Where is Ron Paul? At the 30th Anniversary of Mises Institute!

[noneedtoaggress]

Neither. I fully support Mises.


Why don't you?

Because I recognize that human beings are fallible.

But the truth is that the purpose of you asking that question was to manipulate people's perception of me rather than to get an honest answer. I gave one anyway.


Isn't it funny how Trav continues to ignore the criticism of him using that Mises quote and continues to pretend it's criticizing something it's not and just simply repeats the quote as if it agreed with him?

 

[Travlyr]

Because I recognize that human beings are fallible.

Then why do you promote Utopia?

But the truth is that the purpose of you asking that question was to manipulate people's perception of me rather than to get an honest answer.

Right. I was defending myself against your false claims about me. Your work to discredit me fails because I defend myself. I understand and stand up for my rights.

I gave one anyway.

Yeah you did. Everybody has an opinion. Very few people will stand up for their rights or argue the merits of the issue. It is much easier to discredit the messenger than discredit the message.

 

[Travlyr]

Isn't it funny how Trav continues to ignore the criticism of him using that Mises quote while pretending it's criticizing something it's not and simply repeats the quote as if it agreed with his point?

See folks. The criticism of him. My message is not the target... I am the target. Discredit the messenger and discredit the message.

Just like they did to Ron Paul. Ron Paul is a kook, so his message is kooky. NO, Ron Paul has a positive message to get out.

I quoted Mises directly, in context, with intent to promote the message of Ludwig von Mises not to degrade him.

A degrading message, like the aggressive "noneedtoaggress" persists in promoting is deceitful and disingenuous.

 

[archangel689]

This is where I ask you folks to grow up. Grow some balls.

Here's what I think: you need to kill the equivocation fallacy. Now.

Ludwig von Mises:

The anarchists contend that a social order in which nobody enjoys privileges at the expense of his fellow-citizens could exist without any compulsion and coercion for the prevention of action detrimental to society. Such an ideal society could do without state and government, i.e., without a police force, the social apparatus of coercion and compulsion.

In the above quotation, he unambiguously and unequivocally states that his conception of anarchy implies a society "without a police force" and "without any compulsion and coercion". And anarchocapitalism implies a society with a police force and with compulsion and coercion. Again, Mises never even addressed any doctrine which resembles anarchocapitalism in print.

 

[Travlyr]

Here's what I think: you need to kill the equivocation fallacy. Now.

Ludwig von Mises:


In the above quotation, he unambiguously and unequivocally states that his conception of anarchy implies a society "without a police force" and "without any compulsion and coercion". And anarchocapitalism implies a society with a police force and with compulsion and coercion. Again, Mises never even addressed any doctrine which resembles anarchocapitalism in print.

Police forces are not compatible with liberty.

 

[archangel689]

Police forces are not compatible with liberty.

Not the topic at hand. You have just been shown that your quotations do not address anarchocapitalism. You have been shown to be equivocating.

 

[noneedtoaggress]

Then why do you promote Utopia?

Well, like Ron Paul I use the constitution as a rhetorical device to promote free markets and liberty. It's a stepping stone. I don't actually believe that the constitution can hold back the state, though, obviously so I only promote Utopia depending on the audience.

Right. I was defending myself against your false claims about me. Your work to discredit me fails because I defend myself. I understand and stand up for my rights.

No you were not defending yourself against false claims. If that were true you would have attempted to clarify why you are in fact *not* conflating the principles in the link.

You were attempting to defend yourself against accurate claims, which were indefensible, so you resorted to calling my "Mises Cred" into question.

Yeah you did. Everybody has an opinion. Very few people will stand up for their rights or argue the merits of the issue. It is much easier to discredit the messenger than discredit the message.

Yeah you do this all the time. You just did it by ignoring the crux of the argument of that quote you keep posting and attempting to discredit Hoppe. You attempted to challenge my "loyalty" to Moises as if he were some sort of infallible prophet sent by the God-State itself to bring us to the Land of Raw Milk & Sound Money. Remember when you challenged my financial support of the Ron Paul campaign as if that would undermine my arguments? More than once?

I don't have to discredit you, you discredit yourself, Trav.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Some of us understand the reason that the Post Office, and Post Roads, were installed in the Constitution. Do you? While I disagree with the Post Office, it made sense to the founders because they looked at government as a necessary good that included anyone who was going to approach someone's property daily should be accountable to elected officials who could be taken out of office if they betrayed the people. It was all about accountability to them.

The monopoly that should be focused on, if people want to live free, is monopoly money. End the monopoly money and the people win their freedom.

To fleece the public. Same as any other government "enterprise".

 

[archangel689]

Then why do you promote Utopia?

A utopia is an ideally perfect society, not merely a society that has never existed. The man who puts all the guns and all the decision-making power into the hands of a coercive central governing body and then says, ‘Limit yourself’; it is he who is truly the impractical utopian.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

A utopia is an ideally perfect society, not merely a society that has never existed. The man who puts all the guns and all the decision-making power into the hands of a coercive central governing body and then says, ‘Limit yourself’; it is he who is truly the impractical utopian.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to archangel689 again. I'll +rep you later if I can.

 

[Travlyr]

IPSE DIXIT.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipse_dixit

Another false assertion. Police did not come onto the scene in America until around the 1830s or so. There were very minimal then. They did not have much influence on society until around the time of the Civil War. Their influence waned until around the time the counterfeiters took over America in 1913. The CIA, FBI, IRS, State Police and the ruling class took over in America when the counterfeiters took over. In 1933, when gold was made illegal to own privately, the Police State grew out of proportion. They have continued to grow unabated, because they are funded with an unlimited money supply, counterfeiters buy them, until such time that they claim the right to judge, jury, and executioner. They even claim the right to "kill lists" of citizens. John Locke called them an illegitimate government. I agree.

"The aim of such a legitimate government is to preserve, so far as possible, the rights to life, liberty, health and property of its citizens, and to prosecute and punish those of its citizens who violate the rights of others and to pursue the public good even where this may conflict with the rights of individuals. In doing this it provides something unavailable in the state of nature, an impartial judge to determine the severity of the crime, and to set a punishment proportionate to the crime. This is one of the main reasons why civil society is an improvement on the state of nature. An illegitimate government will fail to protect the rights to life, liberty, health and property of its subjects, and in the worst cases, such an illegitimate government will claim to be able to violate the rights of its subjects, that is it will claim to have despotic power over its subjects." - John Locke

 

[Travlyr]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to archangel689 again. I'll +rep you later if I can.

No rebuttal or substance added to the discussion. Only Rah... Rah... Shish Boom Bah! Gooooooo... Anarchists! Rah.. Rah.

 

[archangel689]

The crap about police has nothing to do with your equivocation. My only objective was to show that your quotations were not pertaining to anarchocapitalism and that I have done.

 

[Travlyr]

To fleece the public. Same as any other government "enterprise".

Again, Mises,

We call the social apparatus of compulsion and coercion that induces people to abide by the rules of life in society, the state; the rules according to which the state proceeds, law; and the organs charged with the responsibility of administering the apparatus of compulsion, government.

So is it your opinion that Mises thought government was installed to fleece the people?

 

[Travlyr]

The crap about police has nothing to do with your equivocation. My only objective was to show that your quotations were not pertaining to anarchocapitalism and that I have done.

Again Mises,

Anarchism misunderstands the real nature of man. It would be practicable only in a world of angels and saints.

Standing armies are not compatible with liberty.

 

[Travlyr]

Well, like Ron Paul I use the constitution as a rhetorical device to promote free markets and liberty. It's a stepping stone. I don't actually believe that the constitution can hold back the state, though, obviously so I only promote Utopia depending on the audience.



No you were not defending yourself against false claims. If that were true you would have attempted to clarify why you are in fact *not* conflating the principles in the link.

You were attempting to defend yourself against accurate claims, which were indefensible, so you resorted to calling my "Mises Cred" into question.



Yeah you do this all the time. You just did it by ignoring the crux of the argument of that quote you keep posting and attempting to discredit Hoppe. You attempted to challenge my "loyalty" to Moises as if he were some sort of infallible prophet sent by the God-State itself to bring us to the Land of Raw Milk & Sound Money. Remember when you challenged my financial support of the Ron Paul campaign as if that would undermine my arguments? More than once?

I don't have to discredit you, you discredit yourself, Trav.

You discredit yourself aggressive man. You claim there is noneedtoaggress yet you are quite aggressive. That is an oxymoron. If there was sincerely no need to aggress, then you would not be online doing your damnest to discredit me, Ron Paul, and Ludwig von Mises.

 

[noneedtoaggress]

Again Mises,


Standing armies are not compatible with liberty.

Trav, how does Mises' critique of a pacifistic principle in any way support your assertion about standing armies (which is an assertion I would agree with)?

 

[archangel689]

"ANARCHISM" DOES NOT MEAN ANARCHOCAPITALISM.
"ANARCHISM" DOES NOT MEAN ANARCHOCAPITALISM.
"ANARCHISM" DOES NOT MEAN ANARCHOCAPITALISM.

Do you see an emerging pattern here? Are you really that stupid as to not get this?

 

[Travlyr]

"ANARCHISM" DOES NOT MEAN ANARCHOCAPITALISM.
"ANARCHISM" DOES NOT MEAN ANARCHOCAPITALISM.
"ANARCHISM" DOES NOT MEAN ANARCHOCAPITALISM.

Do you see an emerging pattern here?

Tell that to the third graders!

 

[noneedtoaggress]

You discredit yourself aggressive man. You claim there is noneedtoaggress yet you are quite aggressive. That is an oxymoron.

Oxymoron.

If there was sincerely no need to aggress, then you would not be online doing your damnest to discredit me, Ron Paul, and Ludwig von Mises.

such an imaginative world you weave!