http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwz0BYqOhMI At about 33:20 Rotbard mentions that the Mises Institute was contacted by the Chinese embassy. They were looking for ways to "desocialize" and the Mises institute was one of the first places they looked.. interesting.
havent seen anyone mention this. it was just posted to my facebook feed...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/artcarden/2012/09/29/the-greatest-thinker-youve-never-read-ludwig-von-mises/
Grant, he's a prominent libertarian :P
Jolly good words from Ron Paul.
A YouTube playlist I compiled as a tribute to free market, cities and peaceful productivity.
Clayton -
Religious Child Abuse Story in America in 2012
MUST VIEW Ron Swanson: Libertarian
A Genuinely Disgusting Business
Quotation of the Day…
It’s Official: No Global Warming Since 1997
Is Failure to Predict a Crime?
The Underwater Cuban Missile Crisis: Soviet Submarines and the Risk of Nuclear War
Mikoyan's "Mission Impossible" in Cuba: New Soviet Evidence on the Cuban Missile Crisis
Apparently putting "destroying commies" under professional skills on a resume isn't a good idea. Thank you technical writing class for teaching me so much knowledge!
On a side note some dred locked hippy wearing his underwear (wife beater and boxers) just walked in the public restroom without shoes on. Ohhh college
No, they're right. That goes on the cover letter.
I'd say it rather goes in the epitaph - "Wheylous the Commie Destroyer"
The Ron Swanson link is awesome.
Just watched Ayn Rand's "The Fountainhead." Meh acting and meh dialogue, but a message that surpasses all of that.
Wow you mean the old black and white film?
Yep. At the courtroom scene I was saying in my mind "hells yeah!"
A NEW trilogy of Star Wars films have been announced, too.
FUUUUUUUUUUUU-
At least Mr. Plinkett will have some new review material.
Anyone else see that thread shutdown that just went down?
Yep, I was just about to make a thread about it. Bad idea?
You mean the one about racism? Yeah. I don't see how it wasn't legit discussion, although it's true that if a visitor trying to learn about libertarianism were to stumble upon that, they'd be spooked.
It depends upon whether or not you really think that it was unjust and whether or not you're willing to fight over it, methinks. I think that the topic is rather... Flammable (Race-realism, not necessarily the thread you are thinking of making) , and I was frankly astounded that the conversation remained as civil as it did.
EDIT
I would message the mod before I would start a thread about it.
Not entirely civil. Stcstocstocsoc and I had our discussion get a little heated.
Well my thread was going to be "Who deleted the thread?" I want to know who it was. We were having an intellectual discussion without any flaming going on. The last post in the thread was a link to a journal article on a university website. What's unbelievable is that people like mustang19 can continously post inane threads and troll everyone, and yet the established members of this forum (which is so broken already) cannot engage in a proper discussion because it's politically incorrect. I'm pretty sure the top of the page says TU NE CEDE MALIS.
Whoever deleted the thread should post here and explain themselves.
Thanks, Malachi. I was editing my last post in that thread and so did not see his post. Why would it be an inappropriate topic for these forums? The topic is related both to politics and economics, the latter e.g. in a recent and well-known work by Gregory Clark (A Farewell to Alms), echoed in turn by Hans-Hermann Hoppe. Also on that note, remember how Hoppe had to go through all that shit for saying that homosexual people have higher time-preference than heterosexual people ceteris paribus? Is that an appropriate topic for discussion here or not?
"Also on that note, remember how Hoppe had to go through all that shit for saying that homosexual people have higher time-preference than heterosexual people ceteris paribus?"
LMAO did he actually say that? What was his reasoning?
Anyway, yeah go ahead and make the thread, I would like to know the reasoning, just be polite.
aside from the rothbard link, and whatever other austrians were mentioned, I am not entirely convinced that the subject was germane to this forum.
Well he was talking about how people plan beyond their lifetimes, and wish to pass things down to their descendents. Thus those who do not have children would have a shorter time horizon and higher time-preference (not to mention that children are costly and saving is required to maintain them). If he is correct on that and that homosexuals are much less likely to have children than heterosexuals, it follows that they have higher time-preference.
I wasn't proposing to make a thread on the topic of Hoppe. I was just wondering what's allowed or what's not.
I am not entirely convinced that the subject was germane to this forum.
Well I strongly disagree. The topic is extremely important for all social sciences and humanities, and therefore it is an applicable topic on a forum about economics, history, and politics. To paraphrase David Friedman, evolutionary theory is simply economics where the utility function is known. They are related disciplines and in my posts I was showing how the conclusions were necessary a priori as in economics.
Some ideas are taboo in this country, to the point where you cannot even discuss them.
What, like anarchism? Why can't we discuss them? Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito.
Whats the benefit to discovering that hey, such-and-such statistical relationship does hold true for 99% of subjects from X genetic pool!
To be able to understand human societies more correctly.
Youre just going to talk yourself right out of methodological individualism
Not at all. I was talking merely about what can be understood on average. There can still be individuals from low average intelligence groups that have higher intelligence than individuals from high average intelligence groups.
I find it hard to believe that statistics that generally describe the performance of subjects on a test wold be helpful to me in making actual decisions.
We were discussing the topic as an academic question. Why does it have to be helpful to you making actual decisions?
http://i.imgur.com/koYpE.jpg
+1 Malachi
You've got to realize that there are plenty of AnCap forums out there. But this one is link from the frontpage of the LvMI website, which is for economic arguments mostly. Linking someone to the LvMI for an economic article and then having them stumbling onto a racially-controversial conversation, approved by the representatives of the LvMI is kind of a disaster. Do you really have to discuss it here?
The Anarch is to the Anarchist what the Monarch is to the Monarchist. -Ernst Jünger
@ Neodoxy
You have a Debate.org page?
Look, if there were several threads on the topic and it had been gone over many times, then I would agree with deleting that thread. But can we really not even have one thread in which to discuss such an issue? Is it really that scary?
So it really just looks like the argument for deleting the thread is that it makes the people involved (including the webstie itself) look so bad that it must be shut down at all costs. Well I hate to break it to you guys but you already look as bad as it can get. The New Deal, regulation, minimum wage, and government spending saved the country. So did entry into WWII. If you disagree with those things you are already going to be called evil racists even if you aren't, so you really lose nothing discussing the topic of race.
@Skeptic
Yea but I haven't logged in in a year.
Why do you ask?
I just discovered the site, and I took a look at a user's account named "Laissez-Faire" and I saw that butterfly surrealist picture that you showed me on that thread where we were discussing my surrealist short film. Sure enough it was Keanu Reeves.