from here: http://www.leftycartoons.com/the-24-types-of-libertarian/
I believe this is stage 2 in the intellectual battle. Anyway, if you can debunk these 24 misconceptions, then you're ready to be sent out to battle.
doesn't seem like much to debunk, they're only jokes. But the apostle is a little unfair however, especially since any attempt to explain ourselves will result in a "history of economic theory" lecture -it's not possible to rhetorically communicate the ideals of freedom, you must engage others on a truly intellectual level.
I'm with you fakename, The Apostle was the only one that really irked me.
Yes. The problem is that it is a long road to libertarian conclusions. One can't express or transmit libertarian political philosophy through sound bites.
Without knowing the underlying science and philosophy libertarians sound just like petulant brats who don't want to pay their 'fair share'.
There is hope, though. Through some attrition I've converted a friend of mine from full fledged socialism to "post-hayekian socialism"...it's a start. Education is key.
The "Too Smart for Science" one got me. That is the opponents of Liberty can not conceive that govenrment provided science has corrupted the scientific community to such a degree that the Scientific Community itself has been fooled into believing in this global warming nonsense. But to make matters worse the social science community and especially the economics community have rejected the ideas of freedom, free markets, free association and efficiency for the idea that there are these gifted humans capable of commanding the world and making it a better place.
http://i.imgur.com/2axVG.png
"Man thinks not only for the sake of thinking, but also in order to act."-Ludwig von Mises
^Brilliant, that was hilarious too.
The "Too Smart for Science" and "Arrogant" ones annoy me, haha. Because libertarians actually realize that most people commonly believe in global warming for one reason: they know someone whose sister's friend saw a review for An Inconvenient Truth, a movie promoted by a senator.
~~~Go science!~~~
DD5:Anyway, if you can debunk these 24 misconceptions, then you're ready to be sent out to battle.
What misconceptions? You can find half of those personality types on this forum on any given Sunday.
I thought it was funny because it was true.
which one am i?
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
What misconceptions? You can find half of those personality types on this forum on any given Sunday. I thought it was funny because it was true.
Cite?
Democracy means the opportunity to be everyone's slave.—Karl Kraus.
Stoned :P
Perhaps in "typical" fashion we should make one for the statists.
"When the King is far the people are happy." Chinese proverb
For Alexander Zinoviev and the free market there is a shared delight:
"Where there are problems there is life."
damn, I was hoping for arrogant or 'more libertarian than thou'...
I must redouble my efforts
E. R. Olovetto:Cite?
Yeah right.
link to finished version in post below...
LeftyCartoons is one of my favourites.
His race cartoons are very very good for putting down standard racist writebacks online.
A lot of these "racialist" characters who have come out of the woodworks to say, "We don't HATE other races; we just think we are different and need to protect our own culture" while thinly veiling contempt for other ethnicities in their streets just for their appearance and manner have become rather widespread on the internet.
Now, when such people use anti-affirmative-action rhetoric, it is not for positive creation, but negative protection. The reasons cited will always be for protecting their country club lifestyle, not because affirmative action harms minorities more than it helps them (see Malays in Malaysia).
LeftyCartoons breaks through all these shameless pretensions and exposes such people for what they are.
As for this cartoon on libertarians:
People, remember that Lew Rockwell once told Thomas Fleming jokingly: "Joe Sobran calling himself a libertarian? Is he a tax cheat or a child molester? I just ask, because it seems people these days become libertarians to make up for their moral failings."
Classical liberalism seems to attract all kinds of garbage, and it's good that other people make fun of them. We don't need rubbish like Alex Jones fans, Randians, Republican Party cheerleaders, Southern American racists, third-rate conspiracy bloggers, Tea Party degenerates, Paul Craig Roberts, and other people calling themselves as champions of liberty these days.
You don't realize how much we benefit from this mocking of such characters.
Frankly, I think stuff like this isn't even worth replying to, if you want to have serious intellectual discussion. But, just for fun:
Naive: Legitimate criticism. There are a number of people who blindly assume a governmentless society would be able to formulate laws and organisational procedures without elucidating the process by which they believe this would arise. People like Long et.al actually put the effort to go out and examine the incentives for law creation and historical examples of such.
Petulant: Legitimate criticism. And it's not just in the political sphere I see this kind of thing, either.
Too Smart For Science: Has the author ever heard of Piltdown Man? Climategate? No doubt he or she would decry any studies to the contrary of the IPCC's as "Funded by Big Oil interests", and yet somehow thinks research grants, fame and government protected positions are not sufficient motivations (let alone the incentives for their backers..) for climate scientists to falsify data, exaggerate or simply lie.
Arrogant: Legitimate but rather generic criticism. There are people like this all over the political spectrum.
Left-wing: I don't even understand the point of this one. Is it a jab at the mutualists near-complete isolation from just about everybody except factions of left-anarchists?
Denial-ican: A fairly silly criticism. The fact that one may be pragmatic enough to see that third party voting is not a viable option for the immediate future doesn't indicate blind loyalty to party principles. Compare this person's stated principles with the Republican Party platform (and the actions of its members).
More Libertarian Than Thou: Has some truth to it. A lot of discussions I've seen here and on the FSP seem to devolve into oneupmanship festivals where the next person posts a more radical proposal than the last.
Terrified: Now this is just plain hypocritical. There are paranoid nuts of a libertarian bent (Alex Jones, David Kramer, just to name a couple) but isn't it the other sorts who are always screaming "If it wasn't for government, children would work in coal mines for 28 hours a day for half a cent, people would have to sell their internal organs just to pay the rent, the economy would have collapsed after the banks and we'd all be slaves of the evil bourgeious overlords!"
Too Much Heinlein: Holy crap, it's Billy Dee Williams! I do like the irony of having what looks like a black dude proclaim his superiority, though. I've not read Heinlein, but if I heard someone saying this IRL, I'd think more of Rand.
The Island: You know, I've never been to America, but unless I'm very mistaken (and putting the income tax nuts aside), I don't think paying for (and attending) government education, social security and government roads is a voluntary act. If it is, someone better tell Irwin Schiff. The guy's been in the slammer for what, 30 years now?
Creepy: I was so disappointed when I learned that this guy wasn't wearing a trenchcoat. Seriously, he looks less like a pedophile and more like a metrosexual Dr. Evil from Miami. In any case, please show me those pedophile libertarians so we can all mock them and laugh at their creepy stupidity.
Selectively Frugal: Legitimate criticism, though I can see equally legitimate concerns that "temporary" tax hikes to keep the budget solvent may prove anything but temporary.
Nepotist: Wealthy, established pundits? The guy even bears a resemblance to Krugman! Projection at it's finest, folks.
The Apostle: No, wait, I was wrong. *This* is projection par excellence. I don't think I need to elaborate.
Atlas: That is funny, but a rather ironic criticism for someone who would probably consider himself a "champion of the people".
Consistent: What the hell is with this guy's nose? He looks like the product of a love affair between a Spy from Spy vs Spy and a human.
The Historian: Ah, yes, I'm sure the Founding Fathers would have agreed that big government and high taxes are a wondrous thing. That's why they were notable for always paying the British Empire's tea taxes and obeying every letter of their laws.
Gunner Joe: Uhh.... right. Citation needed, bro.
Bizarrelly Hypocritical: I'm not going to say a word on this one, for obvious reasons.
Briefly Tempting: What's with this guy's head? Has Arnold from Hey Arnold turned to political activism in his middle age?
Whitey: I just love the expression on this guy's face. The parody having him as a moral guardian really hit the nail on the head. Also, for the slow: Supporting someone's right to control their own property doesn't mean you would do the same in their situation or that you morally approve of their behaviour.
Missionary: It's a Vykker! Run for the hills!
Caveat Emptor: This has some basis in truth, but it's really better aimed specifically at the anti-division-of-labour/paleo/grow-your-own/DIY crowd than libertarians in general.
Stoned: You said it, buddy.
This whole thing sounds very photoshoppable. I smell more parodies (perhaps a nonpolitical one) brewing.
Some of these just indicate how poorly people understand our positions, e.g. the caveat emptor one...
Freedom of markets is positively correlated with the degree of evolution in any society...
Non-funny strawmen.
Finished for now, click image to view entire image if clipped in your browser window:
Prateek Sanjay:Classical liberalism seems to attract all kinds of garbage, and it's good that other people make fun of them. We don't need rubbish like Alex Jones fans, Randians, Republican Party cheerleaders, Southern American racists, third-rate conspiracy bloggers, Tea Party degenerates, Paul Craig Roberts, and other people calling themselves as champions of liberty these days. You don't realize how much we benefit from this mocking of such characters.
What is all this "we" stuff? There is no "we". Methodological individualism please.
Your arrogance is not only misdirected, it may end up being very counterproductive. The Ron Paul 2008 campaign doesn't happen without Alex Jones. We aren't where we are today without Alex Jones. You can disagree with his positions, and I might agree with you, but he has done significantly more to help promote classical liberalism than you have. Likewise with Ayn Rand.
Please try to remember that you are an amateur social critic on an internet discussion forum. These people have reached an audience of millions.
LS, while the 'we' does make it sound like I am trying to speak collectively for everybody else, here's a better way of putting the same point.
"You don't need rubbish like...,.etc".
As *individuals*, there is no need for us to be movement defenders, especially when such characters (including Stormfront members) constitute the movement. Should the people of this site feel offended that a comic criticises conspiracists and racist characters? That's largely the kind of people the comic criticises, so there is no need to feel collective offense at it, just because the word used for them is libertarian.
That's what my initial point was, but to address the mass movements of Jones, Paul, and Rand...
Truth is that our own integrity to moral ideals matter, and not whether we can make coalitions with different groups to reach out to larger audience.
The problem is that one can generally accept that inward change is feasible, while large outward ones are less so. The democratic process is not and never was built on high civilization, morality, and least of all liberty. And fully accepting those values requires a lot of effort on one's own part that can't be achieved by radio or TV, but by patiently reading the right books. I don't think this is an arrogant perspective.
Yet, the various kinds of political coalitions made by libertarians within the political process, my god. Coalitions with the New Left, coalitions with neoconservatives, coalitions with true conservatives, coalitions with all the wrong kinds of people. Henry Hazlitt wrote for the National Review, a supposedly "classical liberal" outlet, which worried more about banning smoking, drinking, and pornography.
Anyway, just because I haven't reached an audience of millions does not mean that I am less of a person than a radio show host Alex Jones, and thus can not criticise him. I am not a political person - tending my own gardens, I have built a large knowledge on the stock market and worked with my parents on trading; I worked to make my life better. But somehow, reducing oneself to being a mediocrity who is capable of preaching on a mass level is a much better thing? Should we congratulate the likes of mass media (like Glenn Beck) who make a name on namecalling and ad hominem as people who push for good causes?
Libertystudent, you yourself believe what you believe, without having to be a cheerleader for the other kinds of libertarians with whom you don't agree. If we were a political party, some of us would have to shut up, and go by the party line to be disciplined team players. But since we are not, we don't. We stand each for our own ideals, because we believe it is right.
Wow, someone had time to draw that about us? We must be more famous than I thought. Way to go folks!
liberty student: What is all this "we" stuff? There is no "we". Methodological individualism please. Your arrogance is not only misdirected, it may end up being very counterproductive. The Ron Paul 2008 campaign doesn't happen without Alex Jones. We aren't where we are today without Alex Jones. You can disagree with his positions, and I might agree with you, but he has done significantly more to help promote classical liberalism than you have. Likewise with Ayn Rand. Please try to remember that you are an amateur social critic on an internet discussion forum. These people have reached an audience of millions.
It's kind of astounding to me how you talk down to forum members. I'm still curious why it is you think that you are livin' la vida libertariana and we/I are unworthy.
One can't express or transmit libertarian political philosophy through sound bites.
You couldn't be more wrong.
liberty student: What misconceptions? You can find half of those personality types on this forum on any given Sunday. I thought it was funny because it was true.
You have a point. Most of these stereotypes are accurate.
The misconceptions are what I assume the average reader will infer from such stereotypes. This only makes the cartoon even more brilliant as anti-libertarian propaganda.
Read the title. It doesn't say "24 types". It says "the 24 types".
Prateek Sanjay:That's what my initial point was, but to address the mass movements of Jones, Paul, and Rand... Truth is that our own integrity to moral ideals matter, and not whether we can make coalitions with different groups to reach out to larger audience.
Prateek Sanjay:Anyway, just because I haven't reached an audience of millions does not mean that I am less of a person than a radio show host Alex Jones, and thus can not criticise him.
Prateek Sanjay:Libertystudent, you yourself believe what you believe, without having to be a cheerleader for the other kinds of libertarians with whom you don't agree. If we were a political party, some of us would have to shut up, and go by the party line to be disciplined team players. But since we are not, we don't. We stand each for our own ideals, because we believe it is right.
YOU MUST READ THIS!!!! - Ayn Rand
haha, classic :) Anyway, it's good mockery (strawman), but that doesn't meant it has debunked anything.
If you want something similar from different perspective, go there http://anarchyinyourhead.com/
(english is not my native language, sorry for grammar.)
E. R. Olovetto:It's kind of astounding to me how you talk down to forum members.
How so? Who did I specifically talk down to? Am I not a member of this forum? I would argue that with my post count, I am definitely a top 20 member of this forum, and so any critiques of this forum, including my own, could very well include myself.
Learn to laugh. Even at yourself and where you came from. No one enjoys a wound up serioso.
E. R. Olovetto:I'm still curious why it is you think that you are livin' la vida libertariana and we/I are unworthy.
I'm not sure that is what I believe. It seems to me that is what you believe.
DD5: liberty student:What misconceptions? You can find half of those personality types on this forum on any given Sunday. I thought it was funny because it was true. You have a point. Most of these stereotypes are accurate.
liberty student:What misconceptions? You can find half of those personality types on this forum on any given Sunday. I thought it was funny because it was true.
Thank you. Without stereotypes, Walter Block could not have written Defending the Undefendable. They provide us with the opportunity to (1) laugh at ourselves, (2) explain our positions better and (3) see ourselves as others may see us, and adjust our actions as needed.
People who only see attacks and not opportunities are missing out IMO.
DD5:The misconceptions are what I assume the average reader will infer from such stereotypes. This only makes the cartoon even more brilliant as anti-libertarian propaganda.
I don't think this cartoon is going to do much damage to libertarianism, and in my opinion, it is unrealistic to expect that there won't be petty critics of any position, on any day. This is life. It is not perfect. The freedom to be intellectually sound is the freedom to be intellectually slothful and dishonest. I'd like to point out that the LRC blog is usually quite reactionary, and they didn't get as worked up as the grassroots reactions I have seen.
But then, if the people at the top were fanatics like some people in the grassroots, this would be a cult, and I would want nothing to do with it.
I've bee thinking these last few days... I can understand someone attacking Republicans, Democrats, some vague political stances, but to mock (and so harshly) something like libertarianism - you should really be annoyed with people thinking differntly than you. Seriosly, how many libertarians does Barry Deutsch know? And why does he feel threatened?
Fear is a good sign. There has been more talk about libertarianism on mainstream media then ever before, although most of it negative.
I mentioned previously the Bill Maher show from a few weeks ago, where one of the guests described herself as a libertarian, but not of the type that "want to abolish the government completely". I thought that was amazing. She would not had felt the need to make that distinction if Ancap had not already infiltrated the philosophy of liberty.
DD5:Fear is a good sign. There has been more talk about libertarianism on mainstream media then ever before, although most of it negative.
During the Ron Paul campaign on the RPF forums, everyone kept repeating this quote from Gandhi.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win."
With Ron Paul, he's won now. He has made it past the fighting and ridicule.
Radical libertarianism hasn't had to fight yet. But progress is definitely being made.
That was pure win, man. :)
I meant the "anti-libertarian" parody of the picture in the first post.
Thanks, it cracked me up too while making it.
.
Chuckled at the 'too smart for science' one. I always laugh when modern 'liberals' claim ownership of science and believe themselves to be arbiters of scientific truth, divorced from any biases.
Anyone can look at nonsense like Boasian Anthropology, blank slate theory, the belief in racial equality and so on to see the kinds of absurd myths leftists wholeheartedly subscribe to (they're basically human creationists of a sort). Not to mention the fact they routinely bully scientists who investigate matters such as heritability and race (most recently Dr. Bruce Lahn, who was pioneering some brilliant research on the evolution of the human brain). Leftists are modern day Lysenkoists when it comes to genetics, neuroscience and behavioral psychology.
Prateek Sanjay:Southern American racists
The word 'racist' is a form of ideological disarmament, it is newsspeak plain and simple designed to halt debate on matters of race.
Of course this is disregarding the fact that even by your own culturally leftist standards, your native India is far more 'racist' than the US or any Western Nation is.
Prateek Sanjay:will always be for protecting their country club lifestyle
And a fine position that is, why should they allow miscreants onto their own private property? Or are you just so full of anti-white vitriol that you despise anywhere Whites congregate to enjoy themselves? Not a Winter Olympics fan I take it then?
"If diversity were a strength people would practice it spontaneously. It wouldn't require constant cheer-leading or expensive lawsuits."- Jared Taylor
Germanicus, a few points.
1. You seem to assume me an Indian patriot who must defend Indian traditions. Of course, India has many racist people.
2. I acknowledge differences in race, and yes, high IQ of Koreans, Japanese, Chinese,.etc can not be disregarded.
3. I am amused you think me to be anti-white, because I just came back from another forum refuting somebody's highly incorrect claims that whitey is responsible for African problems.
4. I am completely for private property. Except the country club character also goes on, attacks immigration, demands restrictions on sale of property to foreigners,.etc. Is the person really libertarian, or just adopted the label for defending foregone conclusions?
Point 4. was the important part.
Now, let's play this game again.