Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Vvellum]
    #2833526 -

bi0 writes:

I'd rather see those who wish to debate anarchist theory actually debate anarchists.

If that's what you'd rather see, feel free to review the two threads for which I provided links. Agent Cooper was a dedicated anarchist -- just check his avatar and the links he was constantly providing. Svoboda and mm. were anarchists as well, but mm. didn't have a lot of input into the discussion.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: ]
    #2833609 -

Quote:
tell me what is libertarian about a system which attempts to control and divert the production and exchange of wealth in society. what are the limits to its power? what rights do people retain?


i dont believe you saying that you can't see how its at all libertarian. its half libertarian which is why half its name is 'libertarian'. market is not unregulated, other personal freedoms are.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Tao]
    #2833616 -

a non-libertarian socialist might not believe in decriminalizing prostitution, drug use. euthanasia, gambling, etc.

anyway, like pinky said, its just another term to group a bunch of people together.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Baby_Hitler]
    #2834154 -

Baby_Hitler asks:

In your opinion, would someone who believed in a libertarian government but also advocated collectivist communities where people live under a voluntary socialist arrangement be a legitimate form of libertarian socialist?

No.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Vvellum]
    #2834192 -

bi0 writes:

by the way, I think the poster named Beery in the thread you linked summed it quite nicely:

Didn't bother reading my reply to Beery, did you? My reply demonstrated I understand as much (probably more) about anarchism as he does.

http://www.shroomery.org/archives/showfl...rev=#Post364877

I dont think you "refuted" anarchism...

Why am I not surprised you hold that opinion? The fact that none of the four anarchists arrayed against my argument were able to even answer -- much less defend their answers -- several of the key questions I posed in order to illustrate the absurdity of their variant of Collectivism means nothing to you, does it?

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Tao]
    #2834264 -

its half libertarian which is why half its name is 'libertarian'.

half of the words in the name are "libertarian". this doesn't make it half libertarian.

market is not unregulated, other personal freedoms are.

but a very large part of human life, particularly the actions required to sustain it, can be described as part of the market. power over the market is in fact complete power over people's lives.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Phred]
    #2834271 -

pinksharkmark said:
Baby_Hitler asks:

In your opinion, would someone who believed in a libertarian government but also advocated collectivist communities where people live under a voluntary socialist arrangement be a legitimate form of libertarian socialist?

No.

pinky



Why not?


--------------------
https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-for-renee-goods-wife-and-son

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Tao]
    #2834278 -

a non-libertarian socialist might not believe in decriminalizing prostitution, drug use. euthanasia, gambling, etc.

but a "libertarian" socialist, instead of decriminalizing prostitution, euthanasia, and drugs, could require an impossibly expensive licensing fee for euthanisia doctors, prostitutes, and recreational drug manufacturers. they could levy such a tax on the proceeds from gambling or drug sales so as to force drug sales and gambling into the 'black market'.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Phred]
    #2834339 -

From the perspective of an outsider, I do not think that is the case at all. You were unable to defend your position just as much as the others - they scored some points as did youself.

Are you always so smug?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Vvellum]
    #2835146 -

I'm afraid so.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: ]
    #2835411 -

its half libertarian which is why half its name is 'libertarian'.
half of the words in the name are "libertarian". this doesn't make it half libertarian.

cmon mm, you're not even trying. i said its ideology is half libertarian so its name is half libertarian. P therefore Q does not mean Q therefore P. All bachelors are men, not all men are bachelors. cmon i don't need to explain basic logic structure to you, youre not trying.

market is not unregulated, other personal freedoms are.

but a very large part of human life, particularly the actions required to sustain it, can be described as part of the market.

true, and socialism sees unequal opportunity to the market and aims to lessen these inequalities (though not completely even them and reduce any market incentive), thus aiming to increase individuals' ability to sustain life (i.e. universal healthcare, welfare for children with impoverished parents, etc.)

power over the market is in fact complete power over people's lives.
that would be if the market were a complete command economy which is not what socialism is

but a "libertarian" socialist, instead of decriminalizing prostitution, euthanasia, and drugs, could require an impossibly expensive licensing fee for euthanisia doctors, prostitutes, and recreational drug manufacturers. they could levy such a tax on the proceeds from gambling or drug sales so as to force drug sales and gambling into the 'black market'.

the operative word there being *could*. a libertarian *could* decide to create the most ridiculously expensive military possible and tax their populace as much as possible. they *could*, but given their ideology, they probably wouldn't. same would go for a libertarian socialist.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Vvellum]
    #2835529 -

bi0 said:
Are you always so smug?


Smug? Nah. He's just a very wise man who's right far more often than he's wrong. It's a talent.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Vvellum]
    #2835569 -

bi0 writes:

You were unable to defend your position just as much as the others - they scored some points as did youself.

Which position of mine was left undefended? You've read the threads, tell us which one I blew.

Are you always so smug?

It's not "smug" to point out fallacies.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Baby_Hitler]
    #2835572 -

Baby_Hitler writes:

Why not?

No Libertarian I've ever met (or read) would advocate Collectivist communities. The fact that Libertarians recognize there may be people living in a Capitalist country who would feel comfortable choosing to pool their possessions and live communally, and that Libertarians would support the right of those individuals to follow that course of action (to a point) doesn't make those Libertarians "Libertarian Socialists", it makes them Libertarians.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Phred]
    #2835992 -

Quote:
Which position of mine was left undefended? You've read the threads, tell us which one I blew.


Well, besides sidestepping and strawman attacks, you simply did not answer many of their questions. I am in the middle of a pretty hairy project at the moment. This is the last day for the next two weeks that I will have any significant amount of time off. It'll be difficult enough for me to spend much time online anywhere till this project is done, so I have no intention of re-reading and picking apart that pedantic thread.

Quote:
It's not "smug" to point out fallacies.


You are smug to say that you "refuted anarchism" in those old threads when, from the perspective of an outsider who is neither an anarchist or Ayn Randist like yourself, neither side can fairly claim "victory" or "refutation." That is not the case, and to do so would be an excersise in arrogance. Your smugness is evident again when you called the entire population of blackened.flag idiots (after a mere 30 minutes) and not worthy of your arguments.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Vvellum]
    #2836185 -

That is not the case, and to do so would be an excersise in arrogance

:thumbup:


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Tao]
    #2837059 -

cmon mm, you're not even trying. i said its ideology is half libertarian so its name is half libertarian.

yes and i said it wasn't, and explained why. a state that protects private citizens in engaging in any honest and peaceful action except creating wealth or making exchanges with other individuals is NOT "half-libertarian", but maybe a tenth or so.

market is not unregulated, other personal freedoms are.

and what good is the freedom to read subversive literature or smoke pot if you aren't allowed to provide for your own material well-being and survival in any peaceful way you see fit?

without market freedoms, you cannot survive. control over "the market" is control over the means by which humans provide for their material needs. it is control over life itself.

i don't mean this in a provacative way or anything... but do you have a job? do you pay bills? do you support yourself or do you depend largely on assistance from your parents?

true, and socialism sees unequal opportunity to the market

yes, some people are more qualified or in a better position to create wealth than others.

and aims to lessen these inequalities

by forcefully seizing wealth from those who are more productive and giving it to those who are less productive. who are you (or anyone else) to decide who shall have the wealth they create seized from them and bestowed on another person? if it wasn't for the economic consequenes, this would be, at the very least, an ethical problem. do you understand the incentives that this sort of policy provides to market behavior?

that would be if the market were a complete command economy which is not what socialism is

explain.

a libertarian *could* decide to create the most ridiculously expensive military possible and tax their populace as much as possible. they *could*, but given their ideology, they probably wouldn't. same would go for a libertarian socialist.

no they could not. taxation is an initiation of force.

Edited by mushmaster (06/28/04 06:45 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: ]
    #2838515 -

a state that protects private citizens in engaging in any honest and peaceful action except creating wealth or making exchanges with other individuals is NOT "half-libertarian", but maybe a tenth or so.

classic libertarian rhetoric, making mountains out of molehills. you make it sound like men roam supermarkets and stock exchanges with guns forcing people to buy and not buy certain things.

market is not unregulated, other personal freedoms are.

i don't mean this in a provacative way or anything... but do you have a job? do you pay bills? do you support yourself or do you depend largely on assistance from your parents?

i dont know what this has to do with anything, but no, I'll be doing that next year. and yes i do have job right now and quite frankly am a bit embarassed of it because I don't feel like it creates any real 'wealth', just trying to divert marketshare from another dot com. but that's another story. and aren't you like 20 or 21 going to university? fact is: *newsflash* most liberals have their own jobs and have to pay bills.

by forcefully seizing wealth from those who are more productive and giving it to those who are less productive. who are you (or anyone else) to decide who shall have the wealth they create seized from them and bestowed on another person? if it wasn't for the economic consequenes, this would be, at the very least, an ethical problem.

no one person decides. the society decides through democratic representation. if someone does not like the system, they may renounce citizenship and leave. simple as that. eventually any contract, such as this social contract, will have to resort to force if one party does not come through.

do you understand the incentives that this sort of policy provides to market behavior?

of course, that's why i wouldnt support full-on communism and command economies. its why there was so little innovation in the command economy eras of the pre-industrial agricultural era. however, lets say you have a 30% tax on something you do where you're earning $100. you will now only earn $70, but thats still $70 more than you would otherwise have so you're probably going to do that work. now if you took 100% of the money that would be a different story. And if someone was able to work and simply didnt and was completely supported, that would be a problem to. fortunately most welfare isn't actually like that (though most conservatives try to paint it that way), and places where it is, need to be reformed. no one will try to tell you that welfare in its current state does not need fixing and improvement. the welfare system is still in its very early stages.

that would be if the market were a complete command economy which is not what socialism is

explain.

command economy is where the all prices and markets are completely dictated by the state. in socialism, there are only parts which are controlled by the government. remember, like 5% of taxes go to welfare.

a libertarian *could* decide to create the most ridiculously expensive military possible and tax their populace as much as possible. they *could*, but given their ideology, they probably wouldn't. same would go for a libertarian socialist.

no they could not. taxation is an initiation of force.

how do will this society raise money for the military? the land value tax idea? techinically a society *could* have a crazily high land value tax. my point is that this "could" shit is irrelevant--they just wouldn't do something like that contrary to their ideology, if it was in fact their ideology.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: ]
    #2839333 -

and what good is the freedom to read subversive literature or smoke pot if you aren't allowed to provide for your own material well-being and survival in any peaceful way you see fit?

And how does socialism prevent this exactly? You think in a socialist country no-one can provide for their own material well-being?


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: libertarian socialism [Re: Vvellum]
    #2840779 -

bi0 writes:

Well, besides sidestepping...

I did none.

... and strawman attacks..,.

Again, I did none.

... you simply did not answer many of their questions.

Sorry, you have me confused with the Anarchists. I answered their questions, they evaded mine the first three or four times I asked them, then got around to attempting to answer some.

Why are you attempting to misrepresent what was discussed in those threads? The links are there for all to see. Anyone reading it can see that I dodged nothing and set up no strawman "attacks".

You are smug to say that you "refuted anarchism" in those old threads when, from the perspective of an outsider who is neither an anarchist or Ayn Randist like yourself, neither side can fairly claim "victory" or "refutation."

So what Anarchist positions did I leave unrefuted? Their insistence that punishment for violent criminals is not required? Their position that hierarchy per se is inherently evil? Their waffling on what constitutes "consensus"? Their advocating coercion in agreements between two consenting adults? Their artificial distinction between "property" and "social possessions"? The logically flawed pronouncement that "property is theft"?

You'll notice that my very first scenario -- the wheelchair one -- flummoxed them completely. None of them could handle it. It went downhill for them from there. And that's not even considering anything at all from the second thread.

Your smugness is evident again when you called the entire population of blackened.flag idiots (after a mere 30 minutes)...

That's all it took to see roughly a dozen and a half severely flawed examples of logic, ad hominems, evasion, dodging, made-up "facts" and more. There are a few people ripping them to shreds, though. One of the ones poking holes in their positions claims to be sixteen years old. I don't know whether that's true, but he's got them tied in knots.

...and not worthy of your arguments.

The sixteen year old is doing fine all on his own. Let him shoot them down. Good learning experience for him.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Why Socialism?
( 1 2 3 4 ... 12 13 )		 Lallafa 6,490 255 06/05/17 09:05 AM
by Falcon91Wolvrn03
* Communist Anarchism DigitalDuality 1,019 6 05/05/04 03:55 AM
by BleaK
* Right wing "libertarians"?
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Xlea321 5,910 65 07/13/04 10:28 AM
by silversoul7
* God is an Anarchist.
( 1 2 all )		 Baby_Hitler 4,984 33 07/21/05 01:12 PM
by rogue_pixie
* libertarianism
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )		 domite 12,800 131 09/23/03 03:26 PM
by Autonomous
* Libertarians & Corporations Autonomous 787 6 05/11/05 10:38 AM
by Autonomous
* A Libertarian Challenge
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Ancalagon 6,215 66 05/09/05 12:00 PM
by Autonomous
* Libertarianism BuzzDoctor 1,561 19 09/09/02 09:58 AM
by Innvertigo

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
5,276 topic views. 0 members, 215 guests and 21 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.031 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 17 queries.