|
jrodefeld posted:Repeat after me, Time Preference has nothing to do with laziness! We'd still like to see what exactly these empirical studies actually say for ourselves. Do you even know what these studies even are or were to find them? Have you yourself actually read them, or are you just taking his word for it?
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 02:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 08:17 |
|
|
jrodefeld posted:I've engaged in discussions with people on different forums and SomethingAwful is frustrating. Am I the one and only libertarian that posts here? I don't mind discussions where I am the minority. As you can probably guess, I prefer it that way. But I'd prefer the ratio was a little more equal. I'd rather it be 10 against 1 rather than 100 against 1. People simultaneously criticize me for ignoring certain posts ("he only responds to the easy questions) and if I try to reply to everyone, I get banned and chastised for getting way behind and losing the discussion. Sorry Jrod, but you don't get to whine about how we're all a bunch of meany-head leftists who are unfairly ganging up on you and that the mods are out to get you. You didn't take the time to lurk here and see how we operate, you didn't read the rules that specifically state not to make a thread like this, you failed to see a thread that was for arguing the pros and cons of libertarianism that already existed, and you came here to Something Awful and asked for this. We didn't track you down and start privately emailing you ridiculing you about your beliefs. You're the one that willingly put out your idiotic ideas for everyone to see, critique, and ridicule. In short, you made the bed and preceded to poo poo in it yourself, so it's not our fault that you have to lie in it now.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 04:52
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:SA forums are an example of what free people in a free society are capable of doing without force. Not a blueprint for how a society should be run. So your saying that free people in a free society would band together for the express reason of making the lives of the other communities around them absolutely miserable? Sounds about right, yeah.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:What about SOPA? CISPA? What about them? No one here is under the impression that politicians are anything less than highly flawed and often under-educated. But that does not invalidate the system itself.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
Gantolandon posted:Let me prove with praxeology how wrong you are. Actually, going by recent events it looks like Jrod took a page from Molybeux's playbook regarding sockpuppets in this very thread.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
DarklyDreaming posted:Ok I've lurked here enough, here's a hypothetical, or what I like to call the Argumentum ad Crassus: Well presumably what you would do is pay a monthly subscription fee to a Home Accident Protection Agency ahead of time, and upon signing up you would sign a contract with them that details exactly what they would protect your home and possessions from and how they would do it. This, of course, would be rather expensive, so you and everyone on the block pool your money to buy a protection subscription at a group rate with a small discount. Then, to lower costs even more, the entire community agrees to all buy a community-wide subscription together. And then decide that each month they will all pay for this, and they will appoint someone to go around and remind people who forget. And part of the contract everyone signs will stipulate that if you are negligent in your contribution the community as a whole can take pieces of property at fair market value to cover your contribution. It's all so much better and completely than having a State do this because 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:As I said earlier all libertarians need to get off the internet and only post by registered private mail because all the forms of electronic communication they use to talk down to statists are literally impossible under their proposed government. You will never get a libertarian to debate the concepts even small local governments have to deal with like right of way. That's what's so laughable about one of Jrod's earliest posts, where he said something to the effect of "In Libertopia, anyone who doesn't like their job can just look up new skills on the internet and master those skills at home, just like I did!" without even a hint of self-awareness or irony. It's completely baffling to me that he and other libertarians are so willfully blind about all the advanced in technology, medicine, and quality of life that were all impossible without a government.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:I am still waiting on an explanation on how nonviolent passive resistance is in fact aggressive force. Didn't he already try? He's said, or at least alluded to, that trespassing is an "initiation of force" against the user, and so the property owner is thus justified in using an equal amount of force to remove them. In this case, asking them to leave. Now, it seems that what Jrod is trying to say is that ignoring this request constitutes an escalation. Thus demanding them to leave is justified. And ignoring that is another escalation, permitting attempts to physically remove the person. Continuing to resist leads to greater and greater amounts of "defensive force" to be used. So if someone chained themselves to a piece of your property you could conceivably go as far as to kill that person even if they made absolutely no show of physical retaliation or perceivable threat. I could be wrong, it's true that Jrod has been intentionally vague about this, but that's what I've gather from his posts.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:But sitting in a place longer than permitted isn't force and refusing a request to move isn't an escalation of force. It's the same amount of force, which is zero. Not to the Libertarian. Refusing to allow the property to owner to use the property as he wishes it (In this case, not have a person on it) that is worse than merely trespassing, and thus is an escalation of force. I never said that it was a particularly good argument, because it is not. But it is consistent with jrod's views.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:It may (or may not) be morally "worse" than mere trespassing, but in any event it is not force. He says that it is never justified to initiate force. If you are physically removing a nonviolent resister you are initiating force. His only response to this is to attempt to redefine the concept for his own ends. Without getting into any arcana about libertarian thinkers or their statements or economic theories, at its most very base level the concept is totally hosed. There really is no need for any rebuttal more complicated than that. It's like arguing with a militant vegan who thinks it's ok to eat beef because cows aren't animals. I fully agree with all of this. Hopefully jrod will address this when he gets back, but I doubt it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:To be fair, he does have a lot to respond too, I think missing a chunk is understandable. Not really, no. If he honestly didn't want to talk about the racism inherent in libertarianism there were plenty of other posts he could have responded ton instead. He doesn't get to complain that he has no posts that aren't about racism to respond to when there clearly are.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:To be fair, he does have a lot to respond too, I think missing a chunk is understandable. Socialists never tried to invent a new form of logic, so no, no they don't.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:I've answered this question several times actually. The answer is that defensive force has to be proportional to the act of aggression or else the property owner is himself committing aggression. This is not an issue that I can give a definitive answer to because each individual case would have to be judged on its merits. But the principle of "proportionality" would be the standard to judge what action is legitimately defensive and which becomes aggression. I court or private arbitration agency would have to make that determination. Would you say my assessment of proportional defensive violence is accurate or not? Why? Also, please respond to  this post.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:How about an Ultimate Warrior economy, instead of a Road Warrior economy? Ultimate Warrior hated homosexuals and Muslims, so it'd be a true libertarian paradise.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2014 13:31
|
|
|
Jrod, if a man is trespassing and my foke* is heightened with jet jack*am I justified in going Ultimate Warrior on their asses? Don't bother, the answer is yes. *these are real words from the Warrior comic
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2014 13:51
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:Instead of this clumsy attempt at balance, how about the workers control the means of production? Much simpler and more intuitive. Can we also eat the rich? I think this will be an important issue for gaining popular support.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I'm not interested in eating Donald Trump or Gina Rinehart, are you? Properly prepared and seasoned and paired with a fine wine I might be.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
Well, it's been almost two whole days since jrod posted in his own thread. Who wants to start taking bets on when/if he'll be back?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 13:43
|
|
|
Reverend Catharsis posted:Pretty hard when you're trying to pull a magical rabbit out of your digital rear end-fingers in an effort to prove to the unwashed masses that your beliefs are superior to theirs. Yeah, but usually he can keep it up for at least a week before he slinks away reeking of shame and failure.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 13:58
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Any minute now another DRO is going to arise in the free marketplace of force in Northern Iraq, promising not to loot banks, extort money from towns, or behead Shias, and their superior customer service will lure away customers and bankrupt ISIS That will never happen. Jeez, haven't you read anything from Libertarian scholars? They all agree that libertarian principles only apply to whites.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 14:37
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:The problem is that today's police are ostensibly bound by degenerate liberal concepts like "probable cause" and "due process". In Libertopia where there are competing systems of law, you're free to hire a security company that has a contract with courts who will protect every property owner's right to gun down undesireables at the door. And you can be sure that the person deserved to get shot because the DRO shot them. See, isn't everything so much simpler if you just replace the State with Liberty and circular reasoning?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 15:30
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Rich libertarians fund publications popular in that community. Also Aristotle. I really should know better by now, but I suppose I'm a bit of a masochist. What could Aristotle possibly have to do with it?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 14:19
|
|
|
What do you mean when you say "as that as that highest form that driving everything finite towards itself"? As it reads you're saying that the laws of science are driving things towards the laws of science. Or freedom driving things to freedom. Whatever word your plugging in doesn't matter, because it's a nonsensical sentence or at best is possibly a tautology.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
Little Blackfly posted:I think I get what he's saying. So it's like saying "[Freedom] leads to a good society by promoting [Freedom] which leads to a good society." And just replace Freedom with whatever. If that's the case then yeah, I think that's a fair an accurate representation of what some, but not all, people in those groups believe and how they think. See, Brandor, why can't you be clear like that?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 15:33
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:The U.S. prints more than that amount of money a year and so there's no reason why it should have to be funded by taxation through theft at which point I have no objection at all You do realize that the amount of printed money in circulation at any one time does not actually reflect the entire US GDP, right? And that every year millions of bills of all denominations are removed from circulation. Not to mention that the US government doesn't pay using cash in almost any circumstance. It's not like pallets of $100 bills are being sent to fund Social Security.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 16:23
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:There's still a problem when I'm clear and straightforward. If you had just said "It's an idol for them" there would have been no problem.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
To be fair the healthcare in the 1950's was pretty good... for the outrageously wealthy.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Normally this sort of hit to his reputation would ruin him, but due to State interference in the marketplace (ie: bannings) he's got an unnatural monopoly on libertarian shitposting these days. That has been his MO, yeah. Specifically when it got too much for him to handle he would disappear for a few days and then suddenly reappear for one or two days of constant insane ramblings, burning out like a poo poo-posting supernova. Usually it took a few weeks, though. He's barely been at this for six days before he slunk off.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 22:36
|
|
|
Somfin posted:I think the realisation that as soon as he came back we were gonna ask him why he was calling for nation-wide mob justice was too much for him. He can't lose the racism fight, because denial is still a functional defence, but he'll lose the "isn't that just a mob but with constant surveillance" argument. He also can't accuse us of strawmanning, ad hominemming or windmilling, because we're reading information that he provided and comprehending it. He'll lose the argument, so he chooses (as is his libertarian right) to no longer patronise our thread where he will lose and instead patronise another thread. Well in his last two or three threads he had a lot more time to go over a bunch of nonsense talking points before us goons went and pointed out that he was advocating for a mob rule libertopia. This time we skipped to the last stage of his script from the word Go. Who What Now fucked around with this message at 23:45 on Aug 14, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
Also please don't ban Jrod yet. At least let us squeeze a little more entertainment out of his stupidity before giving him the axe.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 18:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 08:17 |
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Libertarian thinking is too rigid to acknowledge such possibilities. It's like asking when the characters in a game of dungeons and dragons use the bathroom or bathe. Many D&D nerds have devoted absurd amounts of time to that exact thing, though. VVVVVVV Keep that innocence, friend. Never go to the Wizards of the Coast forums, Giant in the Playground forums, /tg/, or look up what FATAL is. Who What Now fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 21:03
|
|