 |
| |
|
|
Berzerker
|
 |
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:31
|
|
chegitz - quote:
Who ever said we thought the government was moral? |
You want to put words in our mouths, don't complain when the favor is returned. But does that mean you think government is immoral? That puts you in a peculiar position given you're a communist.
quote:
Morality is besides the point. No society is moral. |
Morality is never beside the point.
quote:
All have a foundation of theft and genocide and slavery. We commies simply say, we feel free to take the whole of society since you have no just claim anyway, as you stole it from others. |
I stole "society"? Don't you think it wise to make sure your victims are guilty before stealing from them? Oh, and how are you any different then if you steal too?
quote:
Libertarians are hypocrites, because they claim their morality and rights are absolute, but then draw a line in the sand at reparations for the decendents of the wronged. |
Unlike Theben, at least you try to support the accusation of hypocrisy. Now, why am I responsible for what your ancestor may have done? You believe that the sins of the father become the sins of the great grand children? Btw, I've participated in Israeli-Palestinian threads and I've said that land belongs to the people who owned the land in the 1940's and their descendents. So what does that say about your "proof"?
quote:
"Oh, it would be too difficult to figure out who proffited from slavery/genocide/invasion/theft by government and who the decendents are and who were should divvy up the reparations, so we just won't do it." |
Difficult or not, the reason libertarians oppose reparations is because we don't believe the innocent should be punished for the crimes of the guilty. If you're going to accuse us of hypocrisy, don't put your fabricated arguments in our mouths and portray it as proof.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
St Leo
|
 |
Member of the Apolyton Social Democratic Party
Jul 2005
time: 00:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Floyd
The poor don't deserve any GOOD or SERVICE that they can't or won't pay for, the same as anyone else.
|
Having a minimal level of goods and services available to everyone increase prosperity and growth.
quote:
Well, if you are allowed to say that laissez faire systems will fail, even though we've never had one, then I'm allowed to say that true communist systems will also fail, even though we've never had one of those, either  |
Good, we agree on something, though I wouldn't call the two pet crackpot theories opposites either.
quote:
That's not necessarily true. Children with families who could afford it wouldn't have been working, but rather have been in schools - much better schools than the public crap we have today.  |
Why do you want to punish children for what they have no control over?
quote:
I'm concerned with freedom. |
Freedom without choice is no freedom at all. Freedom is not the opposite of government. There is an optimum level of government for greatest freedom, and no freedom at all at the extremes.
quote:
And I don't care if a person who robs a grocery store was starving - he should STILL go to prison for a good long time. |
Sadist.
quote:
That's why there should be no restrictions on the type of weapons I can arm myself with. That way, when the starving guy breaks into my house in the middle of the night for food, I can shoot his ass without worrying about the knife or Saturday Night Special he may or may not be carrying. |
Murderer.
quote:
Private Police: you would find one who could argue various services provided by the police ... constant domestic violence calls ... are either un-needed or even detrimental. |
Misogynistic sanctioner of abuse (or, in certain cases, Misandristic one).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Vesayen
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
chegitz -
Ah yes, and you send a large chunk of your income to S Africa so the poor get justice? Oh, that's their problem? Yes it is, isn't it... Hmm...
There's a ******* left winger for ya, steal us blind to pay for all sorts of crap and then spit in our faces. No chegitz, it is because of people like DF because if we didn't exist, you a@@holes would have to pay for all that **** yourselves.
Gee, and where do "we" get the money for all those programs? Oh yeah, "taxes". Here's an idea, don't "tax" away our money and we'll have more to spend on the necessities of life. That's a left winger for ya, tax people into poverty and then give 'em back some of their money in the name of "compassion".
Those programs don't "allow" a working man to earn a living, his skills sold in the marketplace creates his wealth.
This natural tendency toward monopolies is mitigated by the marketplace, that's why some corporations seek to create government biases by bribing politicians.
A desire to learn creates education, not government schools. Technology and the market is what determines educational opportunities, not government schools. We have government schools and we see a surplus of people who are qualified to teach or run for Congress and not much else. But you didn't refute DF's assertion that we have no right to force others to pay for our education, you merely argued we should legalise stealing because you like the alleged result.
That's a great argument, if you don't let us steal your money now to educate our children, it will be stolen later by our children. Is that a contract? If so, can we sue the parents of children who commit crimes for breach of contract? Because we are being ripped off to pay for the government schools and by the products of those schools. |
Bezerker, I think that is possibly one of the most compulsive arguments I've heard on Apolyton in a while-please run for local goverment in my state!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:31
|
|
quote:
Having a minimal level of goods and services available to everyone increase prosperity and growth. |
We're on different wavelengths. Your posts about "increasing prosperity and growth" do nothing to refute my points that having universal health care, education, whatever, is coercive and unfree.
quote:
Why do you want to punish children for what they have no control over? |
Why do you want to punish ME for what *I* have no control over?
quote:
Freedom without choice is no freedom at all. Freedom is not the opposite of government. There is an optimum level of government for greatest freedom, and no freedom at all at the extremes. |
Freedom is simply the lack of coercion. I know that you lefties like to equate freedom with money, but that just isn't the case. There is a difference between being FREE to do something and being able to AFFORD that same thing.
Why is it sadism to punish theft and breaking and entering?
How is defending yourself and your home murder? If someone breaks in, in the middle of the night, you don't know if he has a gun, or what his intentions are. But the fact is that he is on your property, without your permission, and has ALREADY demonstrated hostile intent (whether to kill you, rob you, or whatever). Protecting yourself isn't murder.
And if it turns out he was doing this because he was starving? It doesn't change a damn thing - dying is natural, and fear of dying doesn't justify stealing.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:31
|
|
You can either be in favor of freedom, or you can be in favor of tyranny, but you can't be in favor of both at the same time.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:31
|
|
There are no shades of grey. Either my life is my own, or it is not. Either I am free, or I am the slave of "society".
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:31
|
|
quote:
I am not equating freedom with money. I am equating freedom with opportunities. You are the ones who equate opportunities with money, not I. |
Yes, you are free to pursue any opportunity that you have, or that you can make for yourself, PROVIDED THAT you don't violate the rights of others, or close down certain opportunities for others. That is, your rights don't extend to violate those of others.
quote:
Fine, if you get to define freedom |
I don't get to define freedom. In the English language, freedom means, first and foremost, the absence of coercion.
quote:
I get to define liberty. |
You are certainly FREE to do so.
quote:
Liberty is about being able to not hate your life. |
Liberty and self-hate are not related concepts. A man whose freedom is being constantly violated can love himself, while a man whose freedom is not being violated can hate himself. There are plenty of real world examples of both.
quote:
Liberty is about being able to contribute to the advancement of art and science. |
Absolutely. Being able - in the sense that you are not restrained from doing so - to contribute to arts and sciences is certainly an aspect of freedom.
quote:
Liberty is about not burning out at thirty from overwork with nothing to show for it. |
Actually burning out at 30 with nothing to show for it is probably an example of poor decision making, not a lack of liberty. And some people choose to make decisions that we would consider poor, but they are certainly free to do so.
quote:
Liberty is about everyone having leisure time to spend as they damn well please. |
No, in this context, liberty is about being able to contract freely with others. If your contract states that you get 2 months off per year, then that is what you get, and if your contract states that you work 12 hour days, six days a week, with no paid vacation time, then that is what you get as well. You had the liberty to accept or reject either decision.
Your "definition" of liberty is idiotic and contradictory, although you are CERTAINLY *free* to say whatever you want.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
|
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:31
|
|
Thx Vesayen, but I fear the majority is addicted to legalised stealing. I shouldn't be too harsh though, Ben Franklin understood the desire for security was so strong it could overcome the desire for freedom. But he did warn we would have neither if we went down that path and he was right... It reminds me of, perhaps the proverbial, convict who is released from prison only to run out and commit another crime. When asked why, he said prison afforded him security and his freedom did not.
St Leo - quote:
Having a minimal level of goods and services available to everyone increase prosperity and growth. |
If utility is your goal, why do you reject out of hand the negative consequences of a welfare state? Would you say the current welfare state in the US qualifies as "minimal" or in excess of this level? How do you explain out-of-wedlock birthrates? That, it appears, is the greatest determinant of poverty. So why has this rate climbed as the welfare state has grown? Paying people to be irresponsible will only get you more irresponsible behavior...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Vesayen
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by St Leo
quote:
Originally posted by David Floyd
The poor don't deserve any GOOD or SERVICE that they can't or won't pay for, the same as anyone else.
|
Having a minimal level of goods and services available to everyone increase prosperity and growth.
|
No it dosent, it just makes the poor dependant on it.
Im sure the VAST majority of welfare recipients use that money for only a short time and climb out of the hole, right? 
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
Thx Vesayen, but I fear the majority is addicted to legalised stealing. I shouldn't be too harsh though, Ben Franklin understood the desire for security was so strong it could overcome the desire for freedom. But he did warn we would have neither if we went down that path and he was right... It reminds me of, perhaps the proverbial, convict who is released from prison only to run out and commit another crime. When asked why, he said prison afforded him security and his freedom did not.
|
Untill rescently I was in that group I would of called you a heartless bastard for not wanting social programs... then I realized, why the hell am I paying a hedonistic amount of taxes when the money isnt solving the problems the money is being thrown at :? We cant be worse off then we are now for those problems, but we can be more free.
And I am serious, run for office!
I'd also like to point out this is the most one sided political beat down I think I've seen on Apolyton in some time, Go freedom train go! 
Last edited by Vesayen on 05-11-2003 at 10:26
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
St Leo
|
|
Member of the Apolyton Social Democratic Party
Jul 2005
time: 00:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Floyd
There are no shades of grey. Either my life is my own, or it is not. Either I am free, or I am the slave of "society". |
"Free" is a word that makes no sense outside the context of "society". You are not an electron. There is no innate physical freedom that you can achieve.
Democratic, tax-funded government is our only set of checks-and-balances against the godfathers, tyrants, kings, patriarchs, bishops, chiefs, gang leaders, and just plain bullies. It's the only known solution to that since the problem was imposed to us on agriculture.
If you want to have a long-term libertarian society, you are going to have to have everyone on earth abandon agriculture. Otherwise, any slate that you wipe clean will immediately be defaced and defecated upon by opportunists, scumbags, and just general *******s who will immediately set up a myriad of disgusting hereditary social hierarchies and supplant the libertarian clean slate with feudalisms, oligarchies, dictatorships, and autocracies.
And, no, there is no bloody way that six billion people can survive and prosper following a nomadic lifestyle on this planet.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Vesayen
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Floyd
There are no shades of grey. Either my life is my own, or it is not. Either I am free, or I am the slave of "society". |
Very well said.
quote:
Originally posted by St Leo
quote:
Originally posted by David Floyd
Freedom is simply the lack of coercion. I know that you lefties like to equate freedom with money, but that just isn't the case. There is a difference between being FREE to do something and being able to AFFORD that same thing. |
I am not equating freedom with money. I am equating freedom with opportunities. You are the ones who equate opportunities with money, not I.
Fine, if you get to define freedom, I get to define liberty. Liberty is about being able to not hate your life. Liberty is about being able to contribute to the advancement of art and science. Liberty is about not burning out at thirty from overwork with nothing to show for it. Liberty is about everyone having leisure time to spend as they damn well please.
|
You are defining freedom as the ability to have a "nice" life where you get the things you want. That isnt freedom. Freedom is the ability to do whatever the hell you want providing you dont infringe on the rights of another(best brief defenition I can think of). If your life isnt "nice" because you made bad choices, your still free, you just made bad choices.
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
quote:
There are no shades of grey. |
 And this is why libertarians will never gain any power in the world.
|
If you are TRULY right, there is no compromise-infact to do so would be wrong, as it would admit there is some fault when there is none. You cant compromise truth. Liberty sounds like a good idea to me, what do you think?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
|
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:31
|
|
St Leo - quote:
"Free" is a word that makes no sense outside the context of "society". You are not an electron. There is no innate physical freedom that you can achieve. |
"Free" makes sense outside of society too since it requires the absence of coercion or constraint from others. If there are no others, you are by definition, free.
quote:
Democratic, tax-funded government is our only set of checks-and-balances against the godfathers, tyrants, kings, patriarchs, bishops, chiefs, gang leaders, and just plain bullies. It's the only known solution to that since the problem was imposed to us on agriculture. |
Ever hear of the tyranny of the majority? Slaves understood that concept very well...
quote:
If you want to have a long-term libertarian society, you are going to have to have everyone on earth abandon agriculture. |
Really? Why?
quote:
Otherwise, any slate that you wipe clean will immediately be defaced and defecated upon by opportunists, scumbags, and just general *******s who will immediately set up a myriad of disgusting hereditary social hierarchies and supplant the libertarian clean slate with feudalisms, oligarchies, dictatorships, and autocracies. |
If we are to have a libertarian system, enforcing that system against would-be oppressors doesn't violate libertarianism. Democratic systems will defend themselves too you know, all systems will try to prevent abolition...
quote:
And, no, there is no bloody way that six billion people can survive and prosper following a nomadic lifestyle on this planet. |
Gee, a libertarian government = a nomadic lifestyle now? Hey Ramo, did you hear that? He's an anarchist Leo so would we be living in caves clashing stones against each other for cutting tools under his ideology?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Vesayen
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
quote:
If you are TRULY right, there is no compromise-infact to do so would be wrong, as it would admit there is some fault when there is none. You cant compromise truth. |
NO ONE is truly right. And there is no one 'truth'. There are different versions of truth and right depending on who is telling the story. I'm not omniscient, so how can I be confident I'm 100% right? I'm sure a lot of people throughout history who disagree with you (the Catholic Church, Dicatators, etc.) believed they were truely right. |
I love how people claim there is no truth because they cant disproove someone elses belief, or proove their own. There is absolute truth. Absolute truth is the current truth untill new evidence comes around to the contrary.
It's simple really, they were wrong, were not
Even if every person in history up until me said they were right and were actually wrong, that does not logically mean that I am wrong.
To claim the beliefs of past individuals means that I am wrong is a non sequitor(a total logical disconect)-there is no correlation.
Does a human being have the right to dominate another for any reason? No-therefore the idea of liberty is the correct one.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31.
Apolyton Time is 00:31. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-11-2003 09:26
So whoever is in power at this moment decides what the absolute truth is? Wow... I may believe the might makes right, but even I don't go THAT far. What immense power we modern people have. We can change truth by using 'new evidence'!
|