OFFICIAL: "How Libertarian Are You?" Thread

[wizardwatson]

"Common sense" according to whom? "Civility" based upon whose standards? Yours?

Clearly your idea of "organization" is based in the typical top down, vertically organized hierarchial models that have been used, and have failed miserably, for thousands of years.

When you're dealing with highly complex "systems," such as a "community" made up of thousands of people with vastly divergant ideas and belief systems, "one size fits all" styles of organization simply don't work. All they do is strangle the "system" you're trying to "organize."

I'd suggest you try reading some of Butler Shaffer's books, and perhaps do some serious research into the concept of spontaneous order.

You're never going to be able to shoehorn this lot into your predetermined mold, and any attempt will result in your own frustration, at best.

Snore....

Top-down-straw-man-blah-blah-Decentralized-blah-blah-spontaneous-order-blah-blah-reference-to-yet-another-stupid-book-blah-blah-obligatory-I'm-smarter-than-you-snark-end.


WizardWatson's Official Movement Co-Opter and Destroyer Checklist:
Straw Man? Check
Generalization about decentralization or other mysterious generalization? Check
Reference to posters personal interests in attempt to piggy-back Ron Paul? Check
Posters attempt to put down another and make himself look smart? Check

Thank you anonymous internet poster!

Your originality and uniqueness is unmatched.

 

[CCTelander]

Snore....

Top-down-straw-man-blah-blah-Decentralized-blah-blah-spontaneous-order-blah-blah-reference-to-yet-another-stupid-book-blah-blah-obligatory-I'm-smarter-than-you-snark-end.


WizardWatson's Official Movement Co-Opter and Destroyer Checklist:
Straw Man? Check
Generalization about decentralization or other mysterious generalization? Check
Reference to posters personal interests in attempt to piggy-back Ron Paul? Check
Posters attempt to put down another and make himself look smart? Check

Thank you anonymous internet poster!

Your originality and uniqueness is unmatched.

Clearly reason is wasted on you.

Have a nice day.

 

[osan]

The only morally and logically consistent position is to oppose the existence of government.

But not the existence of governance. If we forsake governance, certain difficulties seem to arise. Properly addressing crime is perhaps the prime example. If John murders Joe, how is justice to be handled? Do we simply allow it to go unaddressed and hope that we are not next on John's list of people to murder? There are practical considerations to take into account. Can pure anarchism address these reasonably and adequately?

One may well be a minarchist, but one must accept the moral and logical inconsistencies inherent in that position.

Could you please outline these?

 

[osan]

I'm not much for labels if only that they are too confining. Regarding the US I'm an anti-federalist. As for myself I'm on the left side of the libertarian spectrum in that I don't view property rights as absolute (I support squatter's rights, for example). I am a strong believer in intellectual property...although I believe it could be supplied by the market. I support a general tariff subject to the rule of uniformity. I also support competing currencies and free banking.

Duckie, could you elaborate on your view that property rights are not absolute? I'm not quite there.

 

[wizardwatson]

Clearly reason is wasted on you.

Have a nice day.

Not at all friend.

I was just trying to point out that you are not communicating properly.

I think its clear from my first three posts that I'm being irreverent, and poking fun at yet another pointless thread.

If you are going to teach me, you have to know something about me, and you could not even discern that I was joking.

I easily discerned however that you were trying to school me. I am not the masses. I do not need education, I need people to start participating in real discussion but they are too busy passing intellectual atta-boys back and forth to each other to pay attention to the real issues.

You are not educating each other, you are doing the opposite. And even if you were, that isn't what the movement should be doing anyway. And this kind of behavior in the forums lies at the root of what has chased away much of the good help.

See, I was joking, but now I feel that you will perceive this as negative.

It's a tough game we're playing. Not enough people see the game for what it truly is.

And nothing is wasted on me, not even your post stating that.

 

[osan]

If human nature is so bad, then why would you trust any man to involuntarily govern over others?

FWAP! Well played. Indeed.

 

[libertybrewcity]

I believe in government, just not much of it!

 

[osan]

thread needs a poll

voluntaryist here

I respectfully disagree, citing the hopelessly failed nature of labels as pointed out by several other posters. What is needed is a discussion of principles and why one adheres to one but not another.

Just my plugged nickel's worth.

 

[nayjevin]

I mean, I like a good analogy as much as the next guy, but comparing what Stalin did to making a BB friendlier and more on topic is a leap only an internet dreamer could come up with.!

The government/forum analogy indeed fails. An online forum is more like a conditional usage rights contract wherein a visitor is allowed posting priveleges with the understanding that the forum will be moderated as outlined in the guidelines.

Additionally, it is helpful to understand the human element, which makes the 'boundaries of order' indeed organic.

One confusion is that, for many reasons, Liberty Forest is a great new name for this forum, but as long as we are responsible for Ron's name, and given the environment (this board's place on the internet, the superficial nature of voters), it must be moderated as though it is Ron Paul Forums.

 

[osan]

Murray Rothard believed that Fractional Reserve Banking (central bank or not), was in and of itself, theft and/or fraud. However, I think he was conflating property rights with contract rights here. http://fringeelements.ning.com/profiles/blogs/austrians-that-dont-have-a

How is it in error to so conflate the two?

 

[Justinjj1]

I consider myself a left-libertarian. This quote about sums it up

By being both anti-authoritarian and anti-corporate monopoly, Left Libertarians present a clean break from right-wing coalition of neo-cons, the Religious Right, and Big Business. In opposing the war, in promoting local control (which many Greens do), in fighting state-sanctioned corporate privilege, and in fighting to protect our civil liberties, the Libertarian Left has far more in common with the Left than with the Right as it is presently identified.

What this does not mean is that I prefer Hillary to Congressman Ron Paul. It does not mean outright partisanship in which liberals are my friends and conservatives my enemies. I still feel a sense of common cause with many on the Right, especially strict Constitutionalists. But historically the Right has been the party of the Establishment, of landed privilege. The Left has been opposed. Libertarianism ultimately belongs on the Left. - James Wilson

 

[wizardwatson]

The government/forum analogy indeed fails. An online forum is more like a conditional usage rights contract wherein a visitor is allowed posting priveleges with the understanding that the forum will be moderated as outlined in the guidelines.

Additionally, it is helpful to understand the human element, which makes the 'boundaries of order' indeed organic.

One confusion is that, for many reasons, Liberty Forest is a great new name for this forum, but as long as we are responsible for Ron's name, and given the environment (this board's place on the internet, the superficial nature of voters), it must be moderated as though it is Ron Paul Forums.

Does anyone remember "TheObamaForum". I think it still exists under another name.

When it first came out it was excellent. Super WIN of hilarity. Everyone on there was united and on topic and managed to convince real Obama supporters that it was authentic.

So what's happening here? Why can't we even generate the cohesiveness that a spoof forum managed to generate? Why can't we talk about real issues and stay focused?

It's great that so many have found a home here, and want to 'discuss', but much of the good help has left. Just saying, there's something going on not only here, but everywhere on the internet, that I think a lot of people are just ignoring because "everyone's" doing it.

Well, I don't like it anymore. I'm trying to figure out a way to short circuit this BS, at least here at RPF. This fakeness we're experiencing only exists because of the internet. We're being creative/imaginative in the wrong way, and it needs to change. The movement has potential but its dying one post at a time around here.

Fight Club analogy:

This is your movement, and its ending one post at a time.

Ha!

Would make a good signature.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

FWAP! Well played. Indeed.

+a zillion

 

[Rothbardian Girl]

I consider myself a left-libertarian. This quote about sums it up

Good post.

 

[Old Ducker]

Duckie, could you elaborate on your view that property rights are not absolute? I'm not quite there.

Use it or lose it, mah bro.

 

[RedStripe]

I consider myself a left-libertarian. This quote about sums it up

Wow. Great quote.

 

[silentshout]

I consider myself a left-libertarian. This quote about sums it up

great quote..I am pretty much right there as well.

 

[clarity]

I am a libertarian-nationalist.

 

[Promontorium]

I like to think, we're all on this road, and we're all going in the same direction, let's for once just walk together for awhile, and accept that every once in awhile someone will stop and say "here's where I belong." not "here's where we all belong." don't begrudge those who stop, and don't begrudge those who keep on going. Certainly, eventually one guy will be left walking alone, and only he knows if he'll ever find what he's looking for.

 

[Sola_Fide]

I am a libertarian-nationalist.

What does THAT mean?