Ideas & Thoughts

Should I Run?

  • No

    Votes: 28 66.7%
  • Yes

    Votes: 8 19.0%
  • Maybe

    Votes: 5 11.9%
  • No Opinion

    Votes: 1 2.4%

  • Total voters
    42
Ehhhh, I'd call Kade a liberal, but not a social liberal. I wouldn't mind living in Kade's ideal world too much.

He is a modern liberal. Which is a social liberal. He doesn't believe in property rights.
 
He is a modern liberal. Which is a social liberal. He doesn't believe in property rights.

I don't believe in property rights, but I'm not a socialist. Kade doesn't want the same type of wealth redistribution going on that social liberals do. He wants safety for the weak and doesn't believe the strong would provide it, but he's more for setting standards... regulation. I wouldn't mind a regulated society so much. I don't think Kade approves of the kind of gross wealth redistribution in something like universal healthcare. I might be wrong?
 
I don't believe in property rights, but I'm not a socialist.

Private ownership of the means of production. Public ownership of the means of production. No-one is allowed ownership of the means of production. (Public again)

Which is it? Do you not own your body? Is it not your property? :rolleyes:

ONE more question: So you don't get upset when someone steals something of yours? :D
 
Last edited:
All is well Conza, this means you can enslave Kludge....hurry up and homestead him.

:D

Cowlesy you got ripped off. You should never have paid Kludge for that computer... you should have simply come over and taken it.

You're all talk Kludge. Fraaaaaud :D
 
Last edited:
Private ownership of the means of production. Public ownership of the means of production. No-one is allowed ownership of the means of production. (Public again)

Which is it? Do you not own your body? Is it not your property? :rolleyes:

ONE more question: So you don't get upset when someone steals something of yours? :D

Ownership cannot be proven (yeah, yeah, sorry... imperative). We could have the same nihilist/absurdist vs. absolutist argument, if you want.... I want a certain amount of property I believe I've earned, but if you have a gun, I won't be protesting too much.

As far as getting upset, I don't feel entitled to property. I'd probably dislike you if your goal were, in my perception, to worsen my "standard of living". I wouldn't aggress against you if you chose to do that, though.

:D

Cowlesy you got ripped off. You should never have paid Kludge for that computer... you should have simply come over and taken it.

You're all talk Kludge. :D

You're assuming I'd continue to work as a slave. Cowlesy could have stolen the computer, but I wouldn't have built another. When we have an honest transaction, we gain mutual trust. As we trust each other more, we're willing to... trust the other person with more responsibility.

Your roth-cap/minarchist government tries to entitle people to property. Property claims are valid only as long as it is respected.
 
Last edited:
Ownership cannot be proven (yeah, yeah, sorry... imperative). We could have the same nihilist/absurdist vs. absolutist argument, if you want.... I want a certain amount of property I believe I've earned, but if you have a gun, I won't be protesting too much.

As far as getting upset, I don't feel entitled to property. I'd probably dislike you if your goal were, in my perception, to worsen my "standard of living". I wouldn't aggress against you if you chose to do that, though.



You're assuming I'd continue to work as a slave. Cowlesy could have stolen the computer, but I wouldn't have built another. When we have an honest transaction, we gain mutual trust. As we trust each other more, we're willing to... trust the other person with more responsibility.

Your roth-cap/minarchist government tries to entitle people to property. Property claims are valid only as long as it is respected.
If someone doesn't protest or defend their right to life, does that mean there isn't a right to life?
 
If someone doesn't protest or defend their right to life, does that mean there isn't a right to life?

I think Kludge believes this, but i think he's dreadfully wrong.

Your right to freedom of speech doesn't come through your willingness to defend that right, nor is it granted to you. The reason you have freedom of speech is because you have a flappy piece of meat in your mouth that makes unique sounds when used in correlation with your vibrating neck muscles. That is where your RIGHT to freedom of speech comes from. The fact that you have a tongue, at all, gives you the RIGHT to use it.

Under the same logic, the fact that you have a brain gives you the RIGHT to freedom of thought, the fact that you have control an organic body gives you the RIGHT of freedom of association, the fact that you have a life gives you the RIGHT to your life!

Rights are that which humans are granted by their creator and they most definitely exist!
 
For your own sake I'm going to have to say No.

While it would be a great learning experience your senior year and you would probably enjoy the act of campaigning (or hate it), it would impede your future at this juncture in your life.

You're going into your senior year of High School. This is usually the time when you're picking out your college. You don't want to have to narrow down your choices based upon the fact that next year you'll be stuck in your home town on some stupid school board. Especially your freshman year in college where it's hard enough adjusting.

I'd say that the best thing you can do is find the most qualified person you know for the position and urge them to run, or find someone who is already interested in running and give them your full on support. Become someone's campaign manager and help them through the campaign process.

Seriously, if someone's going to vote the way you want them to vote when they're in office, why would you need to be the one doing the voting. Other than that you might want some sort of popularity or fame.

Are you your high school class president? Why did you not run for that?

Seriously...go to college, go to your first keg party (only if you're 21...wouldn't want you to do anything illegal...hi Homeland Security).

As for political science as a major...might as well take voodoo science as a major.

Try to take a major where your grades aren't based on subjective answers that rely on being in good with the teacher. Take something that has tests where there is only one answer to the question (and that answer is always the answer). I'd suggest a real science such as an engineering degree or computer degree that could actually have value in the real world and pay off in the long run, but you might be set on the political thing. At least take a major that revolves around business or management. That would translate into a real world of politics better than listening to how white men are the evil of America and how corporations are responsible for all the bad in the world today. Any political science major who supports liberty merely spends his time arguing with his teachers, getting nothing out of the course but the useless self praise for setting a teacher straight.
 
I've been thinking that I want to run for elected office during my senior year in high school. I do have plans to go to college and study political science. I just wanted to get your thoughts.

I invite you to visit my website at www.asherheimermann.com to learn more about me and my involvement in politics. I do consider myself to be a Democrat/Independent. I do support some Republican like Ron Paul and Scott Walker.

What does it mean to you to be a Democrat/Independent?
 
There has never really been a more worthless degree.

Save yourself $100,000 in debt... and just click this website... www.mises.org

See: several months later after reading, learning, digesting all the stuff on political economy, philosophy, Austrian Economics etc.

You now know more than your Marxist / Leninist lecturer about the social sciences... and to think he doesn't even know what epistemology means! LMAO!

That's quite a value judgement you are making. Who are you judge what someone else considers valuable or doesn't consider valuable?
 
You've already poisoned that question.
Well, if you mean I poisoned it by referring to it as a right to life in the first part of the sentence, probably. But it wasn't intentional, since what I'm trying to see is whether you are applying the reasoning across the board, which would mean you don't believe in rights at all.
 
Bill Richardson, raised money for Obama, and worships the police state. You'll do just fine in government. Might I suggest the communist party?
 
Back
Top