|
Zanzibar Ham posted:So you're going to make a JRod bot that'll post here? That's pretty awesome, I suggest you spend those
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 04:23 |
|
|
Once you figure out how to make it answer its own rhetorical question it will gently caress the Turing test
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:This thread had a baby brother! Heh at first I read that as Hulk Hogan announcing that the thread had a baby Also, that Jrodbot works surprisingly well. Keep it up!
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
Karia posted:Are you sure you're not thinking of one of Ayn Rand's protagonists? Because one of the heroes from Atlas Shrugged totally does exactly that. Which reminds me! I completed my first four chapters of my Let's Read Atlas Shrugged this week! Should take me another week or so to have proper backlog, but once I do, would people prefer it in this thread with links in the OP? Or should I drop it down in the book barn?
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
Caros posted:Which reminds me! I completed my first four chapters of my Let's Read Atlas Shrugged this week! Should take me another week or so to have proper backlog, but once I do, would people prefer it in this thread with links in the OP? Or should I drop it down in the book barn? As someone who posts a lot in TBB Drop it here EDIT: Unless you want to be guaranteed one libertarian shitposter, than by all means post it in TBB
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:EDIT: Unless you want to be guaranteed one libertarian shitposter, than by all means post it in TBB The mob is hungry. Do this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
Caros posted:Which reminds me! I completed my first four chapters of my Let's Read Atlas Shrugged this week! Should take me another week or so to have proper backlog, but once I do, would people prefer it in this thread with links in the OP? Or should I drop it down in the book barn? Oh god why would you do this to yourself. I still don't know how I made it through that shitpile once.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
My favorite part of Atlas shrugged is the third of it that suddenly turns into a super hardcore BDSM j/o session for the author oh wait sorry I'm thinking of Sword of Truth again
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
Caros posted:Which reminds me! I completed my first four chapters of my Let's Read Atlas Shrugged this week! Should take me another week or so to have proper backlog, but once I do, would people prefer it in this thread with links in the OP? Or should I drop it down in the book barn? FYI, there's a looooong series of blog posts called Ayn Rand Contra Human Nature which does a deep dive into Ayn Rand's philosophy. (Under "Recent posts", click 2006 then January and work your way up from there. I was not kidding about how long it is.) It might be handy for critiquing Atlas Shrugged, thought it can be frightfully dull at times. If nothing else you'll get to read someone tear into Rand for thinking photography isn't art.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
To be fair critiquing Ayn Rand seems kind of pointless when she's already done a fine job of it herself
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:As someone who posts a lot in TBB If it happens, the thread should flip back to D&D if they want to debate the quality of the material discussed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
Grognan posted:If it happens, the thread should flip back to D&D if they want to debate the quality of the material discussed. I strongly support acquiring a new libertarian for the thread. As the jr0debot develps it can occaisionally rereg as a group turing test.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
Karia posted:Are you sure you're not thinking of one of Ayn Rand's protagonists? Because one of the heroes from Atlas Shrugged totally does exactly that. It was the retail slave/minimum wage that got me pissed off at jrode. He proved himself ignorant to the real world in a grand way. The building code thing I think may have been someone else, or just me crossing memories, or was used as an example elsewhere. But definitely the retail/minimum wage thing. I think the part about how DROs and private police should work just like home owner's insurance was also another annoyance. Just the little things of him proving himself ignorant on a subject and then doubling down.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
I've always been afraid that reading anything more than a few words of Atlas Shrugged would be like opening the Ark of the Covenant and either my face would melt off or I would start spouting bigotry and running up to Native Americans and saying "You had no system of ownership, therefore our claim was valid Red Savage!!!" Quips aside, there were a few posts way back in this thread where it was said that Ayn (possibly someone else) wrote a sequel to Atlas that had an opposite tone and was something of a warning about the dangers of self-fanaticism. I can't remember enough about it to even search for it, but I was very surprised that it existed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:Quips aside, there were a few posts way back in this thread where it was said that Ayn (possibly someone else) wrote a sequel to Atlas that had an opposite tone and was something of a warning about the dangers of self-fanaticism. I can't remember enough about it to even search for it, but I was very surprised that it existed. There was a joke theory that Atlas Shrugged and Anthem were the first and third books in a trilogy, with the lost second book describing how Galt and his followers all but destroy the world in their greed and viciousness. This sets up the dark age of Anthem and explains its anti-individualist rules as an attempt to stop it from happening again. I don't remember if that was this thread or elsewhere though. Fake edit: found it. http://bradhicks.livejournal.com/393124.html Goon Danton fucked around with this message at 04:41 on Jul 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 04:39
|
|
|
Greatest thread hits: libertarian Jurassic Park. Edit: seriously the lawn dart argument happens more than once? Edit2: omg this property rights side quest is so long. Edit3: are FishMech and NintendoKid the same person? I don't get it. WrenP-Complete fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Jul 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
I havent read the entire thread, so maybe this has been answered before but, whats the libertarian response to an actual literal social contract? As in when you turn 18 (or are about to accept citizenship) you are presented with a contract that basically states youll be a good citizen, pay taxes, etc and in return the government does everything its supposed to do, maybe with sections explaining some of the more confusing parts of the citizen-government relationship- like how land is technically owned by the government :v. Acceptance means you become a citizen, rejecting it means you have to leave the country as you are now trespassing on the states property.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
Presented without further comment: the libertarian case for private nuclear weapons.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
VioletCorsica posted:Edit3: are FishMech and NintendoKid the same person? I don't get it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
Communist Zombie posted:I havent read the entire thread, so maybe this has been answered before but, whats the libertarian response to an actual literal social contract? Basically: "I didn't sign any such contract and I cannot Long form answer: "There was no such contract and I did not agree to any such "socialist" contracts; taxes are theft; anything the government can do the private sector can do a million times better and more efficiently; all rights are property rights and the government shouldn't own property; I reject the state, there is no such thing as "state property" only private property, and no I won't leave for a more "libertarian" country because those areas are full of black people. Toot toot, I'm a boat." e: Libertarians want the benefits of living in an organized, democratic nation without the responsibilities that come with that. Or they're just racists using code words that really mean "only rich white property owners should run a country, and I'd totally be one of them if the government wouldn't stop giving my money to the blacks." CovfefeCatCafe fucked around with this message at 04:43 on Jul 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 04:40
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Basically: "I didn't sign any such contract and I cannot I already knew all that, I was just wondering if the Almighty Power of Contract could paper over the hatred of government. Especially since its voluntary, afterall whats the difference between this and selling yourself into slavery for a pittance because your starving to death? I guess Im looking for the philosophical response to that idea. Like is it a de facto breach of 'property rights' or the NAP because its the state or something?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:Presented without further comment: the libertarian case for private nuclear weapons. Ancap shitbird posted:Note that in order to argue against self-ownership, one must exercise exclusive control of one’s physical body for the purpose of communication. This results in a performative contradiction because the content of the argument is at odds with the act of making the argument. By the laws of excluded middle and non-contradiction, self-ownership must be true because it must be either true or false, and any argument that self-ownership is false is false by contradiction. It's like a libertarian discovered the Transcendental Argument for God and thought it was fuckin genius rather than embarrassingly weak.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 05:04
|
|
|
Communist Zombie posted:I already knew all that, I was just wondering if the Almighty Power of Contract could paper over the hatred of government. Especially since its voluntary, afterall whats the difference between this and selling yourself into slavery for a pittance because your starving to death? Looking for deep, philosophical thought in the minds and reasoning of Libertarianism is a fool's errand. Literally, their reasoning for ignoring the idea of a social contract is that social contracts are implied ideas, not actual pieces of paper to which we sign on the dotted line. Ideas are nothing to Libertarians, only physical property maters. It doesn't go any deeper than that. When a Libertarian speaks of contracts, they literally mean pieces of paper that you sign. Verbal contracts don't exist. Implied contracts don't exist. And because a social contract is an idea of one's moral responsibility to the government and the government's moral responsibility to it's constituents, but not an actual physical contract, Libertarians hand-wave it away with "I didn't sign no contract." So, yes, the government is in violation of the NAP, because the government is trying to enforce a contract that doesn't exist. That's it. That's all of the thought they've given to it. There is no philosophy. Selling yourself into slavery in Libertopia would involve an actual piece of paper contract stating that you were doing so, and the terms of such an agreement. Of course, Libertarians also feel you are allowed to break the contract by running away, but the slave owner can still enforce the contract up to a certain point, and it's telling that they've put more thought into the slave-slave owner contract than into actually being obligated to one's country.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
So what's to stop a wealthy business owner in Libertopia slipping language into appendix F, subsection C-36 stating that by signing this employment contract (or by entering into this fast food establishment with the contract available in laminated cards outside the restaurant) you agree to waive your rights to personhood and freedom? Actually, what happens if someone fabricates it outright? If you've got someone's signature (or a big 'X') and put it on a slavery contract, who's going to stop you from taking them to a new productive life in the cotton industry?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:So what's to stop a wealthy business owner in Libertopia slipping language into appendix F, subsection C-36 stating that by signing this employment contract (or by entering into this fast food establishment with the contract available in laminated cards outside the restaurant) you agree to waive your rights to personhood and freedom? Depends. What's the color of your skin? How much money do you have? Though in seriousness, someone with better knowledge of the Mises.org database will have to go into what sort of mental gymnastics they come up with about that. The only thing I know is, at least for the first part, it'd be your own fault for not reading and fully understanding the contract. Otherwise, you have no rights beyond what someone grants you if you enter onto someone else's private property is what I've always taken away from Libertarians.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 05:45
|
|
|
Curvature of Earth posted:It's like a libertarian discovered the Transcendental Argument for God and thought it was fuckin genius rather than embarrassingly weak. It's drawing an equivalence between "People have an unlimited right to something" and "some people are capable of doing something sometimes" It's a nonsense argument. "I have a unalienable right to shoot you in the face because I am presently shooting you in the face"
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 05:52
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Looking for deep, philosophical thought in the minds and reasoning of Libertarianism is a fool's errand. Literally, their reasoning for ignoring the idea of a social contract is that social contracts are implied ideas, not actual pieces of paper to which we sign on the dotted line. Ideas are nothing to Libertarians, only physical property maters. It doesn't go any deeper than that. You misunderstood my original question because it was about the social contract being a literal piece of paper that you sign. And so from your response, I presume that then it would be ok for a Libertarian?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 06:09
|
|
|
Communist Zombie posted:I havent read the entire thread, so maybe this has been answered before but, whats the libertarian response to an actual literal social contract? This is actually something resembling certain libertarians' ideal form of social organization, those who want explicitly contractual societies a la Hoppe's covenant communities or Molyneaux's DROs. They can justify something like law so long as it is opt-in in some way (the rules for living in a particular privately owned territory or the terms of a complicated insurance contract, respectively). This can be coherent enough so long as you assume no one ever reproduces. Because the kicker in your question is "once you turn 18." Well, first off, there's nothing saying it has to be at 18 as opposed to any other age, but more fundamentally, what contract are children bound to? Why should they follow any rules they did not sign up for? At what age in the continuum of the maturation process do we say they are competent to do so? And I guess you could sit around spitballing different answers to these questions, but there is no one set of answers fully consistent with the guiding principle and at the end of the day, these explicit contracts for membership in society devolve into social contracts within a single generation: people will tend to conform to the dominant norms of the societies they were raised in, more or less, making their "eventual" signing on the dotted line a mere ritual formality.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 07:36
|
|
|
The only reason Fishmech is not in the top 5 ignored posters is because he got purged from the ignore lists due to him asking the local IK/mod in YCS/C-SPAM to do it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 07:43
|
|
|
Thread highlights/lowlights from side quest thread: - JRod on Trayvon Martin: "purple drank" - Categorical variables being combined and averaged on that Cato economically free list - Actual literal slave states being on the Cato list I am starting to date again after my divorce, and I (self-destructively?) flirted with a libertarian tonight on OKC. He works as an economist. He is into Hayek and not Rothbard, and believes health care is a human right. Based on that, I am 90℅ sure that it's not the jrodbot script populating the chat somehow. He does think Austrian Capital Theory best explains the 2008 crash. What questions should I ask this guy?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 07:46
|
|
|
VioletCorsica posted:Thread highlights/lowlights from side quest thread: UNLEASH THE BOT Edit: real talk, he's not going to take any questioning of his viewpoints well given the inconsistent nature of his views. walk with caution.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 07:53
|
|
|
VioletCorsica posted:Thread highlights/lowlights from side quest thread: There are follow up questions!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 08:01
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Snip He's asking; What if we handed Libertarians a literal Social Contract on their 18th birthdays, on a piece of paper, which you could sign in order to remain party of society, or refuse to sign. Would they approve of it then? Edit: Oh whoops he addressed this already.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 09:20
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:Presented without further comment: the libertarian case for private nuclear weapons. i thought peace walker was a great game and that miller and big boss were real cool in it, but i'm not at all eager for that to exist in real life
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 09:43
|
|
|
Curvature of Earth posted:It's like a libertarian discovered the Transcendental Argument for God and thought it was fuckin genius rather than embarrassingly weak. Hoppe's "argumentation ethics".
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 09:46
|
|
|
Sloppy Milkshake posted:i thought peace walker was a great game and that miller and big boss were real cool in it, but i'm not at all eager for that to exist in real life Metal Gear Rising has PMCs everywhere, and the main character is an employee of them - and a perfect example of free-market engineering, plus all the problems can ultimately be traced back to an evil government official. Surely that's the official libertarian game!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 09:51
|
|
|
Grognan posted:The only reason Fishmech is not in the top 5 ignored posters is because he got purged from the ignore lists due to him asking the local IK/mod in YCS/C-SPAM to do it. That's nothing close to what happened, but feel free to believe in a grand administrator conspiracy against you if you wish. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 12:50
|
|
|
Grognan posted:The only reason Fishmech is not in the top 5 ignored posters is because he got purged from the ignore lists due to him asking the local IK/mod in YCS/C-SPAM to do it. Fishmech is a funny, regular poster. He may be bull headed and very often far out of left field, but still I'd rather have him around than a LOT of USPol posters
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 12:59
|
|
|
fishmech posted:That's nothing close to what happened, but feel free to believe in a grand administrator conspiracy against you if you wish. Well, it's either that or everyone who can't stand you all simultaneously changed their minds
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 13:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 04:23 |
|
|
HorseLord posted:Well, it's either that or everyone who can't stand you all simultaneously changed their minds But enough about fascists like you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 13:30
|
|