When RPF's was born...

[Dr.3D]

Maybe we should all take a day and examine our navels.

I was already doing that when I found out it's secretly connected to another part of my body.

 

[otherone]

And I'm unconvinced that the alt-right emerged from the liberty movement.

From the paleos (who think they're libertarians).

 

[Jesse James]

And I'm unconvinced that the alt-right emerged from the liberty movement.

True, but I will admit that a lot of former Paul supporters are now alt right.

 

[Suzanimal]

I was already doing that when I found out it's secretly connected to another part of my body.

Innie bellybutton - I'm not sure what it's connected to but when I clean it (it smells like an odd combination of coconut oil and stank), I feel my tummy wiggle. Could be why I like the What's for dinner thread.

 

[Dr.3D]

Innie bellybutton - I'm not sure what it's connected to but when I clean it (it smells like an odd combination of coconut oil and stank), I feel my tummy wiggle. Could be why I like the What's for dinner thread.

Gently scratch it with your fingernail.

 

[Danke]

Innie bellybutton - I'm not sure what it's connected to but when I clean it (it smells like an odd combination of coconut oil and stank), I feel my tummy wiggle.

 

[Unknownuser]

And I'm unconvinced that the alt-right emerged from the liberty movement.

I don't believe the alt right emerged from the liberty movement but it sure distracted everyone didn't it? Perhaps it has served its purpose.

 

[PierzStyx]

The anarchists took over, drove out most of the libertarians, gradually converted the dominant philosophy from the one espoused by Ron Paul to something very very very very different. And now the place is a running joke with zero real-world relevance except to document the decline and fall of the liberty movement in the face of leadership abdication.

Judging by your Constitution thread, you don't actually understand Dr. Paul's political positions. He is a libertarian and he doesn't have any problems with anarchists.

The admins can simply go through my ignore list if they want to see who needs to be removed to restore a wisp of credibility.

Those setting themselves up as the single one who knows everything are the ones usually so ignorant they don't understand hwo badly wrong they are. It si called the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Look it up.

I used to refer people to this site all the time; but in its present condition I would be far too embarrassed to do so.

Well if those you referred were like you, bring'em on. Maybe they're opening to learning more instead of imposing their worldview on others.

 

[PierzStyx]

And I'm unconvinced that the alt-right emerged from the liberty movement.

it didn't. The Alt. Left has been around forever. The Turner Diaries were published in 1978.

 

[PierzStyx]

Then you'd be for banning Ron Paul himself. Which is no surprise to see on this forum given how radically different it has become from his vision.



He specifically calls out the anarchists for being unrealistic, that their ideas require human beings to be perfect, which is something that will never happen. It's the exact same argument that I've been consistently making here all these years... I suppose it's because I'm one of the few who actually listened to him?

Now I'm just questioning if you actually listened to that video at all. He said that teh ultimate goal is self-government and that his goal was to always be moving in that direction.

He didn't dismissed anarchism. He in fact said that we are moving more and more to the point of when governments would be irrelevant. We just are there yet, but we are moving that direction.

In other words, exactly what Jesse James said.

You need to stop putting your words and your beliefs into Ron Paul's mouth. You only make yourself look more and more foolish when you do.

 

[Pericles]

The "anarchists" don't own this forum. The "anarchists" didn't drive anyone out.
What happened is, you and yours can't respond to the arguments put forth by "anarchists".
If you believe in the truth of your position, then argue for it. Present the truth of your position, deal with rebuttals, and if your position is better, then your position will become the dominant position here.

If you just bitch about how things aren't the way they used to be, and refuse to examine the facts on the ground, then you're gonna lose. That's the way life works. That's what we market-oriented folks are supposed to be advocating. You compete, or you lose. There is a marketplace of ideas here, and your ideas aren't finding buyers. It's not the "anarchists" job to be silent so your position looks better.

In order for that to happen - particularly the rebuttal part - you're going to have to LISTEN. And since your post insinuates that you don't believe "anarchists" are libertarians, and since you believe "anarchists" believe something very very very very (four verys) different from Ron Paul's position, that tells me you have a lot to improve on the listening front.

Members such as myself did debate anarchists. Pointing out inconsistencies in Rothbard's writings is a sure way to drive them off because many of them could not reason out the consequences of those contradicting ideas.

 

[ProBlue33]

This place was happening in 2008 & 2012, the purity people forced it into irrelevance in 2016, Brian was in at tough spot either way.
Had he allowed the site to evolve organically things might have been different. This is not the only site either, 2016 really polarized both websites and posters. Actually Reddit seems to me to be the most relevant website taking the true pulse of reality now.

 

[undergroundrr]

I check into /r/Libertarian/ every so often. It definitely resonates better with my line of thinking than RPF does these days. Is there anywhere else a libertarian can go that's not dominated by 5 or 6 heavy-posting trump freaks?

 

[fisharmor]

Members such as myself did debate anarchists. Pointing out inconsistencies in Rothbard's writings is a sure way to drive them off because many of them could not reason out the consequences of those contradicting ideas.

I would like to believe you. Do you remember threads, so I can verify?

Also, I've only read The Case Agasint The Fed.So Rothbard doesn't figure very prominently in my thought process. Which is probably why I missed your no-doubt elegantly savage ruination of the stateless mindset.

 

[Pericles]

I would like to believe you. Do you remember threads, so I can verify?

Also, I've only read The Case Agasint The Fed.So Rothbard doesn't figure very prominently in my thought process. Which is probably why I missed your no-doubt elegantly savage ruination of the stateless mindset.

Here is one I could find http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...-s-Reputation-His-Property&highlight=Pericles

The original thread had some good material and another at about the same time.

 

[The Gold Standard]

Here is one I could find http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...-s-Reputation-His-Property&highlight=Pericles

The original thread had some good material and another at about the same time.

Looks like a good conversation. I didn't read the whole thread, but disagreeing with how Rothbard believed the free market would handle reputations doesn't prove or even suggest that it couldn't handle the issue. If there was no state, there would still be a system of law which, depending on market preferences, may or may not address it. Or you would just have a high demand for good information on people and companies, which someone would surely cash in on satisfying.

But back to the point, if debates like that chased away the anarchists, then how is it that people are crying that it was the anarchists chased away the statists?

 

[Pericles]

Looks like a good conversation. I didn't read the whole thread, but disagreeing with how Rothbard believed the free market would handle reputations doesn't prove or even suggest that it couldn't handle the issue. If there was no state, there would still be a system of law which, depending on market preferences, may or may not address it. Or you would just have a high demand for good information on people and companies, which someone would surely cash in on satisfying. But back to the point, if debates like that chased away the anarchists, then how is it that people are crying that it was the anarchists chased away the statists?

That thread had only part of the original conversation where I quoted two Rothbard articles - one about the value of reputation tending to make contracts and transactions self enforcing contradicted by another Rothbard article in which he says he assumes everyone lies, and so he pays no attention to reputation .... The real fun thread was on voluntaryism in which the question is when someone withdraws consent to the rules by which a society operates, does said person have an incentive to essentially screw over everyone else because there is no redress against someone who does not consent to the arbitration or court process in use. Then the string about hiring security companies and so on. All of that missed the point that if someone withdraws consent, he does not recognize the security company or arbitrator you select. That finally went to the then the security company will force you to appear - which of course if you are involuntary brought into a process with which you did not consent, how is that different from the modern state? Then there was the LOL at anarchists - had some classics in it.

 

[HVACTech]

nice to see you here!! its been awhile , since the dictator kicked you out of DP. (totally not deserved) hope you are well HVAC !!

(As to your answer, the first post was most accurate)

I remember you..
and what I remember. is non-hostile. this place is hostile.
mostly I avoid it anymore.

currently, there is an opportunity to continue to spread the message of Liberty..
we are now "moderate rebels"

LOL! how funny is that!

 

[Anti Federalist]

this place is hostile.
mostly I avoid it anymore.

Yeah, with you creating quite a bit of that hostility...

 

[HVACTech]

I would like to believe you. Do you remember threads, so I can verify?

Also, I've only read The Case Agasint The Fed.So Rothbard doesn't figure very prominently in my thought process. Which is probably why I missed your no-doubt elegantly savage ruination of the stateless mindset.

damn I liked that!

savage ruination of the stateless mindset

after all, why should a mindset have a state.. (of mind) right? when what is truly needed...
is a "stateless mindset"

fishy is one clever sophist!