liberty student:overreacting and creating a debate...
liberty student:Same thing happened to 9/11 truth and Ron Paul during his campaign.
I think the exact opposite happened with Ron Paul's campaign. He is typically ignored by both state and media to try and minimize his message. The same thing happened with Peter Schiff's Senate campaign.
As to the 9/11 truthers-- Are you f*^king kidding?! The government, media, and nearly everyone else ignore them totally because Charlie Sheen, Alex Jones, and Zeitgeist-ers use misleading and bogus data to present their ridiculous case. Funny how we haven't heard from Charile since Bush retired. I guess the government must not be so evil to him anymore.
I do not say that the government wouldn't do such a thing; it is simply too incompetent and grabasstic to ever pull off something of that magnitude. They can't run the Post Office or the education system effectively, but some still think they are capable of planning on this kind of scale and making it work. But don't listen to me-- I'm obviously a plant by the Illuminati and an agent of the Shadow Government!
liberty student: I'm not sure what is more tragic, that the statists are self-defeating but may still prevail (due to the next part), or that libertarians are too disorganized, ignorant and cowardly to take advantage of the state's obvious and predictable mistakes.
Libertarians make themselves self-defeating by refusing to organize and indulging in wild conspiracy theories without proof. It is the state that is disorganized, cowardly, and ignorant, and that is what we must take advantage of.
Fleet Centurion:As to the 9/11 truthers-- Are you f*^king kidding?! The government, media, and nearly everyone else ignore them totally because Charlie Sheen, Alex Jones, and Zeitgeist-ers use misleading and bogus data to present their ridiculous case. Funny how we haven't heard from Charile since Bush retired. I guess the government must not be so evil to him anymore.
LOL WUT
Fleet Centurion:I do not say that the government wouldn't do such a thing; it is simply too incompetent and grabasstic to ever pull off something of that magnitude. They can't run the Post Office or the education system effectively, but some still think they are capable of planning on this kind of scale and making it work. But don't listen to me-- I'm obviously a plant by the Illuminati and an agent of the Shadow Government!
"Effectively" according to whose standard(s) of effectiveness?
The government is quite effective at robbing, kidnapping, assaulting, and murdering people. It's so effective at these things that it's gotten most people to believe that it doesn't do them at all.
Fleet Centurion:Libertarians make themselves self-defeating by refusing to organize and indulging in wild conspiracy theories without proof. It is the state that is disorganized, cowardly, and ignorant, and that is what we must take advantage of.
Refusing to organize? Wild conspiracy theories without proof?
I'm not saying the state is omniscient, omnipotent, and/or omnipresent. But it does seem to be more powerful than you realize.
---
Regarding Mr. Assange, this gives a whole new meaning to the meme "It's not rape, it's surprise sex!" /trollface
The keyboard is mightier than the gun.
Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.
Voluntaryism Forum
"they can't run the Post Office or the education system effectively"
If you believe the objective is to deliver mail cost effectively and to create independent critical thinkers, yes, it's a failure. That's what the taxpayers want and via government they will never get it efficiently, or at all!
But maybe the government don't care they can't calculate to serve their citizens, because that's not the objective, only a vote, support and legitimating well played scam.
They don't care if the education or the military is costing more than it should, it's not their money!
I disagree with this. The State is fighting gravity (spontaneous organization). There's nothing that we can do to get people to prefer moral/legal coherency over statist dual-law. However, we can try to explain the true nature of the State and make suggestions on how the wider public can alleviate its suffering under the burden of the State.
Clayton -
FleetCenturion:I think the exact opposite happened with Ron Paul's campaign. He is typically ignored by both state and media to try and minimize his message.
I was there during the Ron Paul campaign my nose up against the glass, watching every article, every interview, all day, every day. When Paul was stepped on or ignored, his supporters roared back. Journalists below the top tier were actually scared of pissing off his fans because they would relentlessly hold them accountable.
FleetCenturion:The same thing happened with Peter Schiff's Senate campaign.
Schiff is a Koch agent from what I can tell. You'll notice Lew Rockwell doesn't cover him at all since he was outed with Glenn Beck and others as attending Koch secret retreats.
FleetCenturion:As to the 9/11 truthers-- Are you f*^king kidding?! The government, media, and nearly everyone else ignore them totally because Charlie Sheen, Alex Jones, and Zeitgeist-ers use misleading and bogus data to present their ridiculous case. Funny how we haven't heard from Charile since Bush retired. I guess the government must not be so evil to him anymore.
Alex Jones has a massive audience which constantly grows. Charlie Sheen did a huge media push on Obama re: 9/11.
Sounds like you're pretty ignorant about a lot of the things you're commenting on.
FleetCenturion:I do not say that the government wouldn't do such a thing; it is simply too incompetent and grabasstic to ever pull off something of that magnitude. They can't run the Post Office or the education system effectively, but some still think they are capable of planning on this kind of scale and making it work. But don't listen to me-- I'm obviously a plant by the Illuminati and an agent of the Shadow Government!
I don't think you're an agent of anything. I think you're quite happy, like most people in the world, to remain ignorant of what is going on around them. Most people don't have any interest in being factual or discovering truth. They prefer to reinforce their biases and participate in bad faith discussions simply because they enjoy feeling superiority of ignorance over the next boob. Thankfully, this place isn't one that allows ignorance to flourish. The truth comes out, as much as can be known, one way or another. Usually through the use of logic, and serious scholarship.
FleetCenturion:Libertarians make themselves self-defeating by refusing to organize and indulging in wild conspiracy theories without proof. It is the state that is disorganized, cowardly, and ignorant, and that is what we must take advantage of.
You can't take advantage of anything. You can't even accurately recount what Ron Paul's campaign went through or what Charlie Sheen has been doing re: 9/11. The key component to being empowered is knowledge. Many libertarians still refuse to address certain topics, like you, preferring to push them off as conspiracy, when in fact, the only way they can continue as coincidence, is through willful ignorance and moral neglect.
I think it is Marc Stevens who makes the point, the state is winning, because you still pay your taxes. When you stop paying your taxes, then the state is starting to get pushed back on. I suspect you, like most of us, continue to pay your taxes, pay your fines, register your vehicles and property, ask for permission from the state to do various activities etc. And as long as you acknowledge the power of the state over you, you will ALWAYS be under it, no matter how self-righteous you think you are.
Yea, this is one area I have to disagree with my fellow libertarians on. There is no 9/11 conspiracy, I can see why they want it to be so, it would be proof of the evil and dangers of government but all evidence points towards it being work of a few crazy people, and not some real life Bond Villan's scheme.
Now its possible that the government knew about the attacks beforehand and didnt stop them(although its just as likely that they missed them becasue of sheer incompetence), and its undeniably true that the government took every advantage of the attacks to grow and become even more oppressive and tyranical than they have ever been. But that they were actually behind them? No that didnt happen....
SirThinkALot:Now its possible that the government knew about the attacks beforehand and didnt stop them(although its just as likely that they missed them becasue of sheer incompetence), and its undeniably true that the government took every advantage of the attacks to grow and become even more oppressive and tyranical than they have ever been. But that they were actually behind them? No that didnt happen....
This is what I am talking about. To believe the official story one has to suppress all reason. So even if we don't believe the official story, but still think the government didn't do it, then who did? See, to disqualify the government, one has to prove someone else did it. Where is that proof? Even the FBI won't charge Bin Laden with crimes, because they admit there is no evidence for it.
Most people confuse 9/11 truth, with believing that the government did it. That's largely a strawman argument. 9/11 truth is about questioning the official story and demanding a real investigation from the government. No one in the mainstream movement believe they have it all figured out, down to names, dates, and places.
9/11, like so many thousands of other smaller events and rituals, are accepted by people not based on reason or research, but upon a desire to not have to confront the truth, which will inevitably lead to confronting not only the state, but family members and friends who buy into the system, and the weight of our past errors.
Confirmation bias protects us from the weight of our own intellectual and moral errors, but it can also wall us off from self-actualization.
Many Libertarians are funny. They know the state is completely immoral and capable of unspeakable atrocity, and yet they still maintain the pretense that something is beyond the state, structurally or ethically. Obviously someone destroyed those buildings. If some rag tag guys in caves with backroom funding from desert backwaters *supposedly* could do it, why not the largest military and covert intelligence operation in the world?
Cognitive dissonance.
PS, if this turns into a 9/11 discussion, I will graveyard it. We already have tons of 9/11 discussions (ironically, in the graveyard). This topic is about how libertarians defeat themselves.
They know the state is completely immoral and capable of unspeakable atrocity
The state is not immoral or committing atrocities, because the state is not a person.
The persons involved might be considered complicit, but rarely fully responsible. The people in Department of Statistics collect information that helps provide for central planning policies, taxation policies, decisions for war production boards, and all else. The engineer providing aerodynamic models to the war production board for a new high speed bomber may just be told that he is to provide plans for a fast plane. Et cetera et cetera.
In the end, it's difficult to just go ahead and say, "Ordinary people are evil and they are the ones who destroy lives", because that is the truly self-defeating position where we claim to dislike the very people towards whom we are supposed to be sympathetic. We could even try to say voters are the ones who murder and loot by voting for brutal government, but voters are really just forced to work under competing bads, and bundles of polices under candidates rather than having choice of policy itself, and so on.
Why do some liberals find some claims about the state outrageous, even when it is possible? Because even statesman aren't guilty until proven innocent. And civic sense and politeness requires avoiding slander. When liberals come to the point of judging journalists, legislators, generals, soldiers, executive advisors, intelligence agents, NGOs, think tanks and all the rest to be guilty until proven innocent, then they can not object when liberals are treated the same way. That is truly self-defeating liberalism.
Many Libertarians are funny. They know the state is completely immoral and capable of unspeakable atrocity, and yet they still maintain the pretense that something is beyond the state, structurally or ethically.
Actually I would say the state is immoral, capable of unspeakable atrocity, and incompetent. If I'm shocked at something the government does, its not because I think they wouldnt do it, but because I dont think they are CAPABLE of doing something(or on occasion because I cant understand how the people would let the state get away with something)
Obviously someone destroyed those buildings. If some rag tag guys in caves with backroom funding from desert backwaters *supposedly* could do it, why not the largest military and covert intelligence operation in the world?
I never said the government COULDNT have pulled of 9/11, only that they DIDNT. When you actually look at the evidence, the claims of people who think the government masterminded 9/11 fall apart very quickly.
I'm interested in more specifics on how libertarians are self-defeating...
Failure to organize - Not sure this it true. Seems there are as many libertarian organizations and groups as there are libertarians. If you mean failure to effectively organize, I can see your point.
Prone to Conspiracy Theories - Seems just about every segment has this problem, so it's not unique to libertarians. Some folks are just skeptical, as they probably should be. Is being skeptical to be taken to mean a person is a nut job? If so, I'd wear the nut job badge with honor. To me a nut job is one who goes along with what he's told without exploring the truth. That definition fits most people.
As for specific conspiracy theories, most people probably don't care. In my observations, people tend to follow issues and subjects that impact them directly. They don't want to invest in the time required to follow-up for things that impact them, let alone topics they really don't care about. Going with the flow is a convienence, and people tend to like convienence. So they accept things and move on.
A skeptic doesn't advance a claim without solid evidence that is confirmed by other parties. If anything, each discovery tends to lead to more questions. I do think there are a lot of people who get worked up on a particular point, and then try to advance it without the required evidence. I've seen far too many claims that are lacking, and that includes official claims as well.
Prateek Sanjay: They know the state is completely immoral and capable of unspeakable atrocity The state is not immoral or committing atrocities, because the state is not a person.
The state as an agent. Really Prateek, I expect a higher standard.
Liberals are self-defeating if they are for limited liberty.
liberty student wrote: Schiff is a Koch agent from what I can tell. You'll notice Lew Rockwell doesn't cover him at all since he was outed with Glenn Beck and others as attending Koch secret retreats.
?
The other day you accused me of 'reckless speculation'.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/lewrockwell-show/?s=schiff
SirThinkALot:Actually I would say the state is immoral, capable of unspeakable atrocity, and incompetent. If I'm shocked at something the government does, its not because I think they wouldnt do it, but because I dont think they are CAPABLE of doing something(or on occasion because I cant understand how the people would let the state get away with something)
I can work with this.
If you believe the state is incompetent, why do you pay its fines and taxes? Why do you follow its rules?
Why do you think the government is not capable of doing something that they claim that men in a cave can do? If you believe they aren't as powerful as the men in the cave, why aren't you paying taxes to the men in the cave? Either from fear, or respect, those cave men seem to be the superior agency of force.
SirThinkALot: I never said the government COULDNT have pulled of 9/11, only that they DIDNT. When you actually look at the evidence, the claims of people who think the government masterminded 9/11 fall apart very quickly.
That is negative proof. It's a logical fallacy.
Just because someone can't prove something, doesn't disprove it. If a government is capable of extracting more wealth than anyone in the history of mankind, largely without violence, can have no meaningful political change in a democracy for almost 100 years, assassinate its own leaders, make torture legal, while breaking every moral law known to mankind, while launching wars under false pretenses without holding anyone accountable for what is essentially treason, how can you possibly believe that they could not blow up some buildings and hijack some planes?
I don't know if you are American, but Americans in general seem to suffer from this affliction of thinking they are exceptional, and yet being incredibly paranoid about men in caves at the same time. Either the US government is supreme or it is not.
Again, if there is a higher power, why are people paying their taxes to the US government? Why are libertarians licensing to travel, and paying fines to courts with no standing?
Yes, the truth is out there, and it is damn uncomfortable. Because the evil isn't in the state. The evil is something we create in our minds and enslave ourselves to. The revolution is not against people with guns, but with our consent to be treated like children and slaves.
Nielsio: liberty student wrote: Schiff is a Koch agent from what I can tell. You'll notice Lew Rockwell doesn't cover him at all since he was outed with Glenn Beck and others as attending Koch secret retreats. ? The other day you accused me of 'reckless speculation'. http://www.lewrockwell.com/lewrockwell-show/?s=schiff
And when was that interview done relative to when the information about the Kochs came out?
Nielsio, you were recklessly speculating. I am not. But I am amused to see it has bothered you enough that you're looking for an opportunity to create a tu quoque instead of addressing your own intellectual errrors.
Schiff gave a speech at a free market oriented meeting and suddenly he's a 'Koch agent'?
Schiff also gave a speech in Saudi Arabia, does that mean he's also an agent for the oil barrons?
Nielsio:Schiff gave a speech at a free market oriented meeting and suddenly he's a 'Koch agent'?
Did I say that?
You definitely didn't- but I think you already know why nielsio was confused, it'd be nice if you could clarify this Koch thing- its the first time I heard it.
auctionguy10:it'd be nice if you could clarify this Koch thing- its the first time I heard it.
Will try to do so tonight in a new thread.
liberty student: auctionguy10:it'd be nice if you could clarify this Koch thing- its the first time I heard it. Will try to do so tonight in a new thread.
Looking forward to your thread, liberty student.
What gives liberty student? You made a claim with zero proof. Aren't you going to at least give us a link or something?
jmorris84:What gives liberty student?
To give you guys a response, since you're apparently not able to search or follow this stuff in realtime, requires free time for me. Something that has been in short supply today.
jmorris84:You made a claim with zero proof.
What claim did I make?
jmorris84:Aren't you going to at least give us a link or something?
Do I owe you something? Have I not given enough, you feel I am somehow in your debt?
You guys will get a post, maybe tonight if I have time. Then you can all benefit from my labor, as you seem to believe is your due.
Seriously jmorris84, what have YOU ever done for ME?
You don't have to do anything that you don't want to do, liberty student. Enjoy the rest of your night. :)
Peter Schiff and the Kochtopus