-
I find that generally the same is true of libertarians except that they are slightly more informed about the opposing side because almost every libertarian has been a statist, very few statists have been libertarians. Furthermore libertarians are more likely to be able to think critically because they don't percieve of a deus ex machina, they don't
-
I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong on this point, but I'd be interested in some substantiation from you about it. I don't have any quotes or references. Its just a general trend I've noticed on the forums. People can quote Rothbard and Mises and Hoppe, but they can't explain their arguments in detail. They don't understand
-
As far as I can tell, this whole thread is just a self-congratulatory pat on the back. Most Ancaps are in the same boat as statists and know very little outside of their school of thought, which they also don't know in depth. They are true believers. For them, their ideology is largly doctrine and dogma. They accept the propositions of their school
-
[quote user="Daniel Muffinburg"]It's a reductio.[/quote] Thank you. I really think people need to learn this. It gets really tiring when you illustrate the absurdity of someone's logic by applying it to a different case and have them come back and claim you're putting words in their mouth. He phrased it as "so you're saying"
-
No he didn't say that. Why are you putting words in his mouth?
-
Yeah, but that's purely anecdotal. It doesn't prove anything.
-
I'd like to know how Soviet Union GDP figures were actually calculated. It must be different from GDP figures in a market economy, because goods produced in the soviet union were not bought and sold on an open market, and don't have market prices. Who is to say if a sack of wheat produced in the soviet union is the same quality as a sack of
-
Being absolutist is a strength, not a downfall. It results from logical consistency. If a rule applies in one case, it applies in all cases if there is no objective reason to apply a different rule. The only alternative is adhocery, where different rules apply to similar instances simply based on preference and not on a rational criteria for applying
-
No, they wouldn't and shouldn't be forced out. Their rights are theirs to hold against the entire world. I also think the utilitarian case cannot be made because it is impossible to define the greater good (maximum utility, ect.) in a coherent manner. All that can be said is that some individual's interests clash with other individual's
-
@ Andrew See here for national IQs and their relationship to GDP. See here , Chapter 16 for an evolutionary explaination of IQ differences and differences in skin pigmentation between the races.