an indiviual, one is at their whim. The strong can crush the weak as they please. Darwin proved it, donchaknow.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

11 Oct 2012, 6:54 pm

Hopper wrote:
Anyway, libertarians. Right wing ones, I mean. This problem with The State (in theory, democratically accountable), but no concern at all with the private (individual or corporate) amassing of power. I mean, what's that all about?

China Mieville wrote:
“libertarianism,” that peculiarly American philosophy of venal petty-bourgeois dissidence.

Libertarianism is by no means a unified movement. As many of its advocates proudly stress, it comprises a taxonomy of bickering branches–minarchists, objectivists, paleo- and neolibertarians, agorists, et various al.–just like a real social theory. Claiming a lineage with post-Enlightenment classical liberalism, as well as in some cases with the resoundingly portentous blatherings of Ayn Rand, all of its variants are characterized, to differing degrees, by fervent, even cultish, faith in what is quaintly termed the “free” market, and extreme antipathy to that vaguely conceived bogeyman, “the state,” with its regulatory and fiscal powers.

Above all, they recast their most banal avarice – the disinclination to pay tax – as a principled blow for political freedom.

...

Libertarianism is not a ruling-class theory. It may be indulged, certainly, for the useful ideas it can throw up, and its prophets have at times influenced dominant ideologies–witness the cack-handed depredations of the “Chicago Boys” in Chile after Allende’s bloody overthrow. But untempered by the realpolitik of Reaganism and Thatcherism, the anti-statism of “pure” libertarianism is worse than useless to the ruling class.

Big capital will support tax-lowering measures, of course, but it does not need to piss and moan about taxes with the tedious relentlessness of the libertarian. Big capital, with its ranks of accountant-Houdinis, just gets on with not paying it. And why hate a state that pays so well? Big capital is big, after all, not only because of the generous contracts its state obligingly hands it, but because of the gun-ships with which its state opens up markets for it.

Libertarianism, by contrast, is a theory of those who find it hard to avoid their taxes, who are too small, incompetent or insufficiently connected to win Iraq-reconstruction contracts, or otherwise chow at the state trough. In its maundering about a mythical ideal-type capitalism, libertarianism betrays its fear of actually existing capitalism, at which it cannot quite succeed. It is a philosophy of capitalist inadequacy.

Libertarianism’s nemesis, “the state,” is no less abstract. This is particularly so for libertarianism’s seasteading wing, for whom the political entity “the state” is bizarrely geographically literalized. Their intent is to slip the surly bonds of earth not up but sideways, beyond littoral borders. It is a lunatic syllogism: “I dislike the state: The state is made of land: Therefore I dislike the land.”


From: http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/332 ... g_utopias/


That wasn't insufferable to read at all. Perhaps the author should read a little less Marx and focus more on actually having a point instead of trying to come off as an English major. Maybe then his rambling rebuke of 'libertarianism' or weird tangent on seasteading would make sense. If you actually want a rebuttal to the blog the read the comments, I'm sure they've covered it quite well.



AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

12 Oct 2012, 11:12 pm

I swing along the middle between democrat and republican I guess that makes me libratarian.


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


DancingDanny
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 351

12 Oct 2012, 11:59 pm

Jacoby wrote:
Hopper wrote:
Anyway, libertarians. Right wing ones, I mean. This problem with The State (in theory, democratically accountable), but no concern at all with the private (individual or corporate) amassing of power. I mean, what's that all about?

China Mieville wrote:
“libertarianism,” that peculiarly American philosophy of venal petty-bourgeois dissidence.

Libertarianism is by no means a unified movement. As many of its advocates proudly stress, it comprises a taxonomy of bickering branches–minarchists, objectivists, paleo- and neolibertarians, agorists, et various al.–just like a real social theory. Claiming a lineage with post-Enlightenment classical liberalism, as well as in some cases with the resoundingly portentous blatherings of Ayn Rand, all of its variants are characterized, to differing degrees, by fervent, even cultish, faith in what is quaintly termed the “free” market, and extreme antipathy to that vaguely conceived bogeyman, “the state,” with its regulatory and fiscal powers.

Above all, they recast their most banal avarice – the disinclination to pay tax – as a principled blow for political freedom.

...

Libertarianism is not a ruling-class theory. It may be indulged, certainly, for the useful ideas it can throw up, and its prophets have at times influenced dominant ideologies–witness the cack-handed depredations of the “Chicago Boys” in Chile after Allende’s bloody overthrow. But untempered by the realpolitik of Reaganism and Thatcherism, the anti-statism of “pure” libertarianism is worse than useless to the ruling class.

Big capital will support tax-lowering measures, of course, but it does not need to piss and moan about taxes with the tedious relentlessness of the libertarian. Big capital, with its ranks of accountant-Houdinis, just gets on with not paying it. And why hate a state that pays so well? Big capital is big, after all, not only because of the generous contracts its state obligingly hands it, but because of the gun-ships with which its state opens up markets for it.

Libertarianism, by contrast, is a theory of those who find it hard to avoid their taxes, who are too small, incompetent or insufficiently connected to win Iraq-reconstruction contracts, or otherwise chow at the state trough. In its maundering about a mythical ideal-type capitalism, libertarianism betrays its fear of actually existing capitalism, at which it cannot quite succeed. It is a philosophy of capitalist inadequacy.

Libertarianism’s nemesis, “the state,” is no less abstract. This is particularly so for libertarianism’s seasteading wing, for whom the political entity “the state” is bizarrely geographically literalized. Their intent is to slip the surly bonds of earth not up but sideways, beyond littoral borders. It is a lunatic syllogism: “I dislike the state: The state is made of land: Therefore I dislike the land.”


From: http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/332 ... g_utopias/


That wasn't insufferable to read at all. Perhaps the author should read a little less Marx and focus more on actually having a point instead of trying to come off as an English major. Maybe then his rambling rebuke of 'libertarianism' or weird tangent on seasteading would make sense. If you actually want a rebuttal to the blog the read the comments, I'm sure they've covered it quite well.


Lol I went to the link and there's only one comment and it says true that.