|
tbp posted:Those are somewhat socialist programs yes. Did you mean communism, then? Socialism is quite a bit different.
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 17:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
tbp posted:No I meant socialism. So elements of socialism are workable in your opinion or do you mean to say you disagree with things like social security and medicare?
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
tbp posted:No. No actually he is right, socialism says nothing about actually having the classless society merely that it is an overall goal in a way similar to "liberty" in liberal capitalist republics. You really are specifically referring to communism when you speak of a society (not state) that is classless.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
tbp posted:This is not the case. Ok, why isn't it the case?
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
Well I guess this could be easily resolved by tbp stating what he thinks socialism is, as he has apparently rejected everyone's attempts at an explanation. So what is socialism, tbp?
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
tbp posted:I'll state my opinion on anything I don't mind. Yeah that is fine, care to give your opinion on what socialism is?
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
tbp posted:I didn't confuse it at all. Ok, so would you mind informing us all on your definition of socialism then?
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 22:02
|
|
|
tbp posted:Common control of production, robust redistribution of wealth, of course the core tenants of a decent life provided (healthcare, transportation, food, etc.) by a central organization, a planned economy, any many more but I'm sure you can see where I am going here. So I am assuming you have conceded that it is not necessarily classless which further distinguishes it from communism? Also, on the criteria: Yes, yes but the form varies wildly, not necessarily by a central organization, and market socialism is a thing.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
tbp posted:A quick google search indicates that many definitions of socialism include classlessness. And, should we be returning to my original point, even if that specification removed, I still think it is wildly unlikely we will see any robust socialist states during any of our lifetimes (especially ones that fulfill that criteria and continue to move toward the "ideal" rather than away into deregulation, etc.) Well in a traditional sense classlessness is the goal of left socialism but it doesn't mean that it is necessarily classless. Like I said earlier it is usually considered to be an overarching goal of socialism that the society works to achieve. As far as dangers go literally any social and economic system will have potential dangers, but would you mind elaborating on what specific angers you think are present?
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
RommelMcDonald posted:Can someone please just post more hilarious Rothbard quotes? Maybe the parts where he talks about getting rid of the homeless or selling your babies to child pimps? A right-wing populist program, then, must concentrate on dismantling the crucial existing areas of State and elite rule, and on liberating the average American from the most flagrant and oppressive features of that rule. In short: l. Slash Taxes. All taxes, sales, business, property, etc., but especially the most oppressive politically and personally: the income tax. We must work toward repeal of the income tax and abolition of the IRS. 2. Slash Welfare. Get rid of underclass rule by abolishing the welfare system, or, short of abolition, severely cutting and restricting it. 3. Abolish Racial or Group Privileges. Abolish affirmative action, set aside racial quotas, etc., and point out that the root of such quotas is the entire "civil rights" structure, which tramples on the property rights of every American. 4. Take Back the Streets: Crush Criminals. And by this I mean, of course, not "white collar criminals" or "inside traders" but violent street criminals – robbers, muggers, rapists, murderers. Cops must be unleashed, and allowed to administer instant punishment, subject of course to liability when they are in error. 5. Take Back the Streets: Get Rid of the Bums. Again: unleash the cops to clear the streets of bums and vagrants. Where will they go? Who cares? Hopefully, they will disappear, that is, move from the ranks of the petted and cosseted bum class to the ranks of the productive members of society. 6. Abolish the Fed; Attack the Banksters. Money and banking are recondite issues. But the realities can be made vivid: the Fed is an organized cartel of banksters, who are creating inflation, ripping off the public, destroying the savings of the average American. The hundreds of billions of taxpayer handouts to S&L banksters will be chicken-feed compared to the coming collapse of the commercial banks. 7. America First. A key point, and not meant to be seventh in priority. The American economy is not only in recession; it is stagnating. The average family is worse off now than it was two decades ago. Come home America. Stop supporting bums abroad. Stop all foreign aid, which is aid to banksters and their bonds and their export industries. Stop gloabaloney, and let's solve our problems at home. 8. Defend Family Values. Which means, get the State out of the family, and replace State control with parental control. In the long run, this means ending public schools, and replacing them with private schools. But we must realize that voucher and even tax credit schemes are not, despite Milton Friedman, transitional demands on the path to privatized education; instead, they will make matters worse by fastening government control more totally upon the private schools. Within the sound alternative is decentralization, and back to local, community neighborhood control of the schools. Further: We must reject once and for all the left-libertarian view that all government-operated resources must be cesspools. We must try, short of ultimate privatization, to operate government facilities in a manner most conducive to a business, or to neighborhood control. But that means: that the public schools must allow prayer, and we must abandon the absurd left-atheist interpretation of the First Amendment that "establishment of religion" means not allowing prayer in public schools, or a creche in a schoolyard or a public square at Christmas. We must return to common sense, and original intent, in constitutional interpretation.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2014 12:42
|
|
|
Here at Temujin DRO we offer an impressive array of benefits for our murderous hordes: stolen crops, actual real meat, gold pried from the cold dead hands of our victims, and as many slaves as you can capture. I think this is more than sufficient material reward, but everyone in Temujin DRO knows the real reward of battle is to scatter your enemy, to drive him before you, to see his cities reduced to ashes, to see those who love him shrouded in tears, and to gather into your bosom his wives and daughters.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2014 07:48
|
|
|
Jrode and Mutato, I think this whole exchange is very useful for you. What this tells you is if you just dropped the NAP and admitted to wanting full blown warlords it would not only make your ideology more honest, but also more appealing!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:See? Revengeance difficulty. Temujin DRO operates within the full legal confines of Libertopia. Is our hard earned Purestrain Gold not the same as yours? If the areas we have rightfully taken over were in compliance with their contracts then there would not have been a need to destroy their cities utterly and enslave the entire population, which if I remind you, is a known legal consequence of Libertopia's rule of law and an accepted outcropping of the contract system as argued by Libertopian legal scholars.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
To get away from drunkdriving chat, has anyone noticed that the Commanding Heights doc/book plays it really fast and loose with the facts?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:So...I'm guessing Jrode hasn't come back yet? Give him some time, he has to gear up by selectively omitting the arguments most devastating to his position.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 03:00
|
|
|
I have another question for Jrod to not answer: How do you feel about the Weimar hyperinflation versus the Bruning policies in terms of damage to Weimar Germany? Also how do you feel that the deflationary and economically conservative Bruning policies were essentially enacted by what could be said to be autocratic measures in the Weimar government?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
Sedan, does Valhalla DRO have strict rules regarding issuing of weaponry or do you have a "keep what you kill" policy for more seasoned karls?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 04:18
|
|
|
This is why Hans Hermann Hoppe is the Best and Most Honest libertarian: He fully acknowledges his ideal would be ruled by a multitude of tyrants exercising minute control over the lives of their subjects and would possess the ability to do as they please* to these subjects. *within the limits of the covenant, not that this would realistically mean anything.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:I don't understand how jrod and other libertarians can have this enormous blind spot in their philosophies where they never consider that once a Free (or Freed or whatever the term du jour is) Market is implemented that the biggest companies won't use violence to ensure their position at the top and maintain their monopoly. I understand why on a macro level the philosophy in general ignores this and none of the "great thinkers" talk about, because it completely falls apart once you consider it for more than two seconds, but I don't understand how individuals who are seemingly intelligent don't figure this out for themselves. I know that jrod doesn't think about it because he doesn't actually do any of his own thinking and just regurgitates whatever article he's read but surely there are smarter libertarians out there that also ignore this. Do they understand the problem and just ignore it? I know a libertarian guy who acknowledges this and embraces it, although he argues that the totalitarian level of control that these business entities would exert would be less severe than what the state exerts. Of course this guy also goes on rants about Keynesian economic theory without even knowing what it is, so take that as you will.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Have you ever asked him how he would feel if the United States Government declared itself to be a giant Dispute Resolution Organization and that it would tolerate no other DROs within its jurisdction, which is all of the lands currently considered part of "The United States" Yeah I have, but I am pretty sure he has the mind of a 14 year old because his answer was seriously that he would be a mercenary for them. No, he does not have relevant experience aside from a brief stint as a law enforcement officer in a small town. My point is that I am starting to think that many libertarians have considered the outcome and do not care or find it desirable, especially the newest generation of libertarians and the edgier crop of libertarian "intellectuals" that have appeared. Mister Adequate posted:Well in all fairness, if you're in the upper echelons of a cyberpunk mega-corporation that has destroyed or seriously denuded the state, you probably really do have a lot more freedom than you would if the state was still powerful. It's just that this is not a good thing. Yeah but this guy is not well off so it is an "interesting" opinion to have. As you said, supporting the destruction of the state might be a rational choice for a business elite if you think you could do better in a neo-feudal system, not so much for anyone who is not a business elite.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:This is the basic core of why I'm virulently anti corporatist. In a peaceful society that has common currency, money is literally power and allowing anyone to have wealth several hundred times over is fiercely undemocratic if you believe in any level of "all men are created equal". Yeah I agree, and the emerging trend in libertarian and similar far right thought has been to quietly (or loudly in the case of H.H. Hoppe) dismiss and/or reject democracy, although arguably the seeds of this sentiment were always present in the philosophy. Hayek's position on Pinochet, for example, highlights the internal hostility to democracy that is core to the philosophy and becoming more explicit. AstheWorldWorlds fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Jan 22, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:It is not just libertarians who have articulated the flaws in democracy. Why would you assume that a majority opinion matters in regards to the morality or wisdom of public policy? Instead of defending a majority opinion, why don't you logically and intellectually determine what rights you think the citizens of a society have and what role, if any, there is for the State and for law? If your arguments have merit and can stand up to scrutiny, then why not endeavour to limit the State to those functions that you feel are legitimate while protecting the rights of the people? Yeah it is called a "constitution". Anything else? As others have already argued the Nazi thing is ahistorical garbage, but nice try.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 04:02
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:The U.S. rich don't have mercenaries because they have the state. They don't know the first thing about armed defence either. This is a good point. In the absence of the present state the newly triumphant business elite would be compelled to establish a new government with the same use of violence as its underlying binding force. I do not believe for a second that intelligent libertarians (read: not useful idiots like jrode) and especially those who are also part of this business elite or have connections to it do not realize this. In a way, I think that libertarians do not seek a true dissolution of government so much as its reconfiguration into a manner that no longer benefits or is responsive to the needs of the population. This is the true and realistic conclusion of the philosophy. AstheWorldWorlds fucked around with this message at 05:07 on Jan 23, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:Will you stop lumping government staff in with politicians The fact he lumps them together basically means he hasn't the faintest clue what goes on in the public sector.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 07:04
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:Your not going to like what I am about to say, and I am sure you are a perfectly nice and well meaning person. But I think you have chosen an immoral career path. Can your skills and ability not help you to find a job in the private economy? Your salary is directly funded by taxpayers and there is no price mechanism to determine if what you do is actually needed or desired by consumers. I would feel very uncomfortable if my salary was paid by using force to expropriate people against their will. A person's salary should be determined through free negotiation between employer and employee and the wages should come from customer sales that are made voluntarily. Among bureaucrats we do cross over quite a bit in either direction, but I found public sector work to be decidedly less lovely in spite of its occasional frustrations. I'm sure Ruan has a similar position. Also, taxation is not theft you idiot and I think everyone has demonstrated that pretty well. I hate doing this, but do you work in the private sector in any meaningful capacity? AstheWorldWorlds fucked around with this message at 08:38 on Jan 23, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 08:14
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:I don't think I have quoted Hoppe in quite a while yet you go on and on about him here. There is a reason why I don't do these sorts of public denouncements of people as racists, which you seem desperate that I do. The answer is two fold. In the first place, when it comes to someone like Hoppe or Rothbard who have written such an enormous amount of material, I can only read what I can and make my own judgments as to their character and motives. I have repeatedly been told that someone or other is a vile racist who said all sorts of horrible things and then when I read up on what they said, it turns out they were misquoted and their opinions distorted by their political enemies. So I don't play that game. Hans Hermann Hoppe's "Property and Freedom Society" hosted white supremacists, specifically Jared "Racial Realist" Taylor and Richard "Bell Curve" Lynn. Why would a man host these kind of degenerates unless he on some level agreed with their positions? Would the Property and Freedom Society ever host Negri or Zizek? No, they would not.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 09:02
|
|
|
"Blacks and whites are different. When blacks are left entirely to their own devices, Western civilization — any kind of civilization — disappears." -Jared Taylor, "racial realist" and speaker at Hans Hermann Hoppe's Property and Freedom Society. But of course there is no reason to suspect HHH is affiliated with white supremacists or has white supremacist tendencies.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 09:11
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:I don't agree with Jared Taylor on much at all with regards to his views on race. Richard Lynn, whatever one thinks of The Bell Curve, cannot be rightly described as a white supremacist. I don't know much about the science of racial differences in average IQ levels or if they exist. But it should be noted that Lynn observed the highest average IQ in Asians NOT Europeans. We don't know that Lynn's research is motivated by racial or supremacist attitudes. Again, i'd like to see proof of this. I have no idea what the empirical data says with regards to racial differences in IQ averages. But if there is evidence to that effect, then it is the scientists job to report what data suggests. Any study in this field, by its very nature, is incredibly controversial and politically incorrect. But that doesn't necessarily imply that it is incorrect. I have no idea but I'd like proof that Lynn has racist or supremacist motivations. Richard Lynn is indeed a white supremacist and your warped apologetics for racists and white supremacists is disgusting. He is on the board of the Pioneer Fund and is considered one of its most important members, which if you are not aware also published Mankind Quarterly. The "Property and Freedom Society" was indeed founded out of Hoppe's frustration that certain voices were not being heard, but let us not kid ourselves about whose voices he wanted heard. A glimpse at their speakers shows that it is only people related to Hoppe's ideological aims, which would make sense giving the ideological bent of the "Property and Freedom Society". Don't you find it curious that a whole host of individuals that are not heard in mainstream academic research don't get invited but, to a man, all the invited speakers have something to do with Hoppe's ideological aims?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
Wow, VitalSigns really did call it. You won't accept any evidence of Hoppe's racism unless he has statements that explicitly express overtly racist sentiments. Jrode, we both know that Hoppe is not a stupid man, and is intelligent enough to not make obvious gaffes beyond his offensive remarks regarding homosexuals which got him in some trouble with his university. It is not a leap to take his peculiar models of property rights and their enforcement and combine them with his obvious associations with racial realists and similar degenerate intellectuals and come to the conclusion that he may be hostile to other races in outcome if not intent. Although, let's be honest it is probably intent too.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
If the landholders of the domain happen to come to the conclusion that their black population (10% of the local population and largely landless) need to be expelled from the land when they form the community covenant on Libertopia Day Zero this is apparently just property rights being enforced regardless of the motivations of said landholders. Is this an accurate statement, jrodefeld?
AstheWorldWorlds fucked around with this message at 20:52 on Jan 23, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 20:49
|
|