|
I think that if one starts with Virtue Economics one ends up at a racism. Not necessarily (yet still very often) explicit racism, but at least systematic racism. By Virtue Economics I mean this : "The one source of economic growth is virtue," At best it ends up: gently caress the poor, they don't have virtue. Which is always: gently caress particular race X. Even if it claims not to be, because of the history of this country.
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 16:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 14:54 |
|
|
I've been thinking some about this proposal that war is impossible in Libertopia because liberty-loving private groups fighting for their homesteads, their freedom, and their sacred honor will always beat the dejected conscripts and cash-hungry mercenaries of a conquering state. So...why didn't the Boer kommandos succeed against the might of the British Empire and her colonial troops after the fall of the governments in Pretoria and Bloemfontein? That should have been the perfect example of private individuals defending their livelihood against a foreign power with nothing but their own resolve and determination...and this was in an era when their small arms were actually comparable to what the British Army could bring to bear on them. Why didn't the Whites win the Russian Civil War? Where were the freedom-loving patriots who will prevail against any conquerer? Hell, why the hell does the American State even loving exist with all its tax-levying, restaurant-licensing, road-maintaining, meat-inspecting, drug-purifying tyranny? Are the brave freedom-loving patriots just waiting a liiiiitle longer before fighting and defeating the US government's mercenary army? Is the US not oppressive enough? Why are states the norm if we're to believe Free Men will always win? I find it pretty hard to believe that the free market would have defeated the Nazis when it can't seem to even defeat Luxembourg or Iceland. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:04
|
|
|
That's because "virtue economics" as you call it is the just world fallacy applied to economics. But yes, essentially it boils down to rationalizing that those who are poor deserve to be poor and that the only reason they are poor is because they chose to be either directly or indirectly. And when this leads to the inevitable creation of racial and gender underclass it's used to justify ideas like "natural social elites" and the "superiority of western civilization". That and the myth of women becoming brood mares for the sole purpose of getting benefits, a disgustingly misogynistic idea that jrod unsurprisingly believes in whole-heartedly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
Oh my God, Bandor and WWN agree on something jrod has truly brought us together this holiday season.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
Hate is the glue that binds humanity together. Edit: holiday season? I guess Valentines Day is in a few weeks. But if Brandor is expecting some antacid hearts he's going to be left sorely wanting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
I don't think anyone wants to agree with Jrod, what with him outing himself repeatedly as a bigoted racist
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
It's amazing because liberals and leftists generally don't shy away from poo poo like how LBJ was pretty drat racist or how the New Deal's benefits largely went only to white people; jrod on the other hand feels this compulsive need to defend the honor of his libertarian idols to the death, no matter what damning quotes from them you bring up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:19
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:It's amazing because liberals and leftists generally don't shy away from poo poo like how LBJ was pretty drat racist or how the New Deal's benefits largely went only to white people; jrod on the other hand feels this compulsive need to defend the honor of his libertarian idols to the death, no matter what damning quotes from them you bring up. B-b-b-Keynes hated the Jews too!
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Oh my God, Bandor and WWN agree on something I think we also agreed on the massive amounts of symbolic vulvas in Christian imagery  It does happen occasionally. I mean I'd broaden what he said from just just-world theology to all theology of glory, but other than that. Also think I should cross post this from the Jesus thread. How the tendency of evangelicals to cloister especially by home schooling / religious schooling was used to draw them in to right wing / libertarian thought and politics. http://www.salon.com/2015/01/20/the_rights_home_school_conspiracy_how_i_helped_gop_launch_a_religious_war/
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Hate is the glue that binds humanity together. I feelin' the infernal spirit brothers! Hail Satan!
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:B-b-b-Keynes hated the Jews too! "HHH is a paragon of good, right, and moral thinking, and his philosophy of limitlessly empowered natural elites can only bring a bounty of good to the primitive negroes and orientals, but even if he was racist, Keynes still said a bad thing once! CHECKMATE STATIST  "
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:Re the Keynes anti-semitism question, our Libertarian friend actually mixed two quotations together as if they were one. I think it's a bit of a stretch to expect libertarians to understand someone changing their opinions on anything after puberty.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:23
|
|
Nolanar posted:I think it's a bit of a stretch to expect libertarians to understand someone changing their opinions on anything after puberty. In fairness, he remained casually and mildly anti-semitic for the rest of his life (even though he was intrinsically opposed to organised racism of any kind and had several Jewish friends). He was probably one of the less racist members of a fairly racist society. HHH on the other hand was born two years after my father and spends his time defending the antebellum South. He has also gone in for the same awful slander as Niall Ferguson and attributed Keynes's economic views to his homosexuality.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:I think we also agreed on the massive amounts of symbolic vulvas in Christian imagery While it's not a bad article, Mr. Schaeffer VASTLY over-estimates how many people didn't already know all of this. You'd have to be outstandingly stupid to not see and understand that the Religious Right have been nothing more than useful pawns for whipping the voter base into a frenzy by the monied elite. He presents what amounts to saying the sky is blue as if it were some sort of world-shattering revelation. Who What Now fucked around with this message at 18:33 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:31
|
|
Who What Now posted:While it's not a bad article, Mr. Schaeffer VASTLY over-estimates how many people didn't already know all of this. You'd have to be outstandingly stupid to not see and understand that the Religious Right have been nothing more than useful pawns for whipping the voter base into a frenzy by the monied elite. I think people usually see that as part of a general societal trend, and are rather taken aback when they see the link is much more conscious and explicit.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:It's amazing because liberals and leftists generally don't shy away from poo poo like how LBJ was pretty drat racist or how the New Deal's benefits largely went only to white people; jrod on the other hand feels this compulsive need to defend the honor of his libertarian idols to the death, no matter what damning quotes from them you bring up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Guilty Spork posted:It helps that with most of the clearly racist liberal icons you can say they were doing their thing 50-100 years ago, whereas HHH is currently a professor at a public university. Curiously jrod, hypocrite that he is, doesn't see any problem with this. It's not like HHH is like those loving bureaucrats who are worse than the spawn of a threesome between Hitler, an even more evil clone of Hitler, and Mephistopheles.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
Guilty Spork posted:It helps that with most of the clearly racist liberal icons you can say they were doing their thing 50-100 years ago, whereas HHH is currently a professor at a public university. Yeah, it really is sort of telling that Jrod goes "LOOK! KEYNES SAID BAD THINGS ABOUT JEWS ONE TIME!" and thinks that this is somehow totally equal to Hoppe's current and continuous vile racist diatribes. I expect you can look at just about anyone at the turn of the century and see that they hold some pretty hosed up views by modern standards. And I'm not even holding a double standard either. I don't really give Murray Rothbard poo poo for his anti-gay stance in the 80's and 90's because that was largely the cultural feeling about gays back then. It was lovely but it was understandable. His views on black people on the other hand, not so much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
Caros posted:Yeah, it really is sort of telling that Jrod goes "LOOK! KEYNES SAID BAD THINGS ABOUT JEWS ONE TIME!" and thinks that this is somehow totally equal to Hoppe's current and continuous vile racist diatribes. I expect you can look at just about anyone at the turn of the century and see that they hold some pretty hosed up views by modern standards. The big difference being if we were discussing something about Keynes, we'd freely admit that he had racist views and that it is a problem. Whereas Jrod has spent page after page page denying that HHH and others said anything racist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:The big difference being if we were discussing something about Keynes, we'd freely admit that he had racist views and that it is a problem. Hey, we did get him to admit that HHH might, possibly subscribe to the 'racial realist' beliefs of the white supremacists he has a yearly convention with. Considering how long he has been at this, I consider that HUGE progress.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:While it's not a bad article, Mr. Schaeffer VASTLY over-estimates how many people didn't already know all of this. You'd have to be outstandingly stupid to not see and understand that the Religious Right have been nothing more than useful pawns for whipping the voter base into a frenzy by the monied elite. He presents what amounts to saying the sky is blue as if it were some sort of world-shattering revelation. Cultists expect a lot of praise and recognition for admitting what the rest of us knew all along.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:It's amazing because liberals and leftists generally don't shy away from poo poo like how LBJ was pretty drat racist or how the New Deal's benefits largely went only to white people; jrod on the other hand feels this compulsive need to defend the honor of his libertarian idols to the death, no matter what damning quotes from them you bring up. That's because libertarianism is a political cult 1) It's composed of a series of ideas that members are expected to accept on faith 2) Its members ignore or attempt to discredit evidence that contradicts these ideas (praxeology) 3) It has a messiah (the free market) and some sort of evil being that is responsible for all of the bad things on earth (the state) 4) They claim that its messiah is too complex to understand, we just need to accept Its Plan on faith (how could a state, run by humans, possibly accomplish what the Free Market accomplishes?) 5) It has sacred texts and prophets (Hoppe, Mises, Hayek, etc) whose words are considered sacrosanct (see jrod's constant references to libertarian writings) 6) It has legendary hero figures (entrepreneurs) who, through their faith, receive great boons from the messiah (a common trope in religion) 7) Libertarians who don't act in accordance with the faith are accused of not being true libertarians, like a Christian caught in adultery 8) Its members attempt to convert non-members, because if you let The Truth into your heart then you'll become a libertarian, too 9) It promises a utopian society that can only be achieved if everyone converts 10) They tend to lash out emotionally when their faith is attacked (see all of the libertarian meltdowns in the thread, although jrod hasn't done this) There have been other major political cults in the past (Marxism comes to mind), but the only major one still around with any significant membership is Libertarianism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Cultists expect a lot of praise and recognition for admitting what the rest of us knew all along. I'm not going to make guesses or claims about what his intentions for writing the article were (although praise and recognition are high on the list of possibilities) but I get the sense that he really does believe that this is a shocking revelation. I have no doubt that a lot of people in the religious right, even and maybe especially those in the upper echelons, also believe that they're cunning ploys are going completely unnoticed by the dull-witted secularists as well. After all part of being in a cult is believing that your special and better than people outside of the cult. And I find people openly displaying these delusions comical.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:I have no doubt that a lot of people in the religious right, even and maybe especially those in the upper echelons, also believe that they're cunning ploys are going completely unnoticed by the dull-witted secularists as well. They expect us to take their half-hearted denials at face value, as if they were trying to get away with telling a racist joke at a poker game. "Limit abortion? Nooo, we just want to make sure every doctor that performs abortion has admitting privileges at a hospital!" "Destroy public schools? Why, we just want to hold failing schools accountable!" Etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:That's because libertarianism is a political cult I think the reason it plays so well in America is the cultural narrative of oppression v. tyranny and being the underdog that is present so strongly in western thinking right now. See also Christian Evangelicals. It's become a rather accepted idea that, in any power struggle, the dominant and potent one is the antagonist. Empire vs. The rebels, Mean ol' Britain against the revolutionaries, Christianity vs. Nero's Rome, our stories seldom have the idea that those who are in the priviledged and dominant group are the people we should aspire to. By and large that's correct of course. But no one likes being the bad guy, so privileged classes contrive ways to see themselves as oppressed in order to see themselves as the protagonists again. Libertarianism is a way for privilege whites to cast themselves as oppressed by a tyranical overlord while still getting all the advantages of their position. It let's them claim to be fighting the good fight while advocating for poo poo that would damage the position of marginalized groups. It let's tgem pretend racism isn't really an issue guys, it's police brutality against everyone! Same kind of poo poo that leads people to say 'why is it feminism if it's about equality, shouldn't it be humanism or equalism' or other dumb poo poo. I get how hard it can be to admit one's privilege, but it's a necessary step of coming to comprehend the nature of the oppression faced by others, like Eric Garner and Michael Brown. Not understanding you're own privilege is less overt tgan KKK racism but I would argue far more insidious and damaging to society.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:17
|
|
Ron Paul Atreides posted:By and large that's correct of course. But no one likes being the bad guy, so you privileged classes contrive ways to see themselves as oppressed in order to see themselves as the protagonists again. Libertarianism is a way for privilege whites to cast themselves as oppressed by a tyranical overlord while still getting all the advantages of their position. It let's them claim to be fighting the good fight while advocating for poo poo that would damage the position of marginalized groups. It let's tgem pretend racism isn't really an issue guys, it's police brutality against everyone! That is apparent in the defensive vanity of libertarianism. The private belief of all Libertarians is that they will be among the greatest beneficiaries in a libertarian universe, because they are the Nietszchean ubermensch who have the will and capability to overcome their fellow men. If you're paying attention, it's another way of saying: 'Well, if we started the game over again from square one, white males would wind up on top again, so boo sucks to you whiny dark people.'
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Curiously jrod, hypocrite that he is, doesn't see any problem with this. It's not like HHH is like those loving bureaucrats who are worse than the spawn of a threesome between Hitler, an even more evil clone of Hitler, and Mephistopheles. I expect my evil powers will kick in any day now. Soon all the apples of Washington will know I am their lord and dark master.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:That is apparent in the defensive vanity of libertarianism. The private belief of all Libertarians is that they will be among the greatest beneficiaries in a libertarian universe, because they are the Nietszchean ubermensch who have the will and capability to overcome their fellow men. If you're paying attention, it's another way of saying: Square one here being defined as we get to keep everything we already have, have much easier access to stealing the assets of others, and no nasty ol' government getting in the way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:He presents what amounts to saying the sky is blue as if it were some sort of world-shattering revelation. Think about it from his perspective and how he looks at the world. It is a world-shattering revelation. It's: this is how we were taken from withdrawing from the world to serving mammon (greed, power, and money) and that this was done intentionally. And that he participated in it. It's one thing to say the religious right has cozied up to the libertarians, of course that's obvious. It is another thing to explain why one was a part of making it happen, and how exactly it was done.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Think about it from his perspective and how he looks at the world. Way ahead of you, champ. Who What Now posted:but I get the sense that he really does believe that this is a shocking revelation. I have no doubt that a lot of people in the religious right, even and maybe especially those in the upper echelons, also believe that they're cunning ploys are going completely unnoticed by the dull-witted secularists as well. After all part of being in a cult is believing that your special and better than people outside of the cult. And I find people openly displaying these delusions comical.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
In a libertarian utopia, can I buy all the land surrounding your house and lock you in? Also, do I have to put up a sign before I shoot you for trespassing on my land that I covertly purchased from your neighbors?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:In a libertarian utopia, can I buy all the land surrounding your house and lock you in? Yes and no, respectively.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Way ahead of you, champ. Wrote it before you posted that, then a multi-hour phone call happened, didn't preview. Always preview people, don't be BrandorKP.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:In a libertarian utopia, can I buy all the land surrounding your house and lock you in? Yes but everyone else would boycott you for your cruelty so it would never happen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
What I want to know is how long does land have to stand unused before it I can mix my labour with it? If my neighbor leaves on an extended six month visit to visit family in Denmark can I move into his house, vacuum the floors and claim it as my own? He can come back but he better have a hotel lined up because I just repainted the bathroom and like hell am I going to let him trespass on my property!
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 01:09
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:What I want to know is how long does land have to stand unused before it I can mix my labour with it? If my neighbor leaves on an extended six month visit to visit family in Denmark can I move into his house, vacuum the floors and claim it as my own? He can come back but he better have a hotel lined up because I just repainted the bathroom and like hell am I going to let him trespass on my property! This is actually a pretty good question even irrespective of taking it to extremes. Is it five years? Ten? Homesteading is a 'natural right' but at what point does something stop being yours if left unattended.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
When it's claimed as battle-spoils most likely.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
Caros posted:This is actually a pretty good question even irrespective of taking it to extremes. Great now you've created libertarian katamari in my head because no property can be left behind.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
Caros posted:This is actually a pretty good question even irrespective of taking it to extremes. Outside of libertopia, current US adverse possession law ranges from 5 to 30 years depending on where you are and what sort of property it is. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 14:54 |
|
|
Zero. You walk in, kill his whole family, then when his grandson comes around to demand restitution you say "gosh, that was like last week, and all of your relative's alleged deeds were destroyed in a mysterious fire so we'll never know who owns what. But I'll tell you what, I realize now that violence is bad and I grant you the freedom to earn this house on the Free Market! If you truly deserve it, the Blessed Market(pbuh) will smile upon you and, like Job, return your house to you tenfold while the violent and the thieving will gnash their teeth in poverty." Easy!
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 01:39
|
|