Byzantine: if you believe we're all just individuals?
Why do YOU PEOPLE keep talking about individuals!?
Byzantine: Well, let's see what's meant. What is a "Russian?" If I move to Russia, learn the Russian language, and drink vodka, does that make me a "Russian?"
Well, let's see what's meant. What is a "Russian?"
If I move to Russia, learn the Russian language, and drink vodka, does that make me a "Russian?"
I think what he meant by those labels was the nationalities of his ancestors, but I agree using labels such as this becomes confusing. I've always had trouble labeling myself when asked by others of my nationality, so I try to avoid it :p
Btw, BP do you speak Russian?
Byzantine: Brainpolice:That objection was addressed in an edit to the post. They are convenient labels, vague generalities and I don't particularly attach much significance to them. They're just convenient for the purposes of communication. The objection is semantic or nitpicky. You know what's meant. Well, let's see what's meant. What is a "Russian?" If I move to Russia, learn the Russian language, and drink vodka, does that make me a "Russian?"
Brainpolice:That objection was addressed in an edit to the post. They are convenient labels, vague generalities and I don't particularly attach much significance to them. They're just convenient for the purposes of communication. The objection is semantic or nitpicky. You know what's meant.
All it means is either (1) someone happens to live within the territory that is commonly labeled "Russia" or (2) someone happens to be descended from people who lived within the territory that is commonly labeled "Russia". Other than that, I attach no real significance to it.
I dunno, if someone moves to "America", learns English, and eats apple pie, does that make them "American"?
Fred Furash: Byzantine: Well, let's see what's meant. What is a "Russian?" If I move to Russia, learn the Russian language, and drink vodka, does that make me a "Russian?" I think what he meant by those labels was the nationalities of his ancestors, but I agree using labels such as this becomes confusing. I've always had trouble labeling myself when asked by others of my nationality, so I try to avoid it :p Btw, BP do you speak Russian?
Nope. I'm generationally removed enough to have been raised by English speaking parents. It was my great grandparents on my mother's side who initially immigrated from Russia.
Byzantine:I denounce your peoplism.
That's ok. According to some, the free market will abolish people. We're an endangered species.
liberty student: Byzantine:I denounce your peoplism. That's ok. According to some, the free market will abolish people.
That's ok. According to some, the free market will abolish people.
No. You're being very disingenous.
Byzantine: You're Jewish and I'm not. Does your genetic exclusivity sicken you? Does it sicken you that there is a discrete Jewish culture that has been vigilantly defended for 5,000 years?
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
That depends. Are your biological parents and grandparents ethnically Rus'?
The Origins of Capitalism
And for more periodic bloggings by moi,
Leftlibertarian.org
Juan: Also, Jews are, you know, semites. That is, genetically, they are quite close to the Arabs who live in the Middle East....
That depends, at least in terms of appearance.
Mizrahi jews look a lot like the Arabs in the middle east (I often can't recognize the difference), while Ashkenazi jews look different enough (2000 years of intermarrying with caucasians).
As for genetic composition, I have no idea what significance phenotypes have relative to whatever other genes there are :S
*boinks the judeo-bolshevik conspiracy*
Brainpolice: *boinks the judeo-bolshevik conspiracy*
Lol, wasn't Mises Jewish (ethnically anyway)?
Btw, what does Boink mean?
Brainpolice: I consider you people a scar on the face of liberty.
I consider you people a scar on the face of liberty.
This what intellectual defeat looks like.
Peace
JonBostwick: Brainpolice: I consider you people a scar on the face of liberty. This what intellectual defeat looks like.
*boinks the right-wing libberfascists FTW*
Fred Furash: Brainpolice: *boinks the judeo-bolshevik conspiracy* Lol, wasn't Mises Jewish (ethnically anyway)? Btw, what does Boink mean?
Meh, kind of an absurdly drawn out inside joke.
Fred Furash: Mizrahi jews look a lot like the Arabs in the middle east (I often can't recognize the difference),
while Ashkenazi jews look different enough (2000 years of intermarrying with caucasians)
It really sickens me that you and Byzantine actually think that inclusive free associations are bad. It's not just state-imposed inclusivity that you oppose, it's cultural or racial mixing altogether or in general that you appear to oppose.
What is wrong with this? I honestly do not get it. You seem almost fanatical in your opposition to it.
-Jon
Freedom of markets is positively correlated with the degree of evolution in any society...
Jon Irenicus: It really sickens me that you and Byzantine actually think that inclusive free associations are bad. It's not just state-imposed inclusivity that you oppose, it's cultural or racial mixing altogether or in general that you appear to oppose. What is wrong with this? I honestly do not get it. You seem almost fanatical in your opposition to it. -Jon
It's irrational and counterproductive.
Well what is irrational about it? As far as I can tell, it's about as irrational as attempting to conserve a green area. Both entail a financial cost, and both satisfy the subject in question. As I've mentioned before, it depends on what level you take it to - total isolation would be devastating, but trading yet living at a distance does not seem to me to involve any level of comparable destitution.
Brainpolice:It's irrational and counterproductive.
Let me know when you start your anti-gambling crusade.
Jon Irenicus: Well what is irrational about it?
Juan: Jon Irenicus: Well what is irrational about it? Racist 'theories' are as rational as polylogism - In a word, racism is nonsense.
Well not as much nonsense as the term racism itself. I have continually exposed that word as meaning nothing; the only coherent definition of it is you believe one race to be morally inferior to another viz. they deserve less legal rights than yourself. This is accused of defining out of existence but no-one has ever put a contrary definition which stands up to scrutiny.
The atoms tell the atoms so, for I never was or will but atoms forevermore be.
Yours sincerely,
Physiocrat
Yeah, and of course, they're also irrelevant to what I said.
Juan: Fred Furash: Mizrahi jews look a lot like the Arabs in the middle east (I often can't recognize the difference), So, 'genetically' they are the same race, or almost the same race, right ? while Ashkenazi jews look different enough (2000 years of intermarrying with caucasians) Which means that 'genetically' they don't have a lot of 'jewish' genes, correct ? Still Byzantine believes in something called the jewish race, wich I suppose, includes both Mizrahi & Ashkenazi Jews ? Racist nonsense I say.
Not that this point is really so relevant... but I believe Jews are genetically closest to modern day Iranians; they're practically identical. Of course there is a lot of intermixture and what happened with Ashkenazi is, a good chunk where the children of converts and never had any Jewish blood. Judaism is hard to define, it tries to be a race, religion, nation, etc. all at the same time.
ViennaSausage: Libertas est Veritas:Does it matter? Seriously, I hate these threads. It's kind of like watching a bunch of kids trying to ram a square peg into a round hole. Accept that in reality one's thought processes can't be labeled simply with ancap/minarchist/left/right/up/down. I hate threads that hate threads;). (Does that mean I hate my own thread?) IMHO, it matters to the extent of developing my own understanding of libertarianism and Austrian Economics. Granted, a label does not necessarily define an individual, but individuals do define labels. Labels appear useful in the capacity of mental heuristics conveying information. Labels may appear accurate, but the precision is in the details. I posited the initial question because Rockwell's cited writing, while eloquent, whispered ancap, but screamed minarchy.
Libertas est Veritas:Does it matter? Seriously, I hate these threads. It's kind of like watching a bunch of kids trying to ram a square peg into a round hole. Accept that in reality one's thought processes can't be labeled simply with ancap/minarchist/left/right/up/down.
I hate threads that hate threads;). (Does that mean I hate my own thread?)
IMHO, it matters to the extent of developing my own understanding of libertarianism and Austrian Economics. Granted, a label does not necessarily define an individual, but individuals do define labels. Labels appear useful in the capacity of mental heuristics conveying information. Labels may appear accurate, but the precision is in the details. I posited the initial question because Rockwell's cited writing, while eloquent, whispered ancap, but screamed minarchy.
How about "screamed mini-statism"?
For "understanding" and "TRUTH IN LABELING" about “minarchy”, see the discussion thread that I started on this subject at http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/1102.aspx?PageIndex=1