Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

*** December low content thread ***

rated by 0 users
This post has 46 Replies | 3 Followers

Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio Posted: Thu, Dec 2 2010 10:01 AM

  • | Post Points: 140
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,365
Points 30,945
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 177
Points 2,860
Naevius replied on Thu, Dec 2 2010 10:33 AM

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 358
Points 8,245

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,434
Points 29,210

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Fri, Dec 3 2010 7:35 AM

Interview of the creator of Quantative Easing Explained.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,434
Points 29,210

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Fri, Dec 3 2010 6:59 PM

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,434
Points 29,210

This is the definition of low content.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 358
Points 8,245

  • | Post Points: 50
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Mon, Dec 6 2010 3:00 PM

That guy is just like my dad.

Banned
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,434
Points 29,210

That Bernie Sanders video made my head want to explode. I don't understand how we wants to audit the Federal Reserve and is against the bailouts, but still blames the Fortune 500 and Wall Street instead of the source of the problem.

EDIT: An awesomely realistic, accurate, and totally not fear-mongering video about the environment.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,943
Points 49,130
SystemAdministrator
Conza88 replied on Wed, Dec 8 2010 1:22 AM

Merry Christmas ya'll!

Check this out..... laugh

Ron Paul is for self-government when compared to the Constitution. He's an anarcho-capitalist. Proof.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,434
Points 29,210

Haha, Hoppe and Rothbard actually look like they're into it.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Wed, Dec 8 2010 7:21 AM

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 347
Points 4,365
newson replied on Wed, Dec 8 2010 11:28 PM

ironic to have the holocaust museum curator talking about propaganda (nielsio video).

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,434
Points 29,210

I love when people are able to write things out so beautifully.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Fri, Dec 10 2010 3:06 AM

Do you know the person who made that is against private property rights?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,434
Points 29,210

No, I did not. I had the feeling they might not have been anarcho-capitalist just due to the red and black, but I wasn't sure of the source. I just really like the quotation. What's the name of the person who made it?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Fri, Dec 10 2010 7:52 AM

I don't know the person who wrote it, but I know anarcho-communists, and the following in that quotation refers to private property and free trade:

class structures, authoritarianism, hierarchy, replacing one authoritarian system with another.

 

Don't be fooled.

Anarcho-Communism versus Anarcho-Capitalism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmR-rQZ4qF4

Why Hate the Anarcho-Left
http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/14124.aspx

  • | Post Points: 50
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 645
Points 9,865
James replied on Fri, Dec 10 2010 7:57 AM

Well, it's open to misinterpretation.  One could view 'revolutionary' types as the ones trying to replace one authoritarian system with another.

Non bene pro toto libertas venditur auro
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Fri, Dec 10 2010 7:59 AM

The giveaway is that they're against racism and sexism.

Banned
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,943
Points 49,130
SystemAdministrator
Conza88 replied on Fri, Dec 10 2010 11:58 AM

"The giveaway is that they're against racism and sexism."

Correct. The forms of oppression they cite have nothing to do with political philosophy proper.

Ron Paul is for self-government when compared to the Constitution. He's an anarcho-capitalist. Proof.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,008
Points 16,185

at least they are against the state...  in a stateless society, there will be societies that wont be anarcho caps, but as long as they dont interfere with the market, i dont see how these communites are a problem....

My Blog: http://www.anarchico.net/

Production is 'anarchistic' - Ludwig von Mises

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,008
Points 16,185

Sanders might be an independent but he is openly a socialist

My Blog: http://www.anarchico.net/

Production is 'anarchistic' - Ludwig von Mises

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Fri, Dec 10 2010 12:49 PM

Izzy,

They are for mob rule against all private property capitalists, which is far worse than a state.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,008
Points 16,185

the point is that in a stateless society, there are going to be other civilizations besides anarcho capitalists.

My Blog: http://www.anarchico.net/

Production is 'anarchistic' - Ludwig von Mises

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Wed, Dec 15 2010 5:20 PM

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 430
Points 8,145

Nielsio, I'm not sure who made that video, but they seriously mischaracterized Locke's conception of self-ownership.

He does, after all, constrain self-ownership by the notion that God has ultimate ownership of all of us. You can't just leave that little inconvenience out when making case for liberty, though I do acknowledge the obvious time limits of that video.

I wonder if they couldn't have quoted from a libertarian who was more singular in his argument for self-ownership.

“Remove justice,” St. Augustine asks, “and what are kingdoms but gangs of criminals on a large scale? What are criminal gangs but petty kingdoms?”
  • | Post Points: 35
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Wed, Dec 15 2010 6:07 PM

Being a human being doesn't make you own yourself. A serial killer is a human being but has lost his self-ownership. An alien can be a self-owning moral agents and so could a machine potentially.

I think there are others things wrong with that video too. His 1-2-3 option was good, but then at the end he says government should protect rights. That doesn't make any sense and is simply option nr 2.

I posted the video because a couple of things were well done and have a lot of potential.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,434
Points 29,210

He does, after all, constrain self-ownership by the notion that God has ultimate ownership of all of us.

I don't understand how that's a problem since God can't really take away our liberties, whether you believe in that or not. Unless Locke would somehow promote a self-named 'agent of God' taking away someone's liberties who doesn't adhere to a set of morals or something.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,434
Points 29,210

I already posted this in another thread, but I figured it would work better in the low content thread as a random video:

I was assigned to watch this video for one of my classes. Chamillionaire talks about his career and various entrepreneurial activities. It's really interesting to see if you have an hour or so of time.

He talks a lot about how he supports bootlegging as a means of helping success, so I think a lot of people on here will like it!

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Fri, Dec 17 2010 5:21 PM

Carlos Ricci of the unschooling channel talks about his own home and his two daughters.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Fri, Dec 17 2010 11:15 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/17/wikileaks-cuba-banned-sicko

Cuba banned Michael Moore's 2007 documentary, Sicko, because it painted such a "mythically" favourable picture of Cuba's healthcare system that the authorities feared it could lead to a "popular backlash", according to US diplomats in Havana.

The revelation, contained in a confidential US embassy cable released by WikiLeaks, is surprising, given that the film attempted to discredit the US healthcare system by highlighting what it claimed was the excellence of the Cuban system.

But the memo reveals that when the film was shown to a group of Cuban doctors, some became so "disturbed at the blatant misrepresentation of healthcare in Cuba that they left the room".

Castro's government apparently went on to ban the film because, the leaked cable claims, it "knows the film is a myth and does not want to risk a popular backlash by showing to Cubans facilities that are clearly not available to the vast majority of them."

 

Didn't Moore help bail out Assange?

Double rofl!

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Tue, Dec 21 2010 9:59 AM

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,434
Points 29,210

^^^ sad news after this: "The Federal Communications Commission has passed controversial new rules that prevent Internet providers from playing favorites or blocking access to Web sites that offer rival services. Three of the panel's five members voted in favor of the plan."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,434
Points 29,210

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 205
Points 2,945
Johnny Doe replied on Wed, Dec 22 2010 10:12 AM

?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Wed, Dec 22 2010 11:24 AM

The "voluntarists" are terrible debaters. All they do is regurgitate orthodox market arguments. They need to go on the offensive, attack the socialist definition of government, run all 50 milion arguments against democracy, attack the utopia fallacy, etc... Even when they bring up the issues they don't make extensions back to what the socialists are saying. Example:

"Market anarchism is just voluntarism, so you can have voluntary democratic socialism"

They leave out "So the main burden of proof for the socialists is to prove that you need to attack other people and force them into democratic socialism" And if they fail to meet it, point it out. Of COURSE the socialists can troll you all day about toll roads and inequality. They're going to drop the core arguments and you need to drive it home...

Ugh.

Even if they just stuck to boring boring free market arguments, they could drastically improve their performance with "cards", or pieces of paper with quick responses on them. Example: "The socialists bring up racism. Here are 3 market arguments on the topic...." 20 seconds later, you have hit their argument back three times over.

Organization you guys. I would spend at least 40 hours preparing for a debate like this. It is critically important that we win and win hard in public forums.

"Bob is the snr fellow at the mises academy and molinari institute and Bill is the webmaster of socialismrules.net --> I guess that means they're super qualified to represent these positions snarf snarf"

I really dont know what the deal is with libertarians who debate with other people and then give lousy performances (or outright get served) because they aren't prepared to deal with their opponents. Why not? Just because you're "right" in your head doesn't mean you can actually win an argument, and if you're going to lose an argument why have it in the first place? The movement would have much more credibility if the libertarian jr.'s would stay quiet around seasoned socialists.

/rant

(I know a lot of people who use libertarianism, and even market anarchism, as a cultural revolt against yuppi leftists and christian conservatives... they are not rigorous in their ideology, and are defenseless against statist trolling.)

Banned
  • | Post Points: 35
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,434
Points 29,210

Why not? Just because you're "right" in your head doesn't mean you can actually win an argument, and if you're going to lose an argument why have it in the first place? The movement would have much more credibility if the libertarian jr.'s would stay quiet around seasoned socialists.

This is my problem. I try to stay away from debates for the most part unless it's something I'm extremely comfortable with. What I try to do most is convince people who are otherwise politically apathetic to watch certain videos and answer their concerns. I'm terrible at debates. I'm thinking about taking that logic course the Mises Academy is offering because it seems like it may help with debates, but I'm not sure if I have enough money yet.

  • | Post Points: 35
Page 1 of 2 (47 items) 1 2 Next > | RSS