|
VitalSigns posted:Um, so if big wars of conquest can only be fought by a prior-existing State with a large tax base that can print money and monetize the debt then, uh, where did ISIL come from? Indeed, I remember how Genghis Khan formed the largest land empire ever by reforming the Mongol tribes' banking system and decoupling the leading currency (horses) from the gold standard. Perhaps he learned from the example of Muhammad and his successors, who famously exploded out of the Arabian peninsula under unifying banner of "Low Interest Treasury Bonds!"
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 07:13 |
|
|
Do roving murderous hordes that elect their leaders count as a state?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
You all realize we're talking to someone so embedded in his own beliefs and faiths that he will never accept the fact that he is the bad guy....paragon1 posted:Do roving murderous hordes that elect their leaders count as a state? Libertarianism at its best!
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:jrod, you mentioned several times during your posts last night that you hold debate to high importance, especially when it comes to discussing issues like the ones being brought up. So have you considered taking up the offers to have a live debate? I know Caros has a standing offer to debate you on healthcare and I want to debate you on whether or not the Non-Aggression Principal is moral. I'll reiterate that I'm willing to let you choose the style of the debate, either free form or structured with opening statements, rebuttals, timed question segments, and closing statements. I'll even allow you to pick the moderators, if any. I'm willing to give you literally every advantage, and I'm willingness to bet Caros would to. Hell, I'm willing to buy him a webcam since apparently that was part of the issue last time I brought this up. On that note, I'm kind of curious to see if there is any desire in D&D for an actual Debate thread. I've been pondering putting up a thread for the last month or so (since IronKnuckle came back basically) that would exist to set up informal D&D debates on various subject in the vein of IQ2 US debates or something similar, but I'm not entirely sure it wouldn't get laughed off the subforum.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
Whoa whoa whoa IronKnuckle is back? Where?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:Whoa whoa whoa IronKnuckle is back? Where? I'm not sure if he actually came back and was instabanned the moment he posted, but I know he bought about fifteen avatars for various D&D posters linking to his new blog. Its pretty much what you'd expect from IronKnuckle, which is to say that it reads like the insane ramblings of a paranoid schizophrenic and has charts like this that prove supply side economics. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
Just buying a bunch of goons avatars linking to his idiot blog so far as I know. Edit: Caros! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Caros posted:I'm not sure if he actually came back and was instabanned the moment he posted, but I know he bought about fifteen avatars for various D&D posters linking to his new blog. Its pretty much what you'd expect from IronKnuckle, which is to say that it reads like the insane ramblings of a paranoid schizophrenic and has charts like this that prove supply side economics. ....  Why did I click that link. Why why why....
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Oh I knew about that, I was hoping he was back and posting. Earnestly insane is more entertaining than willfully dense.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:Whoa whoa whoa IronKnuckle is back? Where? He bought out a few people's avatar's promoting his lovely racist blog during the christmas season. You know, to promote the holiday spirit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:.... You knew what this was. My favorite irony is that for a guy who holds what appears to be a decade long grudge over being banned from Neo-Gaf, Iron Knuckle didn't waste even a moment locking down comments on his blog after I pointed out that he was being a racist shithead with no evidence to back it up, and also that he probably shouldn't be judging people, what with the whole "Judge not lest ye be judged" part of the bible in mind. Turns out he is a hypocrit who can't take critisism. Who knew. He also refused to debate me because I'm not an american liberal, so I guess he hates Canadians too? Caros fucked around with this message at 17:54 on Jan 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
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. jrodefeld posted:I've answered this question many times but I'll do so again. A crony capitalist is someone who uses the political means, either entirely or partially, to acquire wealth and market share. They use the State and the law to create an artificial advantage for themselves such that consumers have less influence on their success or failure. Again we come back to the thing that although in theory consumers can use rational choice to prevent businesses from behaving badly, in practice businesses can and will do countless things to warp and circumvent our decision-making ability. When science says something inconvenient they will hire fake scientists to make biased studies and flood the media with misinformation so that the truth becomes very difficult to find, and even harder to convince enough of the population to put out of business. There's also no shortage of corporations that don't particularly do business with actual consumers. If I object to the business practices of a company that makes industrial robots, chances are I'll have some exhausting detective work ahead of me to discover even some of the manufacturers that use their products, and chances are even if I tell the world at large, no one's going to give a poo poo. Also again, labeling relations between employer and employee as "non-coercive" is questionable. I do have a friend who works as a program manager, whose skills are in such high demand that not getting along with his boss means he can quit and thumb through job offers at his leisure. But for most people it's a choice between working the job they have or starving. That may not be coercion in the sense of pointing a gun at someone, but it's certainly not voluntary in the sense that I voluntarily walked down the street to buy some donuts earlier this morning.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
Caros posted:You knew what this was. I know, and I should have expected no better in the Libertarian thread, but drat that is a stinky turd wrapped in flaming patriotism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
Count Canuckula posted:He bought out a few people's avatar's promoting his lovely racist blog during the christmas season. Whoa whoa, be careful with those hurtful accusations of racism man. Do you have any actual proof that he's racist beyond relying on spurious claims of "coded" language? Unless you can produce a picture of him lynching a black man (while holding a signed notarized statement saying "I am lynching this black man because I am a racist who hates him for his race and no other reason" of course, otherwise a lynching picture could mean anything) then I'll thank you to withdraw your outrageous claim.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
Caros posted:I'm not sure if he actually came back and was instabanned the moment he posted, but I know he bought about fifteen avatars for various D&D posters linking to his new blog. Its pretty much what you'd expect from IronKnuckle, which is to say that it reads like the insane ramblings of a paranoid schizophrenic and has charts like this that prove supply side economics. The greatest thing is that this chart could easily have come from the textbook of my international macroeconomics class.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Guilty Spork posted:Again we come back to the thing that although in theory consumers can use rational choice to prevent businesses from behaving badly, in practice businesses can and will do countless things to warp and circumvent our decision-making ability. When science says something inconvenient they will hire fake scientists to make biased studies and flood the media with misinformation so that the truth becomes very difficult to find, and even harder to convince enough of the population to put out of business. There's also no shortage of corporations that don't particularly do business with actual consumers. If I object to the business practices of a company that makes industrial robots, chances are I'll have some exhausting detective work ahead of me to discover even some of the manufacturers that use their products, and chances are even if I tell the world at large, no one's going to give a poo poo. The best example of this phenominon is vaccinations. There is overwhelming scientific evidence in favor of vaccinations, but one loving guy with a profit motive has ultimately led to tens of thousands of sick or dead children by claiming the vaccination causes autism. One loving guy can convince thousands of people that the shouldn't take the most basic preventitive medical care, and Jrodefeld thinks that somehow Exxon Mobile won't be able to massively influence people with their Scrooge McDuck towers of money?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
Jrode, I realize some of my posting last night may have been mean and hurtful to you. I just want you to know that I genuinely mean every last word of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Whoa whoa, be careful with those hurtful accusations of racism man. I'll have you know that my family owns 80% of the privatized courts in this county- which they earned by inheriting a photo-manipulation software business and using said funds to purchase them. I can produce both proof of racist intent and that you are some kind of quadruple rapist (unless you redact your statement and give all of the businesses you own to me).
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Whoa whoa, be careful with those hurtful accusations of racism man. Was Hitler a racist? I mean he did say that Jews were racially inferior, but he never killed anyone just because of that. He was just responding to the force used against the German people by the traitors in their midst (who happened to include a lot of Jews, Slavs, Roma, gays, mentally ill, etc), I really wish all of you would stop slandering Adolf Hitler by calling him a racist simply for defending the lives and property of Germans everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
Count Canuckula posted:I'll have you know that my family owns 80% of the privatized courts in this county- which they earned by inheriting a photo-manipulation software business and using said funds to purchase them. I can produce both proof of racist intent and that you are some kind of quadruple rapist (unless you redact your statement and give all of the businesses you own to me). You wouldn't dare. I'll leave a bad review of your business on Yelp and the savvy, perfectly-informed rational public will simultaneously decide it's not in their long-term self-interest to patronize a known blackmailer. You're ruined!
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:You wouldn't dare. I'll leave a bad review of your business on Yelp and the savvy, perfectly-informed rational public will simultaneously decide it's not in their long-term self-interest to patronize a known blackmailer. The only legal and moral aggression is my aggression.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
Wait. poo poo. I just remembered that Rothbard article about blackmailers as noble entrepreneurs dedicated to increasing the deterrent for crimes. Blackmail is a virtue here in Libertopia, I'm undone! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Caros posted:The best example of this phenominon is vaccinations. There is overwhelming scientific evidence in favor of vaccinations, but one loving guy with a profit motive has ultimately led to tens of thousands of sick or dead children by claiming the vaccination causes autism. One loving guy can convince thousands of people that the shouldn't take the most basic preventitive medical care, and Jrodefeld thinks that somehow Exxon Mobile won't be able to massively influence people with their Scrooge McDuck towers of money? He doesn't, or at least I don't think he cares. In a pure libertarian mindset it doesn't matter what the results are, only that the system is pure and moral. The results don't matter, only the morality of the system. If people are stupid enough to be duped then they deserve to be duped. If kids die because an company that some how profits off spreading medical misinformation is more successful in marketing than actual medical science then the market has spoken, those kids were meant to die. But what are some dead kids compared to the oppression of statism? No one is saying a libertarian world would be good, but it would be moral, and it would be simple and easy to understand. Good smart people succeed, bad dumb people fail. Everyone falls into the place they deserve. It's useless to argue with a libertarian by pointing out what their policies would lead to, because it comes down to them not caring. The results don't matter to libertarians, only their extremely specific concept of "liberty" matters. You should show a lot of hard core libertarians a totally accurate time portal into the future and have them visit a brutal corporate totalitarian nightmare of slavery and tyrant ruled over by a fat floating capitalist who pulls out workers heart plugs for fun, but so long as the libertarian learns that this "baron" achieved his power through free market capitalism, and all his slaves "willingly" signed contracts of servitude and "consented" to getting heart plugs installed then this is a good future. You could show them the most perfect startrek utopia, but if any of it was built through the theft of taxation or the oppression of free markets then it's a bad and terrible future. Every die-hard libertarian argument ends up like this. You try to argue against some element of their philosophy by pointing out the results will be horrible, they argue the results will be great, finally it's proven the results will be horrible but by now they've re-framed the argument to be simply about liberty/freedom and the results don't matter, only the liberty.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Wait. poo poo. I just remembered that Rothbard article about blackmailers as noble entrepreneurs dedicated to increasing the deterrent for crimes. Its the most hilarious part about the  about aggression that Libertarians bemoan: They are perfectly okay with it when its not targeted at them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Its the most hilarious part about the Here's a hint. When libertarians rant on and on about "personal liberty" they aren't thinking about everyone's liberty, in their hearts they are only thinking of their own personal liberty. They want the freedom to scam, blackmail, bribe, and cheat, and everyone else to have the freedom to be scammed, blacmailed, bribed, and cheated without a state to get in the way of these consensual agreement between informed rational adults.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Here's a hint. When libertarians rant on and on about "personal liberty" they aren't thinking about everyone's liberty, in their hearts they are only thinking of their own personal liberty. They want the freedom to scam, blackmail, bribe, and cheat, and everyone else to have the freedom to be scammed, blacmailed, bribed, and cheated without a state to get in the way of these consensual agreement between informed rational adults. Oh, I know, hence the comment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Here's a hint. When libertarians rant on and on about "personal liberty" they aren't thinking about everyone's liberty, in their hearts they are only thinking of their own personal liberty. They want the freedom to scam, blackmail, bribe, and cheat, and everyone else to have the freedom to be scammed, blacmailed, bribed, and cheated without a state to get in the way of these consensual agreement between informed rational adults. See also, bitcoiners and "legit ponzis," and how they get upset when someone rats them out to the feds because that robs them of projected income as they'd totally get out before the whole thing collapsed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:See also, bitcoiners and "legit ponzis," and how they get upset when someone rats them out to the feds because that robs them of projected income as they'd totally get out before the whole thing collapsed. See also: Silk Road, and the moaning and whining when they got outed as a black market for drugs and the website owner got caught soliciting for a hitman.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:See also, bitcoiners and "legit ponzis," and how they get upset when someone rats them out to the feds because that robs them of projected income as they'd totally get out before the whole thing collapsed. What the gently caress is a "legit ponzi?" Is that just someone going "Hey everybody, I'm running a ponzi scheme, get in on this game of financial musical chairs before I run off with your money" or something?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Nolanar posted:What the gently caress is a "legit ponzi?" Is that just someone going "Hey everybody, I'm running a ponzi scheme, get in on this game of financial musical chairs before I run off with your money" or something? Yeah, basically. In libertopia this would be totally legal, and why not? It just speeds up the natural and correct flow of wealth away from lazy parasites up to the natural elites. If you're dumb enough to give them your money you deserve the results.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
Nolanar posted:What the gently caress is a "legit ponzi?" Is that just someone going "Hey everybody, I'm running a ponzi scheme, get in on this game of financial musical chairs before I run off with your money" or something? Yes, as dumb as that sounds! They honestly think they can monitor incoming money and scale for time to get their "earnings" out before whoever sets these things up skips with everything, and since everyone knows ahead of time he's going to skip sooner or later it makes it legit and not a con. Even among libertarians, bitcoiners are a special kind of stupid, and may one day collapse into a singular platonic ideal of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Here's a hint. When libertarians rant on and on about "personal liberty" they aren't thinking about everyone's liberty, in their hearts they are only thinking of their own personal liberty. They want the freedom to scam, blackmail, bribe, and cheat, and everyone else to have the freedom to be scammed, blacmailed, bribed, and cheated without a state to get in the way of these consensual agreement between informed rational adults. Man, how fast would those payday loan businesses become as prolific as Starbucks in Libertopia? Talk about your booming industries.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
I think Reason magazine has published more than one article praising the market adaptation and can-do spirit of payday loan businesses. I remember one likening them to 19th century "salary buyers," whom they also praised.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Here's a hint. When libertarians rant on and on about "personal liberty" they aren't thinking about everyone's liberty, in their hearts they are only thinking of their own personal liberty. They want the freedom to scam, blackmail, bribe, and cheat, and everyone else to have the freedom to be scammed, blacmailed, bribed, and cheated without a state to get in the way of these consensual agreement between informed rational adults. Holy poo poo pre-2004 Runescape was a Libertarian Utopia
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
Caros posted:Hell, I'm willing to buy him a webcam since apparently that was part of the issue last time I brought this up. An debate thread sounds pretty cool, actually.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Caros posted:I will agree. I cannot empirically prove that Hans Hermann Hoppe is a racist. I don't have documents of him writing "I hate black people", or of him saying how he wants to deport the negro. What I do have is a mountain of circumstantial evidence that all point in that direction, and effectively nothing to the contrary. I get that isn't enough for you, but lets not pretend the writing is not on the wall just because you have your hands over your eyes. The thing is that I know enough about libertarian literature and philosophy to understand that these phrases are NOT the dog whistles you think they are. Libertarians like Hoppe hold private property rights to be sacrosanct and the cornerstone of their system of ethics. If a libertarian society ended up with private property owners discriminating against whites or against Catholics or against almost nobody, it wouldn't matter according to libertarian principles. I'm sure Hoppe would defend the rights of private property owners to allow whoever these please on their property and to reject anyone they please. It's not as if Hoppe will end up saying "drat it, this libertarian private property rights society didn't end up being as racist against blacks as I hoped and thought it would. I'll have to reject this silly property rights theory and instead favor enforced segregation and discrimination." You and I both know he would never say such a thing. It is the first principles of self ownership and private property which Hoppe uses to deduce his political philosophy. Of course he has an aversion to political correctness so he doesn't take effort to make his points in the most diplomatic of ways. Another point is that he lived in Germany and only immigrated to the United States in the 1980s so he never had any direct experience with the Jim Crow South or the sort of segregation that was rampant. His views therefore on the rights of discrimination can and should be sharply separated from the unique experience of the United States with regards to systematized racism and genuine oppression. Hoppe is making an academic argument about free association as deduced from the axiom of self ownership and private property. If you concede that you don't have proof that Hoppe is racist and motivated to pursue his libertarianism because of that prejudice, then you should stop pretending that you do. I've agreed with much of what Hoppe has written that I've read and I've disagreed with some of it. Whatever his other social beliefs or his more controversial remarks and public statements, he remains one of the best living Austrian economists and libertarian theorists. If I am persuaded by his Argumentation Ethics, for example, you will jump to dismiss this argument based on your conviction that Hoppe is a racist, despite any actual proof. What does Argumentation Ethics have to do with racism anyway? An argument should be accepted or rejected on its merits, not on some ancillary failing of the person who made it. I've already clearly shown that many of my opinions and beliefs are informed by many different thinkers, some of whom are on the left and others who are on the "right". I've been influence by left libertarians like Gary Chartier, Anthony Gregory, Scott Horton, and many others whose worldview is clearly more left wing than a "conservative" libertarian like Hoppe. Same when I listen to my favorite left wing commentators and journalists, people like Glenn Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill. I am trying to figure out what is true and what is not true according to the evidence and the logic of the argument as well as my own system of morality. What I don't do is write off a whole group of serious intellectuals and just say "those are the racists and we don't listen to any of their academic arguments because some of their language could be coded language that has racial implications." This is incredibly stupid and intellectually lazy. Now if Hoppe or any other prominent libertarian was actually a provable racist and white supremacist who promoted hate, then I genuinely would not listen to things they have to say because they have defined themselves based on hate speech. I'll even go further and state that there are many libertarian writers who, despite not being racist, nonetheless write things that I have found objectionable or offensive in some way. I have no hesitation to challenge another libertarian who makes a bad argument. I just don't throw around the "racist" label without clear proof. And you shouldn't either. You should modify what you are saying to something like "I don't like Hoppe because I am offended by much of what he writes. Or, he is too politically incorrect and insensitive to how he uses language that has potential racial implications". I could accept any of that criticism. But I can't accept claiming certain knowledge that someone is a racist without any proof whatsoever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:
We've given you pages after page of quotes, citations, and proofs. Holy poo poo, I fear any sort of world where you are allowed to decide what constitutes 'proof' and 'evidence' CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Jan 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:We've given you pages after page of quotes, citations, and proofs. Vital Signs called it. VitalSigns posted:Whoa whoa, be careful with those hurtful accusations of racism man.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 07:13 |
|
|
jrodefeld posted:The thing is that I know enough about libertarian literature and philosophy to understand that these phrases are NOT the dog whistles you think they are. Clearly you don't understand enough, then, simp.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 19:57
|
|