Why should you 'face' anything? Why should any individual have an obligation, or even an interest, in dealing with a society of fools?
“Socialism is a fraud, a comedy, a phantom, a blackmail.” - Benito Mussolini"Toute nation a le gouvernemente qu'il mérite." - Joseph de Maistre
It is unseemly if you flap your lips/fingers all day in some backroom/forum and sit idly. Why babble the day long about how terrible everything is? You are almost a satire on two feet.
Caley McKibben: Education of the masses is technically far easier than having a lot of babies. The problem is that most people are extremely cowardly. This is where Stefan Molyneux hit the bullseye. How many people here do so much as educate the people around them- forget the masses? The appeal of babies is that you can just hide in your hole and not have to face anything.
"Look at me, I'm quoting another user to show how wrong I think they are, out of arrogance of my own position. Wait, this is my own quote, oh shi-" ~ Nitroadict
Caley McKibbin: Why babble the day long about how terrible everything is?
Yes, because as everyone knows, educating people of no biological relation to you is much easier than raising a child, whom only looks up to the parents for guidance & dependence for the initial one or two decades of their life (YMMV).
Correct.
The assumption that because one has a family and somehow is resigned to live in a bubble is wrong.
That sentence makes no sense.
I have an interest because I am young and would like to avoid living under a totalitarian world regime. Yes, things are already pretty bad now, but there is potential for life to get a lot worse, especially in places like the United States. Right now our economy is undergoing a controlled demolition, and at the rate we're going it won't be long before UN "peacekeepers" are putting down riots in the streets and distributing food in breadlines. I am a member of the middle class that is being destroyed right before my own eyes.
But in general, I am less interested in dealing with a "society of fools," and more interested in engaging the elite collectivists who hold the power to make my life, my family's life, and my children's lives a living hell. These people are not fools, they are master strategists who understand how to manipulate the masses to their will. Even if I have no chance of winning, it would give me great pleasure to do battle with them and know that I stood up for freedom, peace, and rationality.
Or maybe I should just look out for numero uno? Or go live on a seastead?
Don't we already do that here?
We? No. You? Maybe. Think about who actually does the whining.
"Education of the masses is technically far easier than having a lot of babies."
Can you actually prove this statement?
"The appeal of babies is that you can just hide in your hole and not have to face anything."
I think the appeal in babies is making them.
Caley McKibbin: That sentence makes no sense.
"Education of the masses is technically far easier than having a lot of babies." Can you actually prove this statement?
Sure. Build a website. Now, change 10000 diapers, spend years of income on child expenses, etc. and wait 20 years. Which was easier? Not to mention quicker. I trust you'll find it is a no brainer.
"The appeal of babies is that you can just hide in your hole and not have to face anything." I think the appeal in babies is making them.
That is the appeal in making them, not having them and I meant the appeal of using it as a political strategy.
Caley McKibbin: We? No. You? Maybe. Think about who actually does the whining.
Just imagine if Lew Rockwell's dad hadn't been a "Taft Republican".
Your assumption was: parents are somehow resigned into some sort of ignorance or lesser active position (too busy raising kids, & only raising kids, and not having personal live, apparently), & subsequently, this pre-occupation with raising a family somehow doesn't achieve anything beyond simply raising a family.
Strange how your method of interpretation works.
That isn't proof. There are millions of websites out there are seriously contending that the masses are educated by one?
"That is the appeal in making them, not having them and I meant the appeal of using it as a political strategy."
Caley McKibbin: Sure. Build a website. Now, change 10000 diapers, spend years of income on child expenses, etc. and wait 20 years. Which was easier? Not to mention quicker. I trust you'll find it is a no brainer.
There is no "no brainer", unless you've already made up your mind & haven't critical thought out options beyond your own preferences.
Lilburne: Just imagine if Lew Rockwell's dad hadn't been a "Taft Republican".
Aside from minor modding duties, I haven't been very active (beyond the past week or two) for a few months before so. I guess I should stop my uppity posting since you apparently have a problem with it.
I don't have a problem with any posts.
Caley McKibbin: Strange how your method of interpretation works.
Caley McKibbin: I don't have a problem with any posts.
I just bought fruit from someone on the side of the rode! lol! Anarchy does exist!
I would love for anyone who was raised in a libertarian like family, or plans to raise one of their own, to weigh in on this.
Although my parents are not libertarians ("small government" Republicans is a better characterization), their values had much to do with me becoming one. I hope to have kids, and to instill in them a respect for private property, freedom-of-choice, and voluntary charity.
Apparently, not only are "states" capable of acting, but so is "statism".
"Apparently, not only are "states" capable of acting, but so is "statism".
Well, I don't know but I've been told....that without the state you couldn't tell anyone.
"Oh, I wish I could pray the way this dog looks at the meat" - Martin Luther
G8R HED:Well, I don't know but I've been told....that without the state you couldn't tell anyone.
Agreed.
I am just a little giddy this morning from being out in the heat too long yesterday and I thought I'd get one in before I leave for church.....
Have a good one.
Sorry to break my rule about responding in here, but it is not to debate, only to clarify. Yes, DD5, assuming secession is possible and the seceded community is large and wealthy enough to defend itself against outside aggressors, a small community need only have a sufficiently large proportion of its own members believe in the benefits of maximal capitalism for anarcho-capitalism to be sustainable.--grayson
I presume this means that the useless rule that we cant post on other threads is jettisoned.
Liberalism differs radically from anarchism. It has nothing in common with the absurd illusions of the anarchists... Liberalism is not so foolish as to aim at the abolition of the state.-- von Mises, Omnipotent Government
I made one post to clarify (not debate), so you can make one post to clarify (not debate). And that's it.
It's obviously not a useless rule, because it's short-circuited the flame wars you were having with others before.
The debate is still on. I'll respond to your latest posts when I get a chance.
[USE ISSUES FORUM]
Anyone else find Rettoper to be Quixotic? It's like he's fighting imaginary pro-anarcho-capitalist arguments.
To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process. Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!" Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."
Grayson Lilburne, you are a man of great patience.
Thank you, cporter.
Good stuff, Grayson. This is a pretty good thread for demonstrating the validity of the idea of the "ancap society". He's thrown everything at it, from assertions of how it would fail to attacking the philosophical foundations of it. The idea still stands as valid and useful, from what I've seen.
Although I think you have too much patience for your own good. :p
Rettoper: "unlike classical liberals, ancaps rejects the use of force, and force is required to obtain and preserve power" (emphasis mine)
For seriously? He did it again! ... Again! ... Again! ... ... ... ... ... ... ... Again!
I hope Lilburne sticks to his guns about the 'naive arguing from history' point
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
Rettoper: "unlike classical liberalism, anarchic societies allow the introduction of dangerous controlled substances into society"
Wut? Not even the Constitution prevented that. This is an odd one that, ironically, is not supported by history.
Rettoper: http://mises.org/Community/forums/p/17464/342205.aspx#342205
**sigh!**
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/users/profile/PalOMine?page=3&action=comments&display=blog&sort=newest
Read the 3rd comment under "Bush's Baghdad". I didn't say it!
Democracy means the opportunity to be everyone's slave.—Karl Kraus.
You guys, mises is dead. Apparently.
It's all very unfortunate. A debate between Grayson Lilburne and a classical liberal committed to serious discussion could have been instructive. Instead, Rettoper seems to change his stance (especially in regards to the merits of praxeology) based solely on its convenience in making the latest baseless assertion.
If there were a moderator this debate would have been stopped long ago. It's like watching Milton Friedman pummel that red-headed kid on Free to Choose.
Rettoper - "for starters, you are an anarchist --- von mises is not. you have not sufficiently reconciled this contradiction."
Lilburne - "There is no contradiction in that statement. I think you are taking my avatar too literally. I do not claim to be von Mises."
After 5 minutes I'm still laughing at this...
"The market is a process." - Ludwig von Mises, as related by Israel Kirzner. "Capital formation is a beautiful thing" - Chloe732.