Can Tea Party reconcile libertarianism and social conservatism?

[klamath]

Honestly, the Market for Liberty is like 200 pages. If you are unwilling to even put in a slight bit of effort, that says more about you than me. Moreover, the voluntaryists here elucidate all the tenets of Voluntaryism and yet you still aren't satisfied. You are not seeking answers. What fundamental flaws of human nature are keeping anarchy back, that aren't also flaws of the State?

Seriously though, have you seen the explosive growth of libertarianism because of institutions like LvMI, FEE, FFF, etc.? Ron Paul didn't just magically build a base of millions. They were all ready there, he even acknowledged as such. Anyways, we only need a small fraction for success and I am wondering what the reaction will be when the voluntaryists in NH succeed. Will you be clamoring to join in? People want all the reward and no work. Sorry, but it doesn't work like that.

No all you proved by refusing to hold an honest discusion is prove to me that my problems with anarchy hadn't been solved by the younger generation either but they sure are good about spouting airily the general philosophy. It reminds me of the '70's youths airily talking about communism but any in depth discussion resulted in " Read Mao's little red book and Karl Marx!"

 

[klamath]

You know, I understand where you're coming from and even sympathize with you. But you have to look at the reality of the situation.

What you're asking/demanding is that we either take the whole vloume of literature and condense it down into a Reader's Digest form for you, or simply take you by the hand and spoon feed it to you line by line. The former is a VERY difficult undertaking, and both are extremely time consuming.

What about your own responsibility to educate yourself? You're here, therefore one assumes you make some claim at being a "liberty advocate" of some kind. Don't you feel that you have some personal responsibility to educate yourself?

And, say one or several of us do offer to spoon feed you the information you claim to want? Are you willing to adequately compenste us for the time we spend in doing so? Isn't OUR time of value?

Also, the fact that you have the temerity to criticise others for not investing the time and effort in educating you, while at the same time you pretty much refuse to invest the time and effort it takes to simply read a few books seems more than just a little hypocritical.

We can point you in the right direction. The rest is up to you.

No it don't fly. My discusions were about specific cases and situations not the whole philosophy. I wanted to solve some specific problems about the nuts and bolts. I understand the whole concept but the anarchists cannot answer or discuss specific problems.

 

[CCTelander]

No all you proved by refusing to hold an honest discusion is prove to me that my problems with anarchy hadn't been solved by the younger generation either but they sure are good about spouting airily the general philosophy. It reminds me of the '70's youths airily talking about communism but any in depth discussion resulted in " Read Mao's little red book and Karl Marx!"

Nobody's refused "to hold an honest discussion." You're being disingenuous.

You're also clearly not willing to put any effort in yourself. If you won't even be bothered to read a few books, why should we bother? Seems to me you're just looking for reasons to write anarchy off. Sorry but I don't waste my time "discussing" things with people who enter into the "discussion" with a closed mind.

Either you'll come around later, or you won't. I'll invest my valuable time on those who can at least show a minimal level of reasonableness.

 

[CCTelander]

No it don't fly. My discusions were about specific cases and situations not the whole philosophy. I wanted to solve some specific problems about the nuts and bolts. I understand the whole concept but the anarchists cannot answer or discuss specific problems.

What problems would those be?

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

No all you proved by refusing to hold an honest discusion is prove to me that my problems with anarchy hadn't been solved by the younger generation either but they sure are good about spouting airily the general philosophy. It reminds me of the '70's youths airily talking about communism but any in depth discussion resulted in " Read Mao's little red book and Karl Marx!"

You are obtuse. Your questions have all ready been answered. You are bringing nothing new to the debate whatsoever. Besides, how am I expected to have every single answer to every single question? That is absurd, and if such a thing were possible, well then...central planning wouldn't be so bad would it? Besides, we have answered just about every question imaginable on this forum and the minarchists still ask the same things over and over. It gets a bit tiring, but nonetheless seek and you shall find.

 

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

No it don't fly. My discusions were about specific cases and situations not the whole philosophy. I wanted to solve some specific problems about the nuts and bolts. I understand the whole concept but the anarchists cannot answer or discuss specific problems.

If you want specific in depth answers why not go where most voluntaryists go to discuss things in depth... Mises.com

Are you seriously complaining RPF is not the leading voluntaryist intellectual forum?

 

[CCTelander]

If you want specific in depth answers why not go where most voluntaryists go to discuss things in depth... Mises.com

Are you seriously complaining RPF is not the leading voluntaryist intellectual forum?

That IS rich, isn't it? Considering that even discussing certain aspects of voluntarism can bring out the banhammer around here, what the hell does this guy expect?

 

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

That IS rich, isn't it? Considering that even discussing certain aspects of voluntarism can bring out the banhammer around here, what the hell does this guy expect?

I know.

Did you happen to catch the thread recently where Lilburne created a thread just to engage in a debate between him and that newer user Rettoper on anarchy?

 

[klamath]

Proved exactly what I said. Waste of time.

 

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Proved exactly what I said. Waste of time.

I have a few immigration questions floating around the statists seem incapable of answering. Would you like to help me out to further my constitutional understanding?

 

[CCTelander]

I know.

Did you happen to catch the thread recently where Lilburne created a thread just to engage in a debate between him and that newer user Rettoper on anarchy?

I missed that one. Sounds like it might be a fun read though. Got a link?

 

[Travlyr]

YouTube - Is Limited Government an Oxymoron? | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

At 18:30 -> Mr. Woods addresses a fundamental conundrum for both the state and voluntary societies. I have not studied how a voluntary society would deal with theft of property, but I suspect that it would be a rampant problem.

This human behavior can be observed in young children. Possession is 9/10 of the law. I observed a three year old visiting a friend house and she found a dog's toy that she liked. The three year old claimed ownership of the toy. The dog took it away from her, and she spent the afternoon seeking adamantly to reclaim her possession.

 

[CCTelander]

Proved exactly what I said. Waste of time.

Absolutely. It's almost always a waste of time to try and engage the closed-minded. Let me know when you've decided to open yours a bit, k?

 

[CCTelander]

At 18:30 -> Mr. Woods addresses a fundamental conundrum for both the state and voluntary societies. I have not studied how a voluntary society would deal with theft of property, but I suspect that it would be a rampant problem.

This human behavior can be observed in young children. Possession is 9/10 of the law. I observed a three year old visiting a friend house and she found a dog's toy that she liked. The three year old claimed ownership of the toy. The dog took it away from her, and she spent the afternoon seeking adamantly to reclaim her possession.

I don't have any links handy, but Molyneux has several podcasts and youtubes that deal specifically with this problem.

Theft would, most probably, be a very minor issue. In a society wherein one could work a few hours a week to provide for one's basic needs, the incentives against it FAR outweigh any temptation in favor. Why take the risk inherent in stealing someone else's stuff when it's so easy to just go get your own legitimately?

 

[Travlyr]

I don't have any links handy, but Molyneux has several podcasts and youtubes that deal specifically with this problem.

I'll look into it.

Theft would, most probably, be a very minor issue. In a society wherein one could work a few hours a week to provide for one's basic needs, the incentives against it FAR outweigh any temptation in favor. Why take the risk inherent in stealing someone else's stuff when it's so easy to just go get your own legitimately?

This is what Tom Woods referred to... that human behavior determines that we take the easy route if given a choice. i.e. the government handout is easier than working, etc.

A voluntary society would certainly have to address this dilemma.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I'll look into it.



This is what Tom Woods referred to... that human behavior determines that we take the easy route if given a choice. i.e. the government handout is easier than working, etc.

A voluntary society would certainly have to address this dilemma.

Considering that there have been real world examples of private courts and voluntary systems of governance, I would have to argue, that, that dilemma has all ready been demolished. We even have a good template for a voluntary system of law in todays world -- The Xeer. Even going back to the Anarchist Quakers shows that this argument is patently false. Besides, what have we to lose if this is the case?

That is something I never understood. You pose all these questions, but fail to realize that the current situation, both today and in 1787, or 1797, or 1836 were essentially the same. Instead of there being no institutionalized theft, the graft plunderers were all ready in power, so I don't see how dismantling that power is in any way shape or form disturbing. Isn't it more disturbing to defeat yourself before you even begin, by saying it just is?

There was a wonderful speech by Lew not too long ago that addressed this issue. I'll try and find it, but I can't promise.

So by dismantling the system you stop the easy route. It isn't easy setting up a State in a Stateless society, just ask the UN, US, and Ethiopia about Somalia.

 

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

I missed that one. Sounds like it might be a fun read though. Got a link?

http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/17464.aspx

 

[Number19]

...don't think for a second you will force me into your system.

As long as you leave me in peace and do not initiate force against my secession from the State...

?????????????????????????????

 

[Number19]

I have a few immigration questions floating around the statists seem incapable of answering...

I'm interested in knowing what kind of questions you have. I may or may not have a response, but I often find questions to be more enlightening than extended discourse.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

?????????????????????????????

What are you trying to get at here?