Answering the libertarians and their lies

by **rothbardian** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 3:24 am

Just picking out a few points to address here (I'd love to cover it all but it's too much): Joe H.-- Your football club illustration is an interesting point because it's a pretty good example of a libertarian community. The key thing some people may be overlooking in the case of your club is that it is...a voluntary association. That's the key. You can withdraw from the association if you want to. There may be agreements you have to enter into, in order to participate in that community (the football club) but if you don't like something about it or you're just tired of playing...you can quit. Not so with coercive government. You can't quit and say--"I want to form my own association". You were questioning the $9000 medical bill. My only point was how immorally high the prices have been rigged. Once a particular part of the business community (in this case the health care industry) has got it fixed up so that the government is paying the bills...they skyrocket their prices and drive an entire nation into bankruptcy. That's where we're at in the U.S. in actual reality (even though bankruptcy hasn't been officially declared). It doesn't matter whether the bill is being paid by the government (as you describe it) or paid privately by the individual. A theft is still occurring. The impoverishing of the economy is still happening. There's no reason our nation and our world can't be made up of a series of voluntary associations. These private structures perform with vast superiority anyway. Why not set everything up after that kind of model? Coercive government is just screwing up the whole world. The world is nearing the brink of a totalitarian dark night under coercive government. Heck, let's try ANYTHING but what we've had so far (coercive governments). As I have described before, more often than not, government agencies are perpetrating the very problems they purport to be solving. The reason for this is...they need these 'problems' to arise in order to justify the existence of the particular government agency in question. Examples: 1. The worst threats to our national security and the greatest harm to American citizens right now, has been coming from precisely those who have been entrusted with our national security. Recall 9/11...3000 dead Americans at the hands of our own national security leadership. 2. The DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency) has been heavily involved in smuggling drugs...and smuggling them INTO our country (along with the CIA). The sum total of the U.S. drug problem is perpetrated by these very people. 3. The Federal Reserve Bank, which is tasked with the oversight and health of the U.S. currency has been doing the exact opposite...counterfeiting our currency into a slow but certain destruction, for almost 95 years. 4. The Education Department is doing just the opposite of education. Public schools have been cynically shaped into "obedient, illiterate sheeple" factories. As evidence, I would present to you 999 million semi-literate Americans who obediently hang on every word that proceeds forth from CNN and Fox News...and they remain obediently in their coercive fold, patiently awaiting "9/11 Part-Two". The vastly superior feature of the 'voluntary association' model is that if a particular association is becoming obsolete or unpopular...individuals can freely leave it...the association peters out and dies from natural causes. Coercive government will not do such. AND it will manufacture artificial justifications (as I said). Bilbo-- Thanks for the 'thumbs up' earlier. And I agree with your take on the Great Depression. It was artificially concocted and completely premeditated by the 'powers that be'. It's the classic modus operandus of corrupt (is there any other kind?) government-- 1. Manufacture an artificial problem (The Depression). 2. Gloriously step in with the "solution" (taxpayer funded soup kitchens). yathrib-- You kind of misdirected away from your own argument there. I wasn't talking about whether the Founders were libertarian or not. I was saying that they were attempting something unprecedented...establishing unprecedented freedom (in a world full of despots, kings and dictators). You seemed to think if something is unprecedented it is automatically a "pipe dream". My response was that just because something is unprecedented, doesn't make it wrong...or impractical. Human flight was unprecedented at one point! Captain Nemo-- Pinochet wasn't a Libertarian. He was a dictator. Libertarianism is all about freedom from coercion. Dictators are all about coercion. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rothbardian>rothbardian</A> at: 8/17/06 1:28 am

by **rothbardian** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 5:21 am

bvonahsen-- Your argument "The libertarian answer is you do it through eternal war" is a gigantic misconception and a very carefully crafted piece of PTB propaganda (in my humble opinion). (edit: I mean no offense. I just think this is where the idea has originated from.) Isn't it interesting that the unceasing wars you refer to, are an exact description of the entire 20th century (and continuing into the 21st)? And Libertarianism had nothing to do with it. Coercive governments are the culprits-- they force taxation upon the community then collude with the military-industrial complex to use those monies for lucrative wars. They also coerce young people into fighting and dying in those wars. The direct connection from coercive government to 'unceasing war' is an undeniable fact. In a libertarian world, the individual has only limited and finite personal resources. He cannot dip into a bottomless pit of tax dollars. He has precious few chances (and maybe only one chance) to convert his finances into a profit with which to sustain a living. This picture of a libertarian world where everyone is running crazily through the streets, shooting off their guns (a PERFECT depiction of the 20th century of wall-to-wall coercive governments, by the way) is a myth. It's a lie from the pit of PTB hell. The REALITY is that there is a natural trend towards peaceful cooperation on the part of individuals with limited means. I see that natural trend every day in my sphere of commerce. It's simply not profitable to engage in conflict, it's highly UNprofitable. IN FACT, the greater the harmony I can achieve, and the more cooperatively I function with others...the more progress I make. That's the reality of MY world. And I don't see any bureaucrats around me all day long. I live (as do almost ALL people) in a virtual libertarian world. Years ago, when I first went into business for myself, I remember walking into a place of business and there were only black folks present (customers and workers). Just for a few brief moments we looked each other over, under the spell of a lifetime of ridiculous propaganda from the mainstream media and academia, which claims that blacks and whites can only get along under heavy-handed supervision from dimwitted, lazy government bureaucrats. But then I pulled out my wares and offered my services. The focus shifted instantly from the contrived 'controversy'...to the business at hand. They loved my goods and services and I loved their remuneration. Many years and visits later, we're good friends-- we talk about each other's familys, we send each other Christmas cards etc. There is a natural alliance in the market place. There is a natural positive dynamic. It is by no means conflict-free. But the conflicts are limited because no one has access to unlimited tax dollars with which to fund the conflict...therefore the overwhelming priority is to get the conflict resolved and get back to "putting food on the table". In other words, Libertarianism doesn't eliminate conflict-- it just eliminates the ability to MASS PRODUCE conflict. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rothbardian>rothbardian</A> at: 8/17/06 3:30 am

by **Joe Hillshoist** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 7:44 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>You were questioning the $9000 medical bill. My only point was how immorally high the prices have been rigged. Once a particular part of the business community (in this case the health care industry) has got it fixed up so that the government is paying the bills...they skyrocket their prices and drive an entire nation into bankruptcy. That's where we're at in the U.S. in actual reality (even though bankruptcy hasn't been officially declared).<hr></blockquote> Maybe we are talking at cross purposes, cos this is exactly what happens once services provided by governments become privatised. It is what has happened in my country over the past 15 to 20 years. That is because people called it(govt ownership of stuff, infrastructure and the like) socialism and attacked it, saying privatisation would result in better service because of this that and the other. And it was complete bullshit. It hasn't actually worked. As bad as democracy can get it only gets that way because people become complacent, apathetic and lazy; or too stressed by their lives to contemplate politics. Thats what happened in the US. Some people might use that as an arguement to say people don't deserve democracy. I suspect that will happen pretty soon. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>There's no reason our nation and our world can't be made up of a series of voluntary associations. These private structures perform with vast superiority anyway. Why not set everything up after that kind of model?<hr></blockquote> I seem to remember you saying that would support such a system yet when i directed you to <a href="http://www.unahi.org/index.htm" target="top">one</a>, you called it a liberal something or other and wrote it off. This organisation, lets call it the Higanon people, cos that is what it actually is, although they have to form western style institutions to interact with western institutions, a group of people that consider themselves a unique, individual group. Their young people are always leaving for the bright lights and the big city. Some go and join the army, some go and join the muslim rebels in southern Mindinao. Most of them come back, if not to live, then regularly. They end up wanting to remain part of that particular unique identity. But they don't have to. The coersion comes from inside them in that case. Most people in a country assume they are part of that country, they identify with the land and community where they live, but sublimate that often through institutions and symbols. That seems to be a fundamental human need. The need to belong, and those private organisations you mention may work, ala the phyles of Neal Stephenson's The Diamond Age, in that regard. In many ways I totally agree with you on that level. The US seems to have always been about excess and extremeism despite the propaganda. It maight of viewed itself as a bastion of freedom, but in reality it is a bastion of excess, from the Pilgrims to vegas and Nukes, whiskey pete and Iraq to Lance Armstrong - the US is about excess. Million this and that marches. Hollywood. National Debt Etc etc. If there is a violent upheaval in the US, and whatever replaces the current mess, it will be steeped in excess. That is a severe danger to whatever freedom anyone here thinks is worthwhile. You wanna be careful what you wish for sometimes. I can see problems with the voluntary association thing tho. Unless something has a hold on you, and I mean from the inside, not some external duress, if it moves you and the like, its easy to walk away, and its easy to come into such a set up and take what you can then move on to the next one.

by **yathrib** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 10:57 am

But still, the founding fathers based their system of government on how people actually behaved according to their observation, at least that's my sense from the Federalist Papers, etc. It wasn't based on an absolutist, reality-challenged pie-in the-sky ideology. Important difference, that.

by **professorpan** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 12:00 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>In a libertarian world, the individual has only limited and finite personal resources. He cannot dip into a bottomless pit of tax dollars. He has precious few chances (and maybe only one chance) to convert his finances into a profit with which to sustain a living.<hr></blockquote> And suppose he fails that chance? What if he's injured, gets sick, or has a mental breakdown? Vulture capitalism (i.e. unregulated, free-to-exploit "libertarian" capitalism) eats its dead. Soylent green is people, dammit! It's PEOPLE! Give me that good old-fashioned social welfare state any day. I'd be overjoyed to pay taxes to fix up roads, feed the poor, and take care of the sick. With enough popular will, it could happen. It's certainly much more possible that a libertarian, unregulated capitalist free-market utopia.

by **johnny nemo** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 1:08 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Captain Nemo-- Pinochet wasn't a Libertarian. He was a dictator. Libertarianism is all about freedom from coercion. Dictators are all about coercion.<hr></blockquote> I swear that history books are like kryptonite to you Libertarians. Pinochet's privitization of government programs, deregulation of governement standards and "free market" economy were Libertarian and disastrous. Historically, the two go hand-in-hand, and that's a fact. Since Somalia and Chile won't convince of your dangerous follies, let us explore the Libertarian paradise of the pirate Captain Mission. <a href="http://www.trivia-library.com/a/attempted-utopias-society-captain-mission-pirate-utopia-part-2.htm">www.trivia-library.com/a/...part-2.htm</a> In 1726, on a small island between Madagascar and the east coast of Africa, Captain Mission and his followers built a bustling pirate Libertarian paradise. After an amphitheater was constructed, Captain Mission gave a speech declaring the Libertarian principles of his new Utopia. "Here comes into being today the Republic of Libertatia. You, my people, are the Liberi. We dedicate ourselves to the spread of liberty, and the love of liberty, toleration, and the love of humanity under whatever faith and whatever skin. May our fortune equal the greatness of our hope!" When his subjects complained about the lack of enough women for all, Captain Mission led his Navy on a special raid, intercepting a Mecca-bound ship, kidnapped 100 females, brought them back to Libertatia, and presented them to their waiting grooms. Soon enough, as can be expected, things began to break down in Libertatia. Captain Mission realized that Libertatia must have democracy and popular law. To this end, the pirates and colonists were divided into groups of 10, and each group elected one of its number as a representative to the Central Assembly. They constructed a State House and the representatives elected Captain Mission their 1st lord conservator for a term of 3 years. He, in turn, chose Thomas Tew, of Salem, his admiral, heading a 3-ship fleet, and Caraccioli as his Secretary of State.  Thus, a Frenchman, an American, and an Italian ruled a polyglot citizenry over 2 centuries before the formation of the UN. To summarize, Libertarianism didn't work, so they adopted what did work: DEMOCRACY. 280 years later, you "daydream believers" still can't figure out that LIBERTARIANISM DOESN'T WORK. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=johnnynemo>johnny nemo</A> at: 8/17/06 11:10 am

by **bvonahsen** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 1:10 pm

I probably should even have replied to this topic, I get too angry and it really is off topic for the whole site. I would rather not talk general politics here. Only what is usually called "deep politics" or anything not related to someones' party affiliation. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>What if he's injured, gets sick, or has a mental breakdown?<hr></blockquote> That is why I hate libertarians, because they tell me the reason I was ended up on the street is that it was my own fault. Sure, my behavior contributed, but I suffer from depression, not really my fault. Not the "Gee I feel kinda down" kind of depression but the "I have to crawl out of the abyss just to get to depressed" kind. The libertarian reply to anyone who falls on hard times "Too bad, Deal!" or "It must your fault, you must be inferior and the world is better off without you." My reply to them is "Get off your fat ass, leave mommies house and get your own place, stop masturbating to internet porn or posting to Free Republic (same thing) and join the real world. My opinion is the world would be better off without libertarians because they repeat the lie that one's success in life is wholly up to you. Those who profit in life are a better sort of person than those who fail. It's economic euthanasia and every bit as unscientific. Ya know... I'm done with this. If I wanted to discuss these issues I wouldn't be here. I come to RI because I like having my scientific, rational world view challenged. If I wanted to have a pointless argument with a dimwitted <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com">freeper</a> I'd go there. All that's going to happen is I'm going to get more and more pissed off and alienate people I would rather not. Not because I can't argue without getting upset, but because I can't argue this issue without losing it. So roth, spend a summer on the street, digging through dumpsters, eating and sleeping on concrete and then come and tell me your bullshit theories and maybe I'll listen. Till then: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Once upon a time you dressed so fine You threw the bums a dime in your prime, didn't you? People'd call, say, "Beware doll, you're bound to fall" You thought they were all kiddin' you You used to laugh about Everybody that was hangin' out Now you don't talk so loud Now you don't seem so proud About having to be scrounging for your next meal. How does it feel How does it feel To be without a home Like a complete unknown Like a rolling stone? You've gone to the finest school all right, Miss Lonely But you know you only used to get juiced in it And nobody has ever taught you how to live on the street And now you find out you're gonna have to get used to it You said you'd never compromise With the mystery tramp, but now you realize He's not selling any alibis As you stare into the vacuum of his eyes And ask him do you want to make a deal? How does it feel How does it feel To be on your own With no direction home Like a complete unknown Like a rolling stone? You never turned around to see the frowns on the jugglers and the clowns When they all come down and did tricks for you You never understood that it ain't no good You shouldn't let other people get your kicks for you You used to ride on the chrome horse with your diplomat Who carried on his shoulder a Siamese cat Ain't it hard when you discover that He really wasn't where it's at After he took from you everything he could steal. How does it feel How does it feel To be on your own With no direction home Like a complete unknown Like a rolling stone? Princess on the steeple and all the pretty people They're drinkin', thinkin' that they got it made Exchanging all kinds of precious gifts and things But you'd better lift your diamond ring, you'd better pawn it babe You used to be so amused At Napoleon in rags and the language that he used Go to him now, he calls you, you can't refuse When you got nothing, you got nothing to lose You're invisible now, you got no secrets to conceal. How does it feel How does it feel To be on your own With no direction home Like a complete unknown Like a rolling stone?<hr></blockquote>

by **AnnaLivia** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 2:06 pm

quote bvonahsen: "I probably should even have replied to this topic, I get too angry and it really is off topic for the whole site. I would rather not talk general politics here. Only what is usually called "deep politics" or anything not related to someones' party affiliation." you've been nothing short of too fucking brilliant for this planet, right up until you said that.

by **AnnaLivia** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 2:12 pm

Quote bv “See I think the main reason there is so much poverty in the world is that the money flows to the richest people...” Like I said; too fucking brilliant for this planet quote him again “When foreign interests invest in the collection of resources they are doing it to take out more than they put in. IE To make a profit. That profit has to come from somewhere and it comes from the pockets of those in the places resources are extracted from.” …and then see those people get angry like you would and there’s tension and ever-escalating violence to pollute your happiness and then the globe gets wired to blow and then… And the martians and the prom committee are STILL scratching their heads and wondering why we don’t just murder the idea of having wealthpower giants see and

by **AnnaLivia** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 2:14 pm

For god sake roth, the question is government psycopaths ON BEHALF OF WHOM? GO TO THE CLUE STORE, ROTH. Oh, I forgot. You shop elsewhere. The private, for-profit system is no good vehicle for delivering healthcare services. Linking your chance to receive medical care to your employment is…well god it’s beyond my comprehension why we do this, too. Honestly just how stupid do you have to be to say that the working people of a place, whose sacrifice of their time and efforts are what built the goddam place, don’t have a right to at least a minimum standard of living guaranteed by society and delivered by government? Why the very fuck do you think we formed societies, roth? adding on edit: I mean it. You guys have created an AWESOME thread here. One objection. The ‘people suck’ thang. ‘Twas just WHO made and delivered the system saved joe’s wife? Just who has done all the uncountable wonderful things on this earth? A squillion zillion heroic deeds and compassions shown one another throughout ages? Was it Possums? Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=annalivia@rigorousintuition>AnnaLivia</A> at: 8/17/06 12:18 pm

by **AnnaLivia** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 2:34 pm

The nut of it for me is, Libertarian = socialize the costs and privatize the profits. Again I repost a bit from stonefruit, from right here on this site: As Marx said in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte: “Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given, and transmitted from the past.” The power elite deliberately obscure the structural limitations on free will (that they themselves largely created) to mask the sad fact that, as human civilization has evolved from feudalism to democracy, we have traded kings and tsars for presidents and prime ministers but the money power behind the scenes has remained the same. Worse yet, it has allowed only the absolute minimum concessions to the establishment of a sane economic, political, and legal order needed to stave off social revolution. This is not enough. The regime of capital accumulation survives by feeding off of the subject body while simultaneously stupefying the subject mind with the myth of individual agency and doing everything in the regime's power to ensure that this agency cannot be used in any meaningful way.

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 3:16 pm

I agree with them. Social Darwinism is the enemy. We are social animals and take care of each other when we can. When we can't, 'our' government is supposed to do it in a way agreed on by consensus. When that is corrupted into 'free markets-every man for himself-survival of the fittest/richest' to keep tension on the social fabric it rips and you get fascism, cruelty, complacency about suffering, and atrocity as accepted elements of life. And that brutal inhumane aesthetic is what is intentionally imbued into children and thus American culture using TV and movies. Which is exactly why I've focused on the subliminal values promulgated by what we call 'entertainment.' There's a Spartan world that resembles Nazi Germany in that Trojan Horse. For that is the only way to get people to allow systemic poverty, war, pollution, and mass suffering to be 'normalized' and thus perpetuate capitalism. Suffering must be normalized and justified and, if possible, citizens must be de-sensitized to it. I don't accept that for one second.

by **johnny nemo** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 3:28 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>One objection. The ‘people suck’ thang.<hr></blockquote> That was just something I wrote to point out that, whether they be religious or atheist, history has shown that people have a long tradition of mistreating each other. Some people are out there doing good and that's great. I sincerely hope that you're not one of these "serial positivists" who refuses to see that there is anything wrong with the world. The fact that 40,000 children starve to death everyday and very little is done about it, won't change no matter how many "positive affirmations" one does. The armchair politician Libertarians, if they were to stop daydreaming about utopia, get off their fat, suburban asses and do some charity work, might actually make society a better, and more "utopic" place. I'm not gonna hold my breath and wait for it to happen, though.

by **AnnaLivia** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 3:41 pm

i just don't wanna let it be forgot that there's that other side to the coin, jnemo, that's all. i think it gets made invisible sometimes, that we ARE worth saving. let's face it despair comes pretty easy these days and human nature gets blamed for our problems (when looking at only one side of coin). i hear so much defeatism i guess i react sorta automatically by now. thanks-you for helping making this thread so good!

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 3:52 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>i think it gets made invisible sometimes, that we ARE worth saving.<hr></blockquote> As a species we are far more likeable than we are led to believe. Brain-scanning science has proven that we are hard-wired for compassion. It is one of our survival traits. You survive and so my prospects for surviving look good, too. Only those who want the cloak of authority in the police-state want us to believe we are bad children who must be beaten and protected from each other. "Serial positivist." lol.

Answering the libertarians and their lies

A few thoughts...

A few more thoughts...

Re: A few thoughts...

Point taken...

Re: A few more thoughts...

Pinochet's policies WERE Libertarian

Re: A few more thoughts...

Re: A few more thoughts...freudian typo

Re: most awesome thread

Re: most awesome thread

Re: most awesome thread

Re: AnnaLivia's comments

Sucking people

Re: Sucking people

Re: Kissing people

Who is online