Why the HELL are you NOT a Libertarian?

reply to post by earthdude


Here was your quote that hawiye was responding to.

Originally posted by earthdude I would be a Libertarian but the ranks are full of complete nut cases. I lean left but some of the Libertarians fall over into the extreem right.

Ignorant means lacking knowledge. It is not a disparagement.

Ignorance is not bliss. Information is power. Spread the power.

reply to post by tauempire


Yeah, I am a liberal.

Hell, I have been called the farthest right wing nutcase out there.

Sorry to break it to you. But Libertarians believe in freedom of the social lives of everyone. They believe in the freedom of the economic of everyone. They believe in the most minimalist government there is.

Excuse me, how is that liberal? Or actually in better terminology. How is that the new definition of liberal?

No taxation on the individual. Period. What you labor for is yours. What property you own is yours.

Trying to break the cycle of ignorance.

God damn, Jean Paul Zodeaux and endisnighe, you guys are awesome. Really, gotta give it too you. Doing a great jo of defending what is right.
Marxism and Communism = Manipulation control of the populace.
Canada boy is argueing that manipulation has lead freedom to our current state of crisis. So your saying that we should MANIPULATE EVERYONE INTO THINKING ONE WAY, and THATS HOW WE SOLVE THE GOD DAMN PROBLEM!!!! How does that EVEN make sense? YOU (For(Home)Country) ARE A HYPOCRITE! Jean Paul is absolutely right, it is hubris that has caused the fall of AMerica, and it is freedom that will fight hubris back into its cage. It is knowledge and more importantly understanding that will tame that hubris into a pussy cat of pride. And hubris will no longer exist....idealy. But it will always exist unfortunetly. And thats whats great about America. FREEDOM gives us the RIGHT TO HAVE HUBRIS. It gives us the right to think and act in the wrong ways by our choosing, as long as they are not breaking the law. Communism forces the bad principles that CAN come out of freedom and capitalist markets. So you want to solve the problem by MAKING fear king. Wow. Someone's got a doctorate in Stupidity.

[edit on 17-5-2010 by lastzoroastrianleft]

Originally posted by lastzoroastrianleft
Canada boy is argueing that manipulation has lead freedom to our current state of crisis. So your saying that we should MANIPULATE EVERYONE INTO THINKING ONE WAY, and THATS HOW WE SOLVE THE GOD DAMN PROBLEM!!!! How does that EVEN make sense? YOU (For(Home)Country) ARE A HYPOCRITE!
[edit on 17-5-2010 by lastzoroastrianleft]

Good sir, I am sorry if I have offended you. However, your anger seems to contradict what you preach. Although you preach freedom, you condemn me because I do not agree with you. Sounds ironic, does it not?

You seem to fail to properly estimate the ability of large corporations to manipulate the populace and government. People, in today's western culture, are born and educated to consume and get what they want. If they don't, they whine until it comes true. In turn, we see politicians with similar ideology.

If you knew anything about communism and Marxism, you would realize that it was a solution to freedom from oppression experienced by the proletariat due to the bourgeois.

If you wish to intelligently discuss this, please continue to do so. However, your seemingly immature words and argument fail to properly represent your views. Also, if you are interested in a lengthy read, I can provide you with a University paper I have written explaining why the Communist Manifesto provides a more solid platform for freedom as opposed to John Stuart Mill's ideas presented in his essay On Liberty. (It got an A)

reply to post by For(Home)Country


I once wrote a paper in Bio 4 in high school on juvenile diabetes and the field at the time. Biology 1 was mandatory all the other were elective. I was going to become a doctor but did not follow that dream.

I received an A. I used the same paper in college. Received an A. My sister went to college to become a nurse and also some 2 year course on some psychological thinga majig. She used my paper and got an A. Shhh.

That being said, does not mean I am a doctor.

Or should force MY views on someone else. Just as no company or government or individual should force any system of control on another individual.

Originally posted by endisnighe
reply to post by For(Home)Country

 

I once wrote a paper in Bio 4 in high school on juvenile diabetes and the field at the time. Biology 1 was mandatory all the other were elective. I was going to become a doctor but did not follow that dream.

I received an A. I used the same paper in college. Received an A. My sister went to college to become a nurse and also some 2 year course on some psychological thinga majig. She used my paper and got an A. Shhh.

That being said, does not mean I am a doctor.

Or should force MY views on someone else. Just as no company or government or individual should force any system of control on another individual.

Yea, it's funny how much plagiarism exists and goes unnoticed. However, I would never try that because I just don't have the balls.

However, in my defence, I do not wish to become a professor in political science, or history. I'm actually majoring in Economics. Also, I would like to believe that a large, notable Canadian University (with a large bureaucracy put in place to combat plagiarism mind you) would be slightly more, dare I say, Academic than a standard American college and have higher standards. I could be wrong of course, perhaps that's just my national pride kicking in. The paper was also well researched with multiple academic sources.

But whatever, now I'm just bragging. Sorry

reply to post by For(Home)Country

Good sir, I am sorry if I have offended you. However, your anger seems to contradict what you preach. Although you preach freedom, you condemn me because I do not agree with you. Sounds ironic, does it not?

Sadly, this is the mentality of the communist/socialist. They will pay lip service to freedom but insist that others do not have any freedom to speak their mind. They, of course, must have this mentality, as dissent just won't do in their system, and where a Libertarian advocates the totality of freedom to speak, the communist/socialist advocates the totally of freedom to agree with them. Disagreement is not allowed, and resistance is futile, you will be assimilated.

You seem to fail to properly estimate the ability of large corporations to manipulate the populace and government. People, in today's western culture, are born and educated to consume and get what they want. If they don't, they whine until it comes true. In turn, we see politicians with similar ideology.

Any free market advocate knows full well that corporations are antithetical to free markets. They are statutorily created entities that exist by permission, and they then use their influence to insist that private individuals exist by that same permission. The irony of the communist/socialist pointing to the corporation to vilify free markets, is that both the corporation and the communist/socialist need big government in order to push forth their agenda, and the corporation loves Marxist ideas, maybe even more than the average communist/socialist does. Both, however hate the idea of freedom and self governance, as they know in their hearts they can not compete with such a choice.

If you knew anything about communism and Marxism, you would realize that it was a solution to freedom from oppression experienced by the proletariat due to the bourgeois.

A solution is merely the act of solving a problem, it does not mean the answer is correct. In order for the communist/socialist to sell their solution to a public they must first begin with class warfare, and this is the point of proletariat and bourgeois, a divisive tool used as a populist tool to rally the troops. They sell plunder as freedom, and imagine that only they have a handle on what is fair, and what is best for you. However, if you disagree with their assessment of what is best for you, then you automatically become either an ignoramus destined for a re-education camp, or you are a part of the bourgeois and they rely on the force of the masses to destroy you.

If you wish to intelligently discuss this, please continue to do so. However, your seemingly immature words and argument fail to properly represent your views. Also, if you are interested in a lengthy read, I can provide you with a University paper I have written explaining why the Communist Manifesto provides a more solid platform for freedom as opposed to John Stuart Mill's ideas presented in his essay On Liberty. (It got an A)

The communist manifesto is a pamphlet and offers nothing more than empty rhetoric. It is a sales pamphlet for an idea. Marx's Das Kapital, and Frederich Engels subsequent essays on the matter are what provide the platform for communism, not the Communist Manifesto, and if you actually got an A on a paper that used that slight book to right your lengthy paper showing how communism offers more freedom than the ideas of John Stuart Mill, one has to wonder what sort of grades your professor made when going to school, and whether critical thought was the criteria for the paper or if it just merely fit within the standards of indoctrination.

reply to post by For(Home)Country

Also, I would like to believe that a large, notable Canadian University (with a large bureaucracy put in place to combat plagiarism mind you) would be slightly more, dare I say, Academic than a standard American college and have higher standards.

It stands to reason that the bureaucracy you speak of could only discover plagiarism if End's paper was published. Otherwise, it would be highly improbable, no matter how large and efficient that bureaucracy is/was, (an oxymoron if there ever was one), of ever discovering your plagiarism of End's paper, unless of course, you used a biology paper in an economics class, as I suspect this would make your professors wonder what is going with you.

A society should have compassion and assist those less fortunate by birth or otherwise, to bring all of humanity up. One for all and all for one is not a bad way to go. Assistance to the poor is a liberal idea, a socialist idea. So what is so bad about that, what would Christ want of a society? Even John Bonner said, "we republicans need to work on our empathy." and Libertarian ideology has no concern with the poor and would let business run the world unregulated in the name of freedom and limited government. Na, that's not for me. That ideology would be disaster for the masses and enriching for the few and the power of the corporations would rule our daily existence in time. It is fine to be conservative with the tax payers money and I am with the idea of live and let live, but not the elimination of a government that regulates industry and safety, nor leaving the poor to suffer.

reply to post by For(Home)Country


I still use that paper to this day as a resume stuffer. I have it on line.

78 pages, referencing over 100 scientific papers. I actually wrote it because my brother developed it and I wanted to learn about the disease. I concluded with a couple of ideas where the disease treatment would go. I got a few of them right. My teacher of the original class was a registered nurse and he said that I would of got an A at any major college for it.

What do you want to know about juvenile diabetes as it was known in 1984.

I never plagiarized. My sister did.

Yes, you should have seen the available papers for sale back when I went to college. A little harder now with the internet.

reply to post by Pappie54


Society is no more capable of compassion and assisting others than it is in tying its own shoes. That's because society doesn't wear shoes, nor does it think or act, and neither you or I have ever met this guy Society before.

One for all and all for one only works in a fraternal sense, with voluntary members of the group committed to each other. Force them to adopt such an ideal, and inevitably there will be the opportunist who takes advantage of this forced ideal and has all work for the one, being that opportunist.

Jesus Christ never asked society to do a damn thing and instead spoke to the individual. When it came to society, his words were clear:

“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”

This notion that Libertarians don't care for the poor is borne of willful ignorance. Libertarians all have their personal charities, and most remain as private in their charitable giving as they do with the rest of their lives. Liberals and progressives, on the other hand, will shy away from personal charity, and lecture the poor when asking for help, about all the government services available to them, then pat themselves on the back for being so charitable, while that poor person either goes hungry or finds a Libertarian to help him or her out.

As to running the world, most Libertarians who are in business for themselves, have their hands full just running that business, and hardly see the benefit of running the world.

Libertarians are free market advocates and want nothing to do with corporate charters that are a contract agreeing to be inferior to the state that granted such as charter.

Libertarians do not view people as "taxpayers", and see such relegation as a dehumanizing term, that seeks to subjugate a person to being a statutorily defined soul subject to the state.

Of course, the advocates of regulation always point to the poor, and declare themselves the moral and just and explain that the poor are why big government and high taxation is necessary, and no matter how big the government gets, no matter how oppressive the government gets, they continue to point to the poor, because there are always plenty of poor people to point to, and the irony of this is always lost on them. As Jesus said:

"The poor you have with you always..."

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Boy from look and volume of your post, you don't have a life beyond ATS do you? Frankly, you come off as a Mr. Know-it-all but it is only your opinion. I disagree with your views of what works and what does not. When someone spouts such self proclaimed knowledge, I see it as opinion lacking wisdom and insight. If you were truly an extremely smart individual, you wouldn't spend so much time here trying to influence ATS members. You would have smart things to be doing in the real world if your knowledge and education were of real unique value. Get over yourself, yours is just a perspective. You are trying too hard to be a guru.

Originally posted by Pappie54
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

 

Boy from look and volume of your post, you don't have a life beyond ATS do you? Frankly, you come off as a Mr. Know-it-all but it is only your opinion. I disagree with your views of what works and what does not. When someone spouts such self proclaimed knowledge, I see it as opinion lacking wisdom and insight. If you were truly an extremely smart individual, you wouldn't spend so much time here trying to influence ATS members. You would have smart things to be doing in the real world if your knowledge and education were of real unique value. Get over yourself, yours is just a perspective. You are trying too hard to be a guru.

Look who's talking. The only difference between you and I is I don't look at four or five paragraphs and reveal I am overwhelmed by the length of the post, and call it volume. I don't make clear to the world that I am an idiot with an opinion, and instead do what I can to educate myself. You are entitled to your opinion, and you are even entitled to be the dunce you are, that is your choice.

Originally posted by endisnighe
reply to post by earthdude

 

Here was your quote that hawiye was responding to.

Originally posted by earthdude I would be a Libertarian but the ranks are full of complete nut cases. I lean left but some of the Libertarians fall over into the extreem right.

Ignorant means lacking knowledge. It is not a disparagement.

Ignorance is not bliss. Information is power. Spread the power.

Yeah, I got buthurt. I was a Libertarian for a few months. Knowledge of many nut cases within the party drove me away. I would still be a Libritarian if I had not gained the knowledge.

reply to post by endisnighe


So you really buy all this hippie commune street vendor nonsense that Zodeux is selling? Do you really see street vending as the ultimate form of capitalism?

If all businesses were street vendors, then who would pay the taxes needed to build the streets?

You still don't see the clear Marxist ideology behind Zodeaux's vision of the free market?