Libertarianism makes you stupid

dstroy

dstroy

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Power over others isn't a good idea when the people wielding the power are also the sole arbiters of how much power they can have. You end up with the kind of thing you hope to prevent.

Which is why you need to know more about how the free market mechanism of customer feedback is an important ingredient to a more peaceful world.
Click to expand...
Everyone would have to act a certain way, which won’t happen. For example, if we lived in that type of society, I would start a militia and begin capturing land. Then you would have to band together some sort of your own militia and end up with government again, but with less resources.


Mind-numbing stupidity.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
dstroy said:
Everyone would have to act a certain way, which won’t happen. For example, if we lived in that type of society, I would start a militia and begin capturing land. Then you would have to band together some sort of your own militia and end up with government again, but with less resources.


Mind-numbing stupidity.
Click to expand...
The Achilles’ heel of any utopian construct. Utopians invariably specify large groups of individuals all playing team. To someone of a more predatory disposition, it’s a house full of rich rubes.
 
Roger A. Shrubber

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
dstroy said:
Everyone would have to act a certain way, which won’t happen. For example, if we lived in that type of society, I would start a militia and begin capturing land. Then you would have to band together some sort of your own militia and end up with government again, but with less resources.


Mind-numbing stupidity.
Click to expand...
i'm pretty sure i had this conversation with rob about 5 years ago...same result...
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
dstroy said:
The indigenous aren’t libertarians rob.
Click to expand...
They are individuals. Some are and some are not. I think most are not, they are prisoners of a giant militia.

The point of the meme was "your militia" became a government that engulfed them and dispossessed them.

So when you say you worry about someone starting a militia, you're really worried about someone using force to wrongfully control others. When people use force to control others they are "governmenting" (verb) them. The thing you fear happening if there is no government to protect you, an aggressive militia, IS the formation of a government. Your argument cancels itself. Still winning.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Wouldn't it be great if people would just change and behave the way I want them to?
Click to expand...
No. not the way you want them to be. You want them to be subservient and enslaved. That wouldn't be great, that would be horrible.
Peaceful people should be free to live the way they want to. That would be great.

You imply without a central authority people would run amuck. How do you respond to the idea that the central authority of the USA has caused the most death and destruction the world has ever seen in the last century? Do you feel protected ?
 
dstroy

dstroy

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
They are individuals. Some are and some are not. I think most are not, they are prisoners of a giant militia.

The point of the meme was "your militia" became a government that engulfed them and dispossessed them.

So when you say you worry about someone starting a militia, you're really worried about someone using force to wrongfully control others. When people use force to control others they are "governmenting" (verb) them. The thing you fear happening if there is no government to protect you, an aggressive militia, IS the formation of a government. Your argument cancels itself. Still winning.
Click to expand...
But they aren’t libertarians which was the whole premise. Feel free to keep bumping the thread.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Utopians invariably specify large groups of individuals all playing team.
Click to expand...
That is not a part of my argument. It's a part of your assumption of my argument.
My argument is that human relations are best when the participants are engaged on a peaceful, voluntary and consensual basis. How people arrange themselves beyond that is up to them and should be.

You neglect to recognize in your preferred mode, "the referee" , an overarching domineering monstrosity (coercion based government) is not engaging in peaceful, voluntary and consensual acts. Are you saying, it is best to have a large single rapist instead of the possibility of many smaller rapists...is that your argument ?

Why have any rapists at all and how do we get there is the question you should be asking.
 
Last edited:
dstroy

dstroy

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
That is not a part of my argument. It's a part of your assumption of my argument.
My argument is that human relations are best when the participants are engaged on a peaceful, voluntary and consensual basis. How people arrange themselves beyond that is up to them and should be.

You neglect to recognize in your preferred mode, "the referee" , an overarching domineering monstosity (coercion based government) is not engaging in peaceful, voluntary and consensual acts. Are you saying, it is best to have a large single rapist instead of the possibility of many smaller rapists...is that your argument ?
Click to expand...
If you lived in a society of libertarians, I would conquer it.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
dstroy said:
But they aren’t libertarians which was the whole premise. Feel free to keep bumping the thread.
Click to expand...
Some are though and it was my meme dammit! Lol.

So, the thing you fear happening, "the creation of a government via the miitia route" can only be stopped by a government which arose to power after it was powered by a militia ? That's rather dizzying, would you like to sit down and collect yourself?

Also, it would be helpful for those responding recently in this thread if there was a better understanding of how a free market and consumer feedback plays into this. You see, in the present your feedback doesn't matter, you're glued to a one size fits all domineering thing you can't leave. If your grocery store was like that, wouldn't you find another one? If the shitty grocery store treated enough people poorly, and they had the ability to leave it, wouldn't that send a market signal to other bad actors ?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
dstroy said:
If you lived in a society of libertarians, I would conquer it.
Click to expand...
But would you buy a vowel for your forum name dstroy? That's what I want to know.

I don't want to live in a society of only libertarians though.

I want to live in a society where it is recognized that individuals who are peaceful can align with other people or not and be what they want to be as long as they don't force their beliefs on others. Does your "utopian government" feature that option? No, it doesn't, slave.

If your overarching governent model is so good, why has democide (government caused deaths) far outstripped free lance criminal caused deaths?
 
dstroy

dstroy

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Some are though and it was my meme dammit! Lol.

So, the thing you fear happening, "the creation of a government via the miitia route" can only be stopped by a government which arose to power after it was powered by a militia ? That's rather dizzying, would you like to sit down and collect yourself?

Also, it would be helpful for those responding recently in this thread if there was a better understanding of how a free market and consumer feedback plays into this. You see, in the present your feedback doesn't matter, you're glued to a one size fits all domineering thing you can't leave. If your grocery store was like that, wouldn't you find another one? If the shitty grocery store treated enough people poorly, and they had the ability to leave it, wouldn't that send a market signal to other bad actors ?
Click to expand...
Your ideals won’t work after your disjointed society is in ruin.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
dstroy said:
Your ideals won’t work after your disjointed society is in ruin.
Click to expand...
So, on an individual basis you are okay with people dominating you or would you prefer they interact with you on a more consensual basis ?

I don't have a model for society to end up at, I only have a peaceful means to be used. You do not and fail to understand the value of "feedback" to get there. You also don't distinguish between imposed order and peace, a common mistake.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
dstroy said:
Then you would have to band together some sort of your own militia and end up with government again, but with less resources.
Click to expand...
Is it possible for people to "band together" to dispel a threat and then disband the power structure once the threat is removed? Wasn't that the alleged intent of the "founding fathers" ?

The thing that happened is they didn't disband they created a federal governemnt and here we are....slave.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top