Jacob Bloom:I would say the same to you.
except i know what i'm talking about. and you can't even explain these things to yourself, much less anyone else. its simple economics. theanswers have been there in literature for at least the last 150 years.
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
wilderness: Jacob Bloom: 1. My main influence is Machiavelli's The Prince. He outlined, to my mind, human nature. And he also explained how governments work. My other big influence is Phil Zimbardo's Lucifer Effect. He demonstrated how all humans, when put in positions of power, will abuse them. This is called sadistic. According to your view humans abuse power, BUT you knowingly give certain humans the monopoly on destructive power that, according to you, they will abuse. It's called a Military State. See how you keep slipping up?
Jacob Bloom: 1. My main influence is Machiavelli's The Prince. He outlined, to my mind, human nature. And he also explained how governments work. My other big influence is Phil Zimbardo's Lucifer Effect. He demonstrated how all humans, when put in positions of power, will abuse them.
1. My main influence is Machiavelli's The Prince. He outlined, to my mind, human nature. And he also explained how governments work. My other big influence is Phil Zimbardo's Lucifer Effect. He demonstrated how all humans, when put in positions of power, will abuse them.
This is called sadistic. According to your view humans abuse power, BUT you knowingly give certain humans the monopoly on destructive power that, according to you, they will abuse. It's called a Military State. See how you keep slipping up?
You forget that our army protects us! The US military does not hurt the US! It protects us! Whatever abuses the our military may commit against us (which I don't think they do), it's nothing compared to what our enemies would do to us if the military weren't there.
Jacob Bloom: You forget that our army protects us! The US military does not hurt the US! It protects us! Whatever abuses the our military may commit against us (which I don't think they do), it's nothing compared to what our enemies would do to us if the military weren't there.
What enemies?
The fallacies of intellectual communism, a compilation - On the nature of power
Jacob Bloom: I am fighting. By advocating limited government. Not lots of government but also not the absence of government. Both extremes are undesirable.
I am fighting. By advocating limited government. Not lots of government but also not the absence of government. Both extremes are undesirable.
No one in power cares about your advocacy. You are advocating to dead air.
nirgrahamUK: Jacob Bloom:I would say the same to you. except i know what i'm talking about. and you can't even explain these things to yourself, much less anyone else. its simple economics. theanswers have been there in literature for at least the last 150 years.
If you know what you're talking about, why is it that no one agrees with you except for a very small minority? If what you're saying is such common sense, why are you the only people that get it? I don't care if the answers have been in literature, I don't live in a book. I live in the real world, I need real solutions and you guys aren't giving me any.
oh i see. irrational fear is considered 'good argument'. and your ignorance of basic economics and the market process is irrelevant when contrasted to the well told lies you have heard, and your reptile-mind terror of the unkown.
Jacob Bloom: The desire for power is not evil. It's what happens when people get the unchecked power that's evil. The desire for power is part of human nature. And I am no one's enemy. I train my body and mind to be powerful. For what other reason would I do anything if not to have power??
The desire for power is not evil. It's what happens when people get the unchecked power that's evil. The desire for power is part of human nature. And I am no one's enemy. I train my body and mind to be powerful. For what other reason would I do anything if not to have power??
Power is evil itself. You will never stand for freedom unless you give up power, as the definition of power is the denial of another man's freedom. This must be achieved with violence, and with the use of violence comes the corruption of your soul.
Stranger: Jacob Bloom: You forget that our army protects us! The US military does not hurt the US! It protects us! Whatever abuses the our military may commit against us (which I don't think they do), it's nothing compared to what our enemies would do to us if the military weren't there. What enemies?
Iran, Pakistan, North Korea....
Jacob Bloom:If you know what you're talking about, why is it that no one agrees with you except for a very small minority?
fallacy :Argumentum_ad_populum
Jacob Bloom: If what you're saying is such common sense, why are you the only people that get it?
Argumentum_ad_populum
Jacob Bloom: don't care if the answers have been in literature, I don't live in a book.
or think.
Jacob Bloom:I live in the real world, I need real solutions and you guys aren't giving me any.
you need to 'feel good'
Jacob Bloom: wilderness: Jacob Bloom: 1. My main influence is Machiavelli's The Prince. He outlined, to my mind, human nature. And he also explained how governments work. My other big influence is Phil Zimbardo's Lucifer Effect. He demonstrated how all humans, when put in positions of power, will abuse them. This is called sadistic. According to your view humans abuse power, BUT you knowingly give certain humans the monopoly on destructive power that, according to you, they will abuse. It's called a Military State. See how you keep slipping up? You forget that our army protects us! The US military does not hurt the US! It protects us! Whatever abuses the our military may commit against us (which I don't think they do), it's nothing compared to what our enemies would do to us if the military weren't there.
So humans don't abuse power? Which one is it?
Stranger: Jacob Bloom: The desire for power is not evil. It's what happens when people get the unchecked power that's evil. The desire for power is part of human nature. And I am no one's enemy. I train my body and mind to be powerful. For what other reason would I do anything if not to have power?? Power is evil itself. You will never stand for freedom unless you give up power, as the definition of power is the denial of another man's freedom. This must be achieved with violence, and with the use of violence comes the corruption of your soul.
Lol, "power is evil itself"?? You guys are nuts. And I don't believe in the soul. Freedom has to be earned! It has to be fought for! It's not just some entitlement! It will be taken from you unless you defend it!
Jacob Bloom: Lol, "power is evil itself"?? You guys are nuts. And I don't believe in the soul. Freedom has to be earned! It has to be fought for! It's not just some entitlement! It will be taken from you unless you defend it!
Our point exactly. Once you allow a state, your freedom will be taken away. It is inevitable, and you want to perpetuate this, hence you are a power fighter, not a freedom fighter.
Jacob Bloom: Iran, Pakistan, North Korea....
None of these countries are enemies of the United States. They are victims of the American Empire.
In fact, American freedom fighters will find allies in Iran, not enemies.
wilderness: Jacob Bloom: wilderness: Jacob Bloom: 1. My main influence is Machiavelli's The Prince. He outlined, to my mind, human nature. And he also explained how governments work. My other big influence is Phil Zimbardo's Lucifer Effect. He demonstrated how all humans, when put in positions of power, will abuse them. This is called sadistic. According to your view humans abuse power, BUT you knowingly give certain humans the monopoly on destructive power that, according to you, they will abuse. It's called a Military State. See how you keep slipping up? You forget that our army protects us! The US military does not hurt the US! It protects us! Whatever abuses the our military may commit against us (which I don't think they do), it's nothing compared to what our enemies would do to us if the military weren't there. So humans don't abuse power? Which one is it?
Ugh! We have a military to protect us from foreign invaders. Whatever abuses our government may make against us are nothing compared to what a foreign ruler would do.
Stranger: Jacob Bloom: Lol, "power is evil itself"?? You guys are nuts. And I don't believe in the soul. Freedom has to be earned! It has to be fought for! It's not just some entitlement! It will be taken from you unless you defend it! Our point exactly. Once you allow a state, your freedom will be taken away. It is inevitable, and you want to perpetuate this, hence you are a power fighter, not a freedom fighter.
Alright fine. I'm over Austrian economics, this stuff is rubbish.
Stranger: Jacob Bloom: Iran, Pakistan, North Korea.... None of these countries are enemies of the United States. They are victims of the American Empire. In fact, American freedom fighters will find allies in Iran, not enemies.
You're insane.
Jacob Bloom:Alright fine. I'm over Austrian economics, this stuff is rubbish.
you havent shown evidence of any understanding of economics. you just blather half-baked political philosophy. if you are going to go, if you are 'over it' , good bye. good riddance.
Jacob Bloom: Stranger: Jacob Bloom: Iran, Pakistan, North Korea.... None of these countries are enemies of the United States. They are victims of the American Empire. In fact, American freedom fighters will find allies in Iran, not enemies. You're insane.
No, I watch the Daily Show with Jon Stewart over the internet, as do Iranians.
nirgrahamUK: Jacob Bloom:Alright fine. I'm over Austrian economics, this stuff is rubbish. you havent shown evidence of any understanding of economics. you just blather half-baked political philosophy. if you are going to go, if you are 'over it' , good bye. good riddance.
No big loss. From his speech about personal power, he was most likely a randian.
Jacob Bloom: this stuff is rubbish.
Mises was not an anarchist!
What of the insane, the very young, or the very old. Please don't give up on sound theory in spite of a few radical utopians.
I thought this thread was about monopoly though?
Anti-trust to me is irony. Without protectionism, like I.P.,etc, there can be no force to institute monopolism. Monopolies are sanctioned by state action.
Individualism Rocks
Foreign policy positions have nothing to do with economics as a science, they are a matter of libertarian political philosophy. Yet it is not rubbish, merely because you happen to disagree with it.
Freedom of markets is positively correlated with the degree of evolution in any society...
Bank Run: Please don't give up on sound theory in spite of a few radical utopians.
Please don't give up on sound theory in spite of a few radical utopians.
"utopians" is the wrong word. I'll even help you out on this one. A utopia wouldn't consider criminals being around. Yet anarchy not being a utopia but instead honoring the law and excellence thus why all this talk about justice, self-defense, and liberty. This isn't about society being perfect in the utopian sense. So it would be more accurate to call my actions: dreaming of liberty.
Jacob Bloom:Because when I buy a house, I need to know that what I'm buying is going to be protected by force. I shouldn't have to pay for individual protection. It should be supplied to me and everyone else in order for myself and everyone else to feel confident that if I buy that house or if they buy their house, it's not going to be taken from me leaving me with no recourse and that the same goes for others.
This sounds similar to alot objections I've heard before. Usually the objection assumes something unrealistic. In this case, it's that it is possible to have an absolutely secure property title. In most cases though people have the idea that 'public servents' are selfless, uncorruptable, ect. whereas market actors are selfish, greedy and so on. I think the best way to handle these kind of objections is to point out that they assume unrealizable conditions. It is even better if you can lable them as 'utopian.' This will make it harder for them to accuse you of the same thing later on. I think a big part of persuading people is overcoming their objections before they come up.
yes, jacob needs to know that the government wont steal his property threough eminent domain. ha! ha!
he shouldnt have to pay for things he wants, he shouldnt have to pay for healtchare or food or well anything really.
society should be ordered so everyone can feel confident about stuff and no-one should have to pay for the labour it takes to provide that 'confidence'. which is an impossibility so lets not have a long conversation about it but just SHOUT ALOT.
Sage:Do you accept minarchism on reason and evidence, or on faith?
I don't know why you consider him a minarchist.
If anything he is a hyper-militarist. He wants the states to be a New Sparta, a nation dedicated to warfare, 300-style. Every aspect of its citizens lives should be directed toward engaging in war, either through direct participation, or through supplying 'war material.' There should be no national religion except for some sort of jujutsu philosophy. Every citizen should learn maritial arts and marksmanship. Training in the art of war should begin at a young age and is the duty of every citizen. Free markets are useful because they provide a strong economic base for the state to draw upon for its war efforts. But that is their only value. Welfare, medicare and medicade, social security, unemployment insurance, ect. only breed weekness and should be abolished.There should only be a democratic warfare state and productive market to draw upon. The bulk of the industries should be directed towards war efforts. All research and development should be directed towards war efforts, or improving productie capacity. The state should have a massive military, probably ten times its current size, completely pulverizing every country where a new 'Hitler' or terrorist dares to pop up. And any sin committed by the paranoid Spartan state is forgiveable, in light of the benefit of security it provides. There are no aggressive acts, only defensive. The invasion of neutrals, targeted assasination, city bombing, use of WMDs, and collateral damage are always lesser necessary evils, in light of the security achieved. And all such acts are not the fault of the state, but of it's enemy for provoking the state with their aggression and brutality.
In other words, he's been brainwashed with a PC view of history. He is what he thinks is the ideal of Regan Republicanism.
The ones that hate your freedom. duh.
If he really wanted to learn more about econ, why wouldn't he go to the literature section of the website instead jumping into these kinds of treads?
Stephen Forde: Jacob Bloom:Alright fine. I'm over Austrian economics, this stuff is rubbish. If he really wanted to learn more about econ, why wouldn't he go to the literature section of the website instead jumping into these kinds of treads?
Amen.
“Elections are Futures Markets in Stolen Property.” - H. L. Mencken
Jacob Bloom:You forget that our army protects us!
Knight_of_BAAWA: Jacob Bloom:You forget that our army protects us!From whom? Bloviating tinpot dictators without any means of striking us? Desert dwellers who'd never thought about attacking a US citizen until the US Army invaded their country?
From us.
These are the kind of threads that scare people away from Austrianism and thoroughly ingrain them in the corner of the government. Bravo.
Jayjay: These are the kind of threads that scare people away from Austrianism and thoroughly ingrain them in the corner of the government. Bravo.
Thanx for the advice. We'll take it into consideration.
We don't need people who are easily scared away. They are unreliable.
Stranger: Jayjay: These are the kind of threads that scare people away from Austrianism and thoroughly ingrain them in the corner of the government. Bravo. We don't need people who are easily scared away. They are unreliable.
Yes. As statists cower, betray, and thus shed their disgraceful stench upon the earth - certain individuals muster the extra strength that is needed to endure their misgivings and with bravery and steadfastness persist in honoring liberty.
I leave this thread overnight and...wow. I'll take this to mean we're on the right track with the monopoly concept.
We've now seen the full irrationality of the minarchist position laid bare: "Human nature is evil and corrupt, so therefore we need a powerful government and/or army (commanded by humans) to protect us from human nature."
Why anarchy fails
Stranger:We don't need people who are easily scared away. They are unreliable.
We need everyone and anyone
Jacob Bloom:You're insane.
Another one fooled by propaganda
But, people, we do need to be less aggressive. Accept that on most "issues" this guy would be fighting with us, not against us, and remember that at one point many of you couldn't make the final step and reject tyranny altogether. Then try and persuade him, but not fight him.
The difference between libertarianism and socialism is that libertarians will tolerate the existence of a socialist community, but socialists can't tolerate a libertarian community.
wilderness:"utopians" is the wrong word
Yes it is a common term levelled against anarchism. It was lazy to use that terminology. However; having a criminal justice system calls for law. In anarchy what is this law of the land? Does every private defence agency follow the common law, is it a law common to all. If the rule be respect property, where is this rule written so that the insane may at least know it. I've met a great deal of adults that can barely respect property rights in general. They have a 'let them all be damned, if I can I will': attitude. Now self defence and pacifism don't exactly go together. Our the pacifists damned under anarchy? Will anarchy finally be defined under one term instead of left-anarchist, socialist-anarchist, anarcho-capitalist, etc. You see; there are so many different types of anarchism, one must put a this-type or that-type, to let folks know just what kind of no-rule sort of person he is. Also many anarchists have been historically nasty folks, killing presidents, autarkists, and people that don't speak in favour of social cooperation, up until Rothbard really. I think instead of dreaming, we use the tools we know of to maximize individual liberty. Free markets and freedom must logically go hand in hand. It is possible to garner more people into our liberal cause by promoting a methodology that reasons why it must be that in order to gain liberty we must have free markets.
So, I'm sorry if I was name calling. It's easy to grow tired of anyone around here that is not an anarchist getting railroaded.
If we can't work together despite are differing views on the proper application of law, or what if any it should be, it is unlickley we can promote maximum social cooperation.
Again, Mises was not an anarchist.
Dang, I can't find the EDIT option. sorry for the poor grammer. Perhaps I should learn to proofread better. Good day.
proofreading is over-rated. but reading, thats another story:
http://mises.org/story/2088
please read this, post here any sentences which you recognise to be wrong/incorrect. and we will see what the problem might be...
Mises stance is positively randian on the issue. He wasn't a perfect god of economics.
If you actually read for yourself critically the few paragraphs he devotes to such issues you will see some redefining of terms and some blatant fallacies. It seems to me that Mises mind was focused on other areas of concern. real depth of thought on the topic was applied by others, after, his followers.Rothbard, Hoppe etc. but its a long tradition. please read Molinari, it is written so simply, and clearly.
Bank Run: wilderness:"utopians" is the wrong word Yes it is a common term levelled against anarchism. It was lazy to use that terminology. However; having a criminal justice system calls for law. In anarchy what is this law of the land? Does every private defence agency follow the common law, is it a law common to all. If the rule be respect property, where is this rule written so that the insane may at least know it. I've met a great deal of adults that can barely respect property rights in general. They have a 'let them all be damned, if I can I will': attitude. Now self defence and pacifism don't exactly go together. Our the pacifists damned under anarchy? Will anarchy finally be defined under one term instead of left-anarchist, socialist-anarchist, anarcho-capitalist, etc. You see; there are so many different types of anarchism, one must put a this-type or that-type, to let folks know just what kind of no-rule sort of person he is. Also many anarchists have been historically nasty folks, killing presidents, autarkists, and people that don't speak in favour of social cooperation, up until Rothbard really. I think instead of dreaming, we use the tools we know of to maximize individual liberty. Free markets and freedom must logically go hand in hand. It is possible to garner more people into our liberal cause by promoting a methodology that reasons why it must be that in order to gain liberty we must have free markets. So, I'm sorry if I was name calling. It's easy to grow tired of anyone around here that is not an anarchist getting railroaded. If we can't work together despite are differing views on the proper application of law, or what if any it should be, it is unlickley we can promote maximum social cooperation. Again, Mises was not an anarchist.
Yeah all those perspectives, opinions, diversity, and those dang individuals - liberty is grand!
Dreaming in the human action sense of making a decision is active not as passive as you seem to have taken it to mean.