|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: silversoul7]
#2792161 - 06/14/04 11:05 AM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Does "TheOneYouKnow" ring a bell?
TOYK was banned for flaming me? You positive about that?
-------------------- Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
silversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: Xlea321]
#2792215 - 06/14/04 11:20 AM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
He's come back here in many forms, and has been banned every time for flaming. I'm sure at least one of those times he was flaming you, since you were one of his favorite targets.
-------------------- "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire
|
silversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: Xlea321]
#2792219 - 06/14/04 11:21 AM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Alex123 said: If you could, I'm sure Alex would've been banned long ago.
What's up silver? Why did you have to go back and edit that post to add the flame on? Every time I look round lately you're posting something terribly pissy. If I've done something to hurt you let me know and we can straighten it out man.
You've done nothing to hurt me, but plenty to annoy me.
-------------------- "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire
|
DoctorJ
Registered: 06/30/03
Posts: 8,846
Loc: space
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: DoctorJ]
#2792445 - 06/14/04 12:52 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
BTW, i'm still waiting for the libertarian heavyweights on this board to adress the main point of my original post:
I think that libertarianism would work well if everyone abided by libertarian values. But most people do not abide by these values.
You can believe in libertarianism all you want, and you can be a party of that loser minority political party. But the fact of the matter is, in most cases, you will be outvoted by fascists via sheer strength of number. What is to be done about this? How can libertarian principles prevail unless they are enforced by the government? Democracy will not uphold them.
|
silversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: DoctorJ]
#2792457 - 06/14/04 12:59 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DoctorJ said: I think that libertarianism would work well if everyone abided by libertarian values. But most people do not abide by these values.
This would be true of communism, but not libertarianism. Even those who are not libertarians are capable of making decisions for themselves.
Quote:
You can believe in libertarianism all you want, and you can be a party of that loser minority political party.
Not all libertarians belong to the libertarian party. Some(like myself) prefer to use the two-party system to vote for who they think will do less harm than the other.
Quote:
But the fact of the matter is, in most cases, you will be outvoted by fascists via sheer strength of number. What is to be done about this? How can libertarian principles prevail unless they are enforced by the government? Democracy will not uphold them.
But a strong constitution can, at least for a while. Our constitution, while much less strong than it once was, still manages to restrict the actions of government at least somewhat.
-------------------- "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire
|
DoctorJ
Registered: 06/30/03
Posts: 8,846
Loc: space
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: silversoul7]
#2792477 - 06/14/04 01:08 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
But a strong constitution can, at least for a while.
a strong constitution backed by what? How would this constitution be enforced?
Who created the constitution? A mob of idiots, or a selected group of wise men?
is the bill of rights mutually agreed upon? I would argue that it is not. You act as if all people 'hold these truths to be self-evident'. They do not. Do you think that the second amendment would have survived a vote if it were held in the wake of the columbine massacre? I don't.
Quote:
Our constitution, while much less strong than it once was, still manages to restrict the actions of government at least somewhat.
It restricts the actions of the people, it just phrases those restrictions using gain-framing instead of loss-framing.
|
silversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: DoctorJ]
#2792493 - 06/14/04 01:17 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DoctorJ said: Quote:
But a strong constitution can, at least for a while.
a strong constitution backed by what? How would this constitution be enforced?
The Supreme Court currently enforces the constitution, and while they haven't always done the best job of doing so, they've generally done pretty well.
Quote:
Who created the constitution? A mob of idiots, or a selected group of wise men?
Both, but fortunately there were enough wise men at the time to ensure that it was a well thought-out document.
Quote:
is the bill of rights mutually agreed upon? I would argue that it is not. You act as if all people 'hold these truths to be self-evident'. They do not. Do you think that the second amendment would have survived a vote if it were held in the wake of the columbine massacre? I don't.
No, but what does that prove? Libertarianism is not democracy. It is preservation of individual liberty against tyranny, whether it be tyranny of a minority or the majority.
Quote:
Quote:
Our constitution, while much less strong than it once was, still manages to restrict the actions of government at least somewhat.
It restricts the actions of the people, it just phrases those restrictions using gain-framing instead of loss-framing.
Please explain. I'd love to hear this.
-------------------- "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire
|
DoctorJ
Registered: 06/30/03
Posts: 8,846
Loc: space
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: silversoul7]
#2792583 - 06/14/04 01:55 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The Supreme Court currently enforces the constitution, and while they haven't always done the best job of doing so, they've generally done pretty well.
the supreme court sounds to me like an elite group of selected individuals not even popularly elected.
Quote:
Both, but fortunately there were enough wise men at the time to ensure that it was a well thought-out document.
indeed it was, for its time.
Quote:
No, but what does that prove? Libertarianism is not democracy. It is preservation of individual liberty against tyranny, whether it be tyranny of a minority or the majority.
but how can you preserve liberty from tyranny without somehow enforcing unpopular principles on people?
Quote:
It restricts the actions of the people, it just phrases those restrictions using gain-framing instead of loss-framing.
Please explain. I'd love to hear this.
hmmm.. perhaps I should explain the terms I used first. 'Gain framing' would be like me saying "I'm going to let you live", whereas 'loss framing' would be like me saying "I'm not going to kill you." Although both phrases have the same meaning, they both carry different connotations which studies have shown to be psychologically significant.
One recent study, for example, showed that beach goers were more likely to apply sunscreen if they were handed a pamphlet containing the sentence 'The application of sunscreen prevents skin cancer' than if they were handed a pamphlet containing the phrase 'Failure to apply sunscreen may result in skin cancer.'
See- although the two messages said the same thing, one was communicated in terms of gains, and one was communicated in terms of loss. People were more likely to abide by the message framed in gains.
This is why when a store has a sale, they say that things are '20% off' instead of '80% full price'. Even though these two messages are objectively the same, they mean different things to most people.
I believe that the founding fathers wrote the constitution the same way. They framed government restrictions in terms of gains.
The fact of the matter is that the constitution often has to be enforced against the popular will. Look at desegregation in the South during the time of the civil rights movement, or the South during reconstruction.
To say that the Constitution only grants people freedoms is simply not telling the full story.
Remember the 18th amendment? It wasn't the first time that the will of the ignorant majority overrode libertarian values.
|
silversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: DoctorJ]
#2792610 - 06/14/04 02:06 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DoctorJ said: Quote:
The Supreme Court currently enforces the constitution, and while they haven't always done the best job of doing so, they've generally done pretty well.
the supreme court sounds to me like an elite group of selected individuals not even popularly elected.
True, but they don't decide what job someone must have or how they have to live their life, at least not on the level that you're talking about. That's the part that I really object to. I could care less how the leaders are chosen, as long as they uphold individual liberty.
Quote:
Quote:
Both, but fortunately there were enough wise men at the time to ensure that it was a well thought-out document.
indeed it was, for its time.
And I have yet to see a political document today which matches its wisdom.
Quote:
Quote:
No, but what does that prove? Libertarianism is not democracy. It is preservation of individual liberty against tyranny, whether it be tyranny of a minority or the majority.
but how can you preserve liberty from tyranny without somehow enforcing unpopular principles on people?
The main principle here is the right of people to live their lives as they choose. If someone infringes upon that right, they have initiated force, and thus force against them is justified in order to maintain the peace. A constitution, with the means to enforce it, is necessary to defend against the tyranny of the majority.
Quote:
To say that the Constitution only grants people freedoms is simply not telling the full story.
It doesn't grant freedoms. It protects freedoms. As you said, the same thing can be said two ways and mean the same thing. The freedom of speech is still the freedom of speech no matter how you phrase it.
Quote:
Remember the 18th amendment? It wasn't the first time that the will of the ignorant majority overrode libertarian values.
So what?
-------------------- "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire
|
DoctorJ
Registered: 06/30/03
Posts: 8,846
Loc: space
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: silversoul7]
#2792621 - 06/14/04 02:11 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
So what?
so, a society based in purely mutual consent is doomed to be a tyrannical society, because most people are tyrants at heart and they will consent to tyranny even when given a choice including libertarianism. Quote:
It doesn't grant freedoms. It protects freedoms.
it protects certain freedoms by restricting others.
Edited by DoctorJ (06/14/04 02:13 PM)
|
silversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: DoctorJ]
#2792648 - 06/14/04 02:24 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DoctorJ said:
Quote:
So what?
so, a society based in purely mutual consent is doomed to be a tyrannical society, because most people are tyrants at heart and they will consent to tyranny even when given a choice including libertarianism.
Again, what this calls into question is democracy, not libertarianism. It only shows what I have been saying all along: That people are for the most part unqualified to make decisions for other people. They are only qualified to make decisions for themselves.
Quote:
Quote:
It doesn't grant freedoms. It protects freedoms.
it protects certain freedoms by restricting others.
The only freedoms it restricts are those which involve restricting the freedoms of others.
-------------------- "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire
|
Ancalagon
AgnosticLibertarian
Registered: 07/30/02
Posts: 1,364
Last seen: 15 years, 1 month
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: DoctorJ]
#2792649 - 06/14/04 02:24 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
it protects certain freedoms by restricting others.
Elaborate without using an initiation of force argument. My right to life does not nullify some right you have to kill me.
-------------------- ?When Alexander the Great visted the philosopher Diogenes and asked whether he could do anything for him, Diogenes is said to have replied: 'Yes, stand a little less between me and the sun.' It is what every citizen is entitled to ask of his government.? -Henry Hazlitt in 'Economics in One Lesson'
|
DoctorJ
Registered: 06/30/03
Posts: 8,846
Loc: space
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: silversoul7]
#2792656 - 06/14/04 02:28 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Again, what this calls into question is democracy, not libertarianism. It only shows what I have been saying all along: That people are for the most part unqualified to make decisions for other people. They are only qualified to make decisions for themselves.
so basically you want to somehow force people to stop telling eachother what to do, because they will not abandone this behavior on their own.
|
Ancalagon
AgnosticLibertarian
Registered: 07/30/02
Posts: 1,364
Last seen: 15 years, 1 month
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: DoctorJ]
#2792658 - 06/14/04 02:31 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
so basically you want to somehow force people to stop telling eachother what to do, because they will not abandone this behavior on their own.
What is so hard to grasp about Libertarianism? You can tell me what you want me to do till your mouth bleeds, it's when you FORCE me to do something that the government needs to intervene.
-------------------- ?When Alexander the Great visted the philosopher Diogenes and asked whether he could do anything for him, Diogenes is said to have replied: 'Yes, stand a little less between me and the sun.' It is what every citizen is entitled to ask of his government.? -Henry Hazlitt in 'Economics in One Lesson'
|
DoctorJ
Registered: 06/30/03
Posts: 8,846
Loc: space
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: Ancalagon]
#2792660 - 06/14/04 02:32 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
My right to life does not nullify some right you have to kill me.
I may not have the right to kill you, but I may easily have the capability to kill you. What is going to stop me from doing so? Popular laws? What if i were to use my knowledge of social psychology to convince a large amount of people that you were a bad person that didn't deserve to live? Even though it probably isn't true, many people could easily be convinced of it.
|
silversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: DoctorJ]
#2792662 - 06/14/04 02:34 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DoctorJ said: Quote:
Again, what this calls into question is democracy, not libertarianism. It only shows what I have been saying all along: That people are for the most part unqualified to make decisions for other people. They are only qualified to make decisions for themselves.
so basically you want to somehow force people to stop telling eachother what to do, because they will not abandone this behavior on their own.
They can tell each other what to do all they want. They just shouldn't use the government to force them to do it. Keeping the peace is a legitimate function of government, and this includes stopping the initiation of force against peaceful individuals.
-------------------- "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire
|
DoctorJ
Registered: 06/30/03
Posts: 8,846
Loc: space
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: Ancalagon]
#2792673 - 06/14/04 02:39 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
What is so hard to grasp about Libertarianism?
its pretty hard to understand something so inherently frought with paradoxes. Perhaps my doublethink unit isn't functioning correctly.
|
Ancalagon
AgnosticLibertarian
Registered: 07/30/02
Posts: 1,364
Last seen: 15 years, 1 month
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: DoctorJ]
#2792680 - 06/14/04 02:41 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
may not have the right to kill you, but I may easily have the capability to kill you. What is going to stop me from doing so?
I and my right to bear arms that the second amendment recognizes will stop you if the government doesn't get around to it. Say it with me, INITIATION OF FORCE - BAD.
Quote:
What if i were to use my knowledge of social psychology to convince a large amount of people that you were a bad person that didn't deserve to live? Even though it probably isn't true, many people could easily be convinced of it.
That'd be very impressive. If your cult decided to act on it the government and/or myself would put a stop to this initiation of force.
-------------------- ?When Alexander the Great visted the philosopher Diogenes and asked whether he could do anything for him, Diogenes is said to have replied: 'Yes, stand a little less between me and the sun.' It is what every citizen is entitled to ask of his government.? -Henry Hazlitt in 'Economics in One Lesson'
|
DoctorJ
Registered: 06/30/03
Posts: 8,846
Loc: space
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: Ancalagon]
#2792697 - 06/14/04 02:46 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Say it with me, INITIATION OF FORCE - BAD.
how can you prevent the initiation of force except by force itself? People will not voluntarily lay down their arms and play nice with eachother.
Quote:
That'd be very impressive.
Its been done before. By Hitler. Except instead of convincing the majority to hate one person, he convinced them to hate an entire race of people. That was an impressive feat, but not one which i would like to see repeated.
|
Ancalagon
AgnosticLibertarian
Registered: 07/30/02
Posts: 1,364
Last seen: 15 years, 1 month
|
Re: Why I'm not a libertarian [Re: DoctorJ]
#2792720 - 06/14/04 02:55 PM (19 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
how can you prevent the initiation of force except by force itself? People will not voluntarily lay down their arms and play nice with eachother.
Think closely about what the phrase 'initiation of force' entails. Nowhere, ANYWHERE, have I or any true Libertarian stated all force is prohibited. The initiation of force is what is morally wrong. If you storm into my house and fire at me, I am completely justified in shooting back and killing you.
Quote:
Its been done before. By Hitler. Except instead of convincing the majority to hate one person, he convinced them to hate an entire race of people. That was an impressive feat, but not one which i would like to see repeated.
Thanks for the history lesson...I almost forgot about Hitler!
-------------------- ?When Alexander the Great visted the philosopher Diogenes and asked whether he could do anything for him, Diogenes is said to have replied: 'Yes, stand a little less between me and the sun.' It is what every citizen is entitled to ask of his government.? -Henry Hazlitt in 'Economics in One Lesson'
|
|