|
Socrates16 posted:It is literally impossible for you all to be that dense. SA was not an example of a society, but of what individuals within a society are capable of doing without force. Please get banned (without force).
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 01:13 |
|
|
Cercadelmar posted:Your posts are an act of aggression on me I will not create joinder with you!
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:They're examples to a broader point I was making about how politicians make terrible laws about everything. And when they make good legislation, or when bad legislation is fixed? E: To be a bit more nuanced than the whole racism thing, it does seem fair to me to characterize libertarianism as having roots in the idea of state's rights (in the American sense). Which has its roots in slavery and often was used to perpetuate racist policies, but is not racist in and of itself, but rather in its context. Hodgepodge fucked around with this message at 05:45 on Aug 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:It is literally impossible for you all to be that dense. SA was not an example of a society, but of what individuals within a society are capable of doing without force. But there is plenty of force. If I post a thread in CD showing off my new horse rape porn I just filmed, I will be banned. If I post an LP that I started on YouTube and ask for donations in the OP, I will be probated at least and the thread closed. I cannot enter a free and open contract with other goons to create a thread on SA where we all post about under aged hentai.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:Less government would mean they'd be making less decisions about policies. Seriously though this is a really loving stupid thing to say. Massively, colossally stupid. e: it is incredibly, mind bogglingly stupid. Es tan estúpido que necesito decirte en espańol tambien, es el más estúpidísimo. Wanamingo fucked around with this message at 05:47 on Aug 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
Personally, I can tolerate "bad" legislation on my video games if it means that the federal government can make and keep laws in place preventing assholes from refusing me entry to a restaurant or nightclub or whatever due to my skin color.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:44
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:But there is plenty of force. If I post a thread in CD showing off my new horse rape porn I just filmed, I will be banned. If I post an LP that I started on YouTube and ask for donations in the OP, I will be probated at least and the thread closed. I cannot enter a free and open contract with other goons to create a thread on SA where we all post about under aged hentai. Ah, but you see, that is only because the evil government forces the forums to stop so called "illegal" activities. In a true libertarian society Socrates16 and jrodefeld would be able to share their love of horse rape porn with all the world without worrying about statists using force to stop them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:45
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:*man with fake nose and glasses comes into room* No poo poo, I'm honestly questioning if it's not a parachute account. Hey FYI libertarian lurkers I'm taking back the word Statist, that's our word. You can't use it anymore. It means people who believe the state has a purpose to exist for. While we're being meta, can I get a ruling on the word "understand" and "understanding" because last I checked it didn't mean "you are incapable of comprehending my perfect complex ideals  "
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:It is literally impossible for you all to be that dense. SA was not an example of a society, but of what individuals within a society are capable of doing without force. Yes and without force they all elected to submit themselves to force and sanction for breaches of conduct. You are really on to something here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
zeroprime posted:Ah, but you see, that is only because the evil government forces the forums to stop so called "illegal" activities. In a true libertarian society Socrates16 and jrodefeld would be able to share their love of horse rape porn with all the world without worrying about statists using force to stop them. But wouldn't the SA userbase shun posters and ban them anyway for posting about their favorite horse rape porn? An-cap vindicated!
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:But wouldn't the SA userbase shun posters and ban them anyway for posting about their favorite horse rape porn? An-cap vindicated! Nu-uh, libertarians get +4 protection to "use of force", you're not allowed to use forces on them. *floats off into space against the force of gravity*
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:51
|
|
|
It'd be more like an amusement park. An amusement park with bored stoners for ride operators and free two-by-fours and energy drinks for all attendees. And the authorities dress up like clowns and load people onto catapults on an increasingly less random basis, and we can only claim that, in the history of the park, most of these clowns haven't turned out to be child molesters. And for a long while anyone who went into one part of the park came out green and smelly without any real explanation why. And every now and again, usually when a tidal wave has swept through and shat radioactive waste all over the park so it needs to get shut down while the radium gets cleaned out of it, we form a gang and go to some kid's house where he's shooting a film of his Lego blocks, and we shout at him until he builds a Goku with his Lego blocks. Why it is always a Goku is never explained, because the attendees have a notorious hatred for every animated work that comes out of Japan, to the point where an entire sewer system was built onto the park just to house the people who like them. This sewer system has since become a self-sustaining ball of filth and hatred the likes of which our little park could never understand. And there's an art station and the only thing anyone draws is the same guy prolapsing his rear end in a top hat and pictures of things causing 9/11 and totally-ironic-you-guys Nazi iconography, regardless of what the theme is this week or what the medium is. And almost everyone in the amusement park is incredibly scornful and hateful toward the people who go downtown and the people who hang out in the public gardens because those places are free, and one of them includes a vocal minority of people who wish they were african-american blue-furred cats and got an extra hour in a ball pit, and the other one includes a vocal minority of people who wear dumb hats and hate women because they don't gently caress weirdos in dumb hats. And we think we're better because we paid ten dollars and we have the clowns who load people onto catapults. And every now and again someone really stupid shows up and shouts about how stupid they are and one of the clowns threatens to load them onto the catapult unless they roll around in a pile of poo poo for two hours, and immediately dozens of people start rolling around in the poo poo, and the threat becomes that unless the stupid person can roll around in the poo poo in a more thorough and evocative manner than the dozens of people who are already rolling around in the poo poo, they'll be put on the catapult, and this is not seen as a humiliating or debasing behaviour even when the guy inevitably leaves. And one of the great marks of superiority is exactly how long ago you bought your ticket into the park and how many times you've been loaded into the catapult without being flung all the way out of the park. The date you bought your ticket is tattooed onto your forehead when you first arrive and if it's recent it will be a source of endless mockery for no established reason. God help you if you try to set up a stall or a discussion house in the park with a date on your forehead that's from less than two years ago. And you can go to the mask shop and buy a cheap mask for yourself, or you can pay a lot more money to have one of the clowns run over and staple a mask to someone else's face. Traditionally, for no fuckin' reason, this is accompanied by a large red neon banner explaining exactly what it was that led you to the conclusion that paying ten dollars so that a clown will staple a mask to their face was the best option available to you. And after a long and particularly stupid discussion in which a couple dozen shitheads with nothing better to do shout at a man with cotton balls stuffed into his ears, you swagger on up here and say that this is a hopeful view of what people can achieve without force. But by all means, I'm sure we're a great example of exactly what society will become when force is replaced with bannings and probations. Somfin fucked around with this message at 05:58 on Aug 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:55
|
|
|
So is the central premise here that anarchsim is impossible, and therefore should not be even sought as a goal?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
Yes
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
I love you, Somfin.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
SA is pretty much that experiment where monkeys learn to punish each other for no reason because it's the way things have always been done. You shouldn't aspire to this place.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
Would you all support government regulation of SA, then?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
Yo just a heads up that I want everyone to use the libertarian definition of the word "Negroid" in this thread, which as we all know means "to fart into a pie that is topped with whipped cream". This is in addition to the libertarian definition of "force", "aggression", "pug", etc
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:Yo just a heads up that I want everyone to use the libertarian definition of the word "Negroid" in this thread, which as we all know means "to fart into a pie that is topped with whipped cream". This is in addition to the libertarian definition of "force", "aggression", "pug", etc "Pug" henceforth indicates only the noblest and least goofy-faced of hounds.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:Would you all support government regulation of SA, then? We did get regulated by the government what do you think happened to LF  chilling effects bro
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:Would you all support government regulation of SA, then? You seem to have trouble understanding that a niche internet website and a country are two different things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:It is literally impossible for you all to be that dense. SA was not an example of a society, but of what individuals within a society are capable of doing without force. i'm gay
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:04
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:Would you all support government regulation of SA, then? Yes
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:04
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:Would you all support government regulation of SA, then? It's already regulated, why else do you think you can't post your horse rape porn?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:04
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:We did get regulated by the government what do you think happened to LF But I mean with government regulators instead of mods. The website would be on servers like the ACA exchanges. Do you think that would be an improvement?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:As I understand, the stated Libertarian position on such matters is that private charities would end up serving as a worthy stand-in for state services - that if the mean old tax man wasn't bleeding them dry, people would happily donate the same amount of money to charity. Because it's not as though there's a major mismatch between what tugs at people's heartstrings and what society needs. This is demonstrably not enough. The combination of charity and mild socialism in the US, for example, is insufficient to incentivize the baby creators to create enough babies voluntarily to sustain the population. Baby creators simply don't like the uncertainty of private charity. A state with strong (er than we have) social support for parents is required to make human reproduction economically viable enough to sustain our population in the post industrial world. Or turning women into chattel. That works to ... and generally has been the way terrible people with terrible beliefs keep their societies from going extinct. But libertarians can't do that until they redefine "people" to mean what Scalia says the founders meant when they wrote it. McAlister fucked around with this message at 06:11 on Aug 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:07
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:And I had already listed a great many more libertarians who have influenced me, including Stefan Molyneux, Scott Horton, Gary Chartier, Henry Hazlitt, Leonard Reed, Robert Nozick, Sheldon Richman, Jacob Hornberger, Frederic Bastiat and Lysander Spooner. JRod. I for one am actually happy to move the topic beyond the racist tendencies of your philosophers. We've reached the point where everything has been said that can be said on the matter. No one reading this thread will be convinced by your non-arguments, regarding this issue, but the thread is becoming a bit of a circle jerk. In fairness of actually giving you a new topic to stick your foot in I'm actually going to offer you several options below as to what I think would be a good source of future discussion. you can pick from them if you want, or you can try something else, I'm just going to offer them to you. However, before that I do want to touch on one teeny, tiny little thing. Stefan Molyneux. I actually agree with you that a lot of those libertarians aren't especially racist, but that was never the point that every libertarian was a racist. I never accused you of being racist either to my knowledge, and if I did I apologize. What I said was that much of the libertarian school of thought in the united states, and the visible libertarian thinkers were racists I would point out that very few of them actually go as far on the spectrum as the An Cap craziness that you espouse. In fact, of the ones that I recognize I know that Gary Chartier is actually a left anarchist who would probably laugh you out of the room the same as any of us. However, if you are seriously trying to say that I can't find traces of controversial racial statements by Stephan Molyneux!? You'd be mostly right. All I could find was this, this and this. Now to be fair, I only know for a fact that in one of those videos he excuses the murder of a child because that child was black. I'm also not sure which one since it has been a while since I last watched them and I just ate a big snack that I'd prefer not to vomit up in rage. Seriously, in one of those videos he argues that black men have an obligation not to wear hoodies because white people might be afraid of them. I'm not even making GBS threads you. Now this is outside of the topic we were discussing, but they don't all have to be racists do they? Sometimes good old misogyny is the answer. To be specific, Stephan Molyneux was one of the keynote speakers at the first ever A Voice for Men Men's Rights Advocate's conference. This is because in the last year or so he has proven himself to be rabidly anti-women (he says anti-feminist with such video gems as: The Friend Zone: A Sex Free Life Sentence Feminist Hypocrisy Exposed! - A Conversation with Paul Elam The Truth About Domestic Violence - You'll Never Believe... (And I don't!) Not All Women Are Like That! Estrogen Based Parasites Critisim - Rebutted! (He calls women that a lot) And believe me I can go on. I've only gone back as far as May and only picked out the ones with revolting titles. Any video he does on Men's Rights or Feminism is disgusting, but these say my point without even needing for you to watch them. Stefan Molyneux is a huckster cult leader, undoubtedly misogynistic and likely a racist on top of it. That said I'd actually prefer you don't reply to this part of my post unless you really, really want to. I just want to make sure you know that he is this way, beyond that I don't see much point in arguing it unless you need to. Aaaaanyways. So here are my suggested topics for when you get back and want to kick the ball around some more: How you became a libertarian - You never actually told us this story last time due to your computer crash and I'm still deathly curious. We actually started making up fanfiction about it, but Xylo sent the thread to the Gas Chamber rather than the goldmine so we can't get it back. Justice in a Libertarian Society - We've touched on this in this thread already but I know a lot of people are interested. Can you give us a rundown of how you believe a libertarian society would work when it comes to a justice system. I understand that you are talking big picture stuff, and you aren't the guy designing this so its hard to say, but if it were Jrodefeldland, how would you set it up. What is your ideal justice system. Transition - How do you see the transition from our current society to a libertarian society functioning. Again I know its focusing a little more, but how do we switch from government roads to private ones. How do we divide assets and determine who gets what. How do people who are systemically disadvantaged deal with the transition, such as the homeless. What if anything are you suggesting we do about income disparity based on historical crime... basically do you have any way of leveling the playing field so that people aren't hosed from the starting line. Do you care if people ARE hosed from the starting line. This Post - I think a lot of people missed this one since it was late, but can you explain how it is consistent with libertarian ethics to take millions of homes from bankers and give them to homeless people. I think the thread would actually agree with you on this one. Reason Magazine - On an early page of this thread you said "I don't know of Reason magazine and those articles you mention. So they had an article about Holocaust denial? And one that you characterize as "Pro apartheid"? I'd have to see a lot more specifics before I condemn them as racists." when I was talking about Reason Magazine's anti-semetic comments. Another poster however, brought this up from your post history. quote:Avoid these political media outlets: Why were you recommending a magazine, only to blatently lie in thread and pretend that you did not know about it. Or did you recommend it without reading it. Or was it all just a weird bit of grammar failure that you didn't know of the articles I was mentioning? I hope you address one, or all of these topics, since I'm sure your answers will be illuminating. Caros fucked around with this message at 06:15 on Aug 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:But I mean with government regulators instead of mods. The website would be on servers like the ACA exchanges. Do you think that would be an improvement? Wait you think that Something Awful is hosted on some awesome private server and would have more problems if it was hosted on government-regulated servers? E: Wait you think that Something Awful is currently immune to government oversight?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:You seem to have trouble understanding that a niche internet website and a country are two different things. Hold on lets see where they are going with this, theres a non zero chance its not banal idiocy made possible by the altruism of the us goverment reducing the marginal cost of communication to zero. What I'm saying is any libertarian sympathizers need to pay for fair market value of the investment in infrastructure I as a tax payer have made numerous times as part of my social contract or they need to get off the internet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
McAlister posted:This is demonstrably not enough. The combination of charity and mild socialism in the US, for example, is insufficient to incentivize the baby creators to create enough babies voluntarily to sustain the population. Personally, I think it's adorable that you all think that the state helps poor people more than it steals from them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:Personally, I think it's adorable that you all think that the state helps poor people more than it steals from them. Well tell us mister high horse up there on your high horse, how would the poors benefit if there were no services available for them?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:11
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:*man with fake nose and glasses comes into room* I think we've argued before... but as another poster says, you're alright SedanChair. You're alright.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Wait you think that Something Awful is hosted on some awesome private server and would have more problems if it was hosted on government-regulated servers? I'm asking a simple question. Would SA be better if it was directly run by government?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:I'm asking a simple question. Would SA be better if it was directly run by government?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:16
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Well tell us mister high horse up there on your high horse, how would the poors benefit if there were no services available for them? Government no longer stealing from them would be a start. Food price floors and various tariffs make food much more expensive and unhealthy, which leads to even more expensive health issues. Inflation takes away poor people's purchasing power, patent and copyright prevent lower cost alternatives to technology. Government steals the loaf of bread and then gives back the crumbs. It makes me sick.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:I'm asking a simple question. Would SA be better if it was directly run by government? Probably not. I don't think anyone in this thread thinks that there is no place for private business. Would SA be better if it was non-existent because DARPA didn't pay for massive tests that culminated in the internet? Or if government didn't pay for massive infrastructure spending to bring internet service to much of the country? Or if the government didn't regulate the internet to preserve net neutrality and prevent companies from abusing their power to create monopolies on content?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:So is the central premise here that anarchsim is impossible, and therefore should not be even sought as a goal? Yes, anarchism is dumb as hell Socrates16 posted:But I mean with government regulators instead of mods. The website would be on servers like the ACA exchanges. Do you think that would be an improvement? No because that's dumb as hell. Your example is of a free speech dystopia rather than of regulation of the economy. Socrates16 posted:Personally, I think it's adorable that you all think that the state helps poor people more than it steals from them. [citation needed]
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:Government no longer stealing from them would be a start. Food price floors and various tariffs make food much more expensive and unhealthy, which leads to even more expensive health issues. Inflation takes away poor people's purchasing power, patent and copyright prevent lower cost alternatives to technology. Government steals the loaf of bread and then gives back the crumbs. It makes me sick. Taxation is not theft you ignorant shitlord.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
Inflation is pretty low right now too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 01:13 |
|
|
Socrates16 posted:I'm asking a simple question. Would SA be better if it was directly run by government? Yes but only if the government could dish out real life punishment and have televised mod challenges.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 06:18
|
|