Libertarianism makes you stupid

dstroy

dstroy

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Is it possible for people to "band together" to dispel a threat and then disband the power structure once the threat is removed? Wasn't that the alleged intent of the "founding fathers" ?

The thing that happened is they didn't disband they created a federal governemnt and here we are....slave.
Click to expand...
Keep bumping the thread with your totally balanced replies, this is good stuff. A libertarian admits they would stand up a government.
 
Hollatchaboy

Hollatchaboy

Well-Known Member
Friendly_Grower said:
If you drive a car you have to have at least liability insurance weather you believe in it or not.
Why not Pregnancy insurance? It should be mandatory like car insurance is.
So Fornicating without insurance shall be a crime in all 50 states.

Just think how fast Abortion will be come legal in all 50 states if we do.
Click to expand...
A cheaper, and perhaps better option, would be for women to stop putting out until abortion is legalized again. It would be fast tracked into legalization. Just my opinion.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
dstroy said:
Keep bumping the thread with your totally balanced replies, this is good stuff. A libertarian admits they would stand up a government.
Click to expand...
Not admitting anything, just recounting how a "small government" always seems to grow into a monstrosity...and here we are.

I'm not opposed to people banding together to do what is right, meaning that which each of them has a right to do, defend themseselves and their justly acquired property. I am opposed to the band remaining in place to force their preferences, which are not rights, on others. Can you say the same ? I think not.

To govern somebody is not what I am for. To band together with others to repel those who want to be masters doesn't mean the alliance has to then grow into ANOTHER government, does it ?
 
Last edited:
dstroy

dstroy

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Not admitting anything, just recounting how a "small government" always seems to grow into a monstrosity...and here we are.

I'm not opposed to people banding together to do what is right, meaning that which each of them has a right to do, defend themseselves and their justly acquired property. I am opposed for the band remaining in place to force their preferences, which are not rights, on others. Can you say the same ? I think not.

To govern somebody is not what I am for. To band together with others to repel those who want to be masters doesn't mean the alliance has to then grow into ANOTHER government, does it ?
Click to expand...
libertarians are for big government, when it suits them. hahahhahahahahhahahhahaha
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Hollatchaboy said:
A cheaper, and perhaps better option, would be for women to stop putting out until abortion is legalized again. It would be fast tracked into legalization. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...
The unintended consequence might be more rape. Clearly the better option is for people to use more love dolls. Then they could use up all that useless hand sanitizer they fear purchased too.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
dstroy said:
libertarians are for big government, when it suits them. hahahhahahahahhahahhahaha
Click to expand...
That's inaccurate. You see a person claiming to be a libertarian that was for a big government wouldn't actually be a libertarian.

Sort of like how man boobs don't make you a woman.
 
Herb & Suds

Herb & Suds

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
The unintended consequence might be more rape. Clearly the better option is for people to use more love dolls. Then they could use up all that useless hand sanitizer they fear purchased too.
Click to expand...
Over one hundred thousand fewer cases of the flu during the peak speaks differently
Pass that shit around to your family and friends
We will thank you
 
HGCC

HGCC

Well-Known Member
dstroy said:
If you lived in a society of libertarians, I would conquer it.
Click to expand...
As did the nation of Tonga.

en.m.wikipedia.org

Republic of Minerva - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org

I think Rob made an important distinction a while back, he said he is a small l libertarian not a big L libertarian. My assumption is that is some sort of distinction trying to say he isn't part of their weird political party...maybe? It's kinda hard to work with in terms of discussion, it's like defining your own terms.

I dont think the expectations of people are realistic. If they were, we wouldn't really need any government at all, or we could have some kinda altruistic star trek type stuff. As is, the small l libertarian doesn't seem to offer workable solutions to the modern world.

Edit: I'm always gonna mock Libertarians, the big L party and what passes as their more mainstream beliefs. They do silly stuff.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
HGCC said:
As is, the small l libertarian doesn't seem to offer workable solutions to the modern world.
Click to expand...
Free market works in the micro, and hasn't been allowed to be tried in the macro.

The things that threaten government are prohibited by it. Coincidence?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
HGCC said:
It's hard to have a discussion though man.

"I'm a nazi" "so you hate jews?" "Wtf man, that's Nazis...I'm a nazi, meat is murder dairy is rape. nazi means we are vegans." "...wtf???"
Click to expand...
That's why I prefer to self describe as a "Voluntaryist" sometimes spelled voluntarist.

Funny thing the website started by a deceased friend Carl Watner on Voluntaryism is NOW difficult to get to thru many search engines....I'm sure that's just a coincidence. :rolleyes:
 
HGCC

HGCC

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Free market works in the micro, and hasn't been allowed to be tried in the macro.

The things that threaten government are prohibited by it. Coincidence?
Click to expand...
The economic side of the ideology is where a big chunk of the problems are, and the major spot that highlights the "what do you do about bad actors" question.

Not doing business with them might work on a small scale...but well...corporations set rivers on fire when left to their own devices. Their self interest is profit. They operate on size and scale, good luck getting all those consumers to stop buying their stuff. The river is in Cleveland, why do I care, they aren't hurting me directly here in CA...its my economic free will to buy the mega corps more affordable product. Megacorp can then hire a private army to fend of the locals, selling their products far and wide to fund it. Maybe they use all their resources and need more, they have an army....your beliefs rest on them not doing what they have always done and taking more by force.

Did you see how things worked in the 1700s/1800s/early 1900s.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
dstroy said:
This dude (rob) wants to create a power vacuum without understanding the implications of that, or by ignoring them completely if he does which is evil. Bad all around.
Click to expand...

No, I want to normalize the idea that power ( unethical control) over others whether in the micro or the macro is not a foregone conclusion. It doesn't have to be one or the other, it could be, dispersed to individual liberty, the aggregate of that individual liberty being the mechanism which then keeps it that way.

As an aside I find it hard to describe solutions to some people who default to a false dichotomy rather than examining things as they actually are .or possibly could be

Not to mention people who falsely think the ills of government regulated markets are the ills of a free market. They aren't.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
HGCC said:
corporations set rivers on fire when left to their own devices.
Click to expand...
Except corporations in the present are a government created and protected creature. Without that protection and without customer support how long could they set rivers on fire?

I would buy from a service provider that didn't do that, if one were allowed to exist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top