Poll: Allah, Yahweh, atheist? Left wing, right wing, no wing?
Left wing
Right wing
No wing
[Show Results]
 
No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-08-2014, 11:06 AM (This post was last modified: 14-08-2014 11:14 AM by Michael Colton.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(14-08-2014 10:40 AM)Luminon Wrote:  For example, government does not maintain highways, it just takes people's money and makes an overpriced deal with the highway maintenance companies, on which they both get rich. It's just an involuntary middleman.

You may want to research the duties of the Department of Transportation. There is far more to it than hiring people to do repair maintenance.

(14-08-2014 10:40 AM)Luminon Wrote:  Except from policing that people need now

Once you admit an exception you are no longer a strict libertarian. You are another form of small government classical liberal or could be described as having a 'libertarian bent' or tendency - but it is not pure libertarianism at that point.

The other issue with libertarianism besides the idea of it is the practicality or lack thereof. It is essentially irrelevant. It only exists in the United States (libertarian elsewhere means a form of socialism) and it does not have, nor will ever likely have, any significant political impact.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Michael Colton's post
14-08-2014, 12:01 PM (This post was last modified: 14-08-2014 12:11 PM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(14-08-2014 11:06 AM)Michael Colton Wrote:  You may want to research the duties of the Department of Transportation. There is far more to it than hiring people to do repair maintenance.
Yeah, there aren't just architects and the geodetic folks or whatever is their name in English, there are some lawyers who buy out the property that stands in the way... I studied this stuff and I see no evidence that it must be paid by tax money or it won't work. Any kind of job like that can work like a freelance, free market agency in competition with other agencies.
What I saw for sure was, that politicians are prime on this info and they do scams with buying fields that then go up in price because government will bail them out for the highway.

(14-08-2014 11:06 AM)Michael Colton Wrote:  Once you admit an exception you are no longer a strict libertarian. You are another form of small government classical liberal or could be described as having a 'libertarian bent' or tendency - but it is not pure libertarianism at that point.
It's not that I want government. But did you see what happened in Iraq? Saddam got deposed and there were religious fanatics just waiting to pay old debts.
As a libertarian, I am not against order, I am very much pro-order, but this order must come up naturally as a network of people doing business, not as a central power hierarchy. The way to do that is children, they're the key to the free society. In this thread I've talked a lot about peaceful parenting and brain development and even posted some videos.
As a libertarian, I say the state is immoral and needs to go, but not overnight, that would be a big problem. Society has a biological clock, it has nothing to do with politics. In theory, if there was just five years of children growing up without spanking, that would be enough to change the society forever.
Libertarianism is philosophy and principles, but society, that's science and slow processes. I think I'm a better libertarian by paying attention to that.

(14-08-2014 11:06 AM)Michael Colton Wrote:  The other issue with libertarianism besides the idea of it is the practicality or lack thereof. It is essentially irrelevant. It only exists in the United States (libertarian elsewhere means a form of socialism) and it does not have, nor will ever likely have, any significant political impact.
I wouldn't say so. I'm in Prague and libertarianism is based on the Austrian subjectively-psychological school of economics, or as I call it, economic neuron network computing. I studied it on a private college here and we even have a Libertarian party that got one guy into the Euro-parliament. It's anarcho-capitalism. The problem with libertarian left is, that they don't understand economics at all, they have no theory.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-08-2014, 12:34 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(14-08-2014 12:01 PM)Luminon Wrote:  Libertarianism is philosophy and principles, but society, that's science and slow processes. I think I'm a better libertarian by paying attention to that.

Anarchism and capitalism are sociopolitical theories, not philosophies. It has nothing to say about epistemology, ontology, etc.

(14-08-2014 12:01 PM)Luminon Wrote:  I wouldn't say so. I'm in Prague and libertarianism is based on the Austrian subjectively-psychological school of economics, or as I call it, economic neuron network computing. I studied it on a private college here and we even have a Libertarian party that got one guy into the Euro-parliament. It's anarcho-capitalism. The problem with libertarian left is, that they don't understand economics at all, they have no theory.

Anarcho-capitalism is a very different form of libertarianism than the libertarians in the United States and elsewhere. It would have been best in your original post if you had clarified your terms. This is a completely different discussion, now. Libertarianism in the United States is purist capitalism. Not an anarchist form of capitalism. Either way, both forms are completely irrelevant politically and have no future. Every branch of anarchism, whether it is anarcho-capitalism, anarchosyndicalism, whatever, have no political relevance or power in the modern world. If someone wants to support those theories, by all means go ahead. But do not expect to be meaningfully involved in the real world.

Also, you should probably not refer to others as not understanding economics when you espouse a heterodox economic tradition such as Austrian economic theory. It is not particularly useful. Every heterodox economic theory considers mainstream economists to be mislead - that is why they follow a heterodox theory in the first place.

But beyond all of this distraction, my original point was that your claim in the original post that everyone is 'deep down' a libertarian was absurd. It is in the same vein as conspiracy theories: not testable, not based on any evidence, and used simply for emotional effect.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Michael Colton's post
14-08-2014, 12:42 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(14-08-2014 12:34 PM)Michael Colton Wrote:  But beyond all of this distraction, my original point was that your claim in the original post that everyone is 'deep down' a libertarian was absurd. It is in the same vein as conspiracy theories: not testable, not based on any evidence, and used simply for emotional effect.

Yes, that's what everyone else in the thread has been saying, too.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-08-2014, 12:55 PM (This post was last modified: 14-08-2014 01:01 PM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(14-08-2014 12:34 PM)Michael Colton Wrote:  Anarchism and capitalism are sociopolitical theories, not philosophies. It has nothing to say about epistemology, ontology, etc.
Well, there is a justification of ancap derived from the first principles, good enough?
https://freedomainradio.com/free/#upb

(14-08-2014 12:34 PM)Michael Colton Wrote:  Anarcho-capitalism is a very different form of libertarianism than the libertarians in the United States and elsewhere. It would have been best in your original post if you had clarified your terms. This is a completely different discussion, now. Libertarianism in the United States is purist capitalism. Not an anarchist form of capitalism.
I don't know what is a difference between these. Aren't they the same thing?

(14-08-2014 12:34 PM)Michael Colton Wrote:  Either way, both forms are completely irrelevant politically and have no future. Every branch of anarchism, whether it is anarcho-capitalism, anarchosyndicalism, whatever, have no political relevance or power in the modern world. If someone wants to support those theories, by all means go ahead. But do not expect to be meaningfully involved in the real world.
I wouldn't equate political power with future. USA is basically going to shit like Roman empire 2000 years ago. Political relevance is factual disaster.

These theories support themselves in gray economy, everyday business and cryptocurrency trade. Also in areas like non-government private schools in third world, which provide better education than government schools but operate completely under the radar. Austrian economics works, but only when there is no forced transaction. Hell, there were even private-operated stock markets in Holland since the 1600's. Nationalizing finances or anything else was never a good idea.

(14-08-2014 12:34 PM)Michael Colton Wrote:  Also, you should probably not refer to others as not understanding economics when you espouse a heterodox economic tradition such as Austrian economic theory. It is not particularly useful. Every heterodox economic theory considers mainstream economists to be mislead - that is why they follow a heterodox theory in the first place.

But beyond all of this distraction, my original point was that your claim in the original post that everyone is 'deep down' a libertarian was absurd. It is in the same vein as conspiracy theories: not testable, not based on any evidence, and used simply for emotional effect.
What's wrong with emotional effects? Politics is running on them Wink
If you are so much into evidence, you might want to get some evidence that government programs solve any problems, such as economic crises and market bubbles, poverty, crime, unemployment, terrorism and drug abuse Consider
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-08-2014, 01:04 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(14-08-2014 12:55 PM)Luminon Wrote:  Well, there is a justification of ancap derived from the first principles, good enough?
https://freedomainradio.com/free/#upb

I was helping you distinguish between terms, not asking for a philosophical justification. I apologize if I was not clear.

(14-08-2014 12:55 PM)Luminon Wrote:  I don't know what is a difference between these. Aren't they the same thing?

Subforms of anarchism typically have either: anti-corporate monopoly tendencies or reformulations of modern conceptions of private property. Hypercapitalists do not.

(14-08-2014 12:55 PM)Luminon Wrote:  I wouldn't equate political power with future. USA is basically going to shit like Roman empire 2000 years ago. Political relevance is factual disaster.

These theories support themselves in gray economy, everyday business and cryptocurrency trade. Also in areas like non-government private schools in third world, which provide better education than government schools but operate completely under the radar. Austrian economics works, but only when there is no forced transaction. Hell, there were even private-operated stock markets in Netherlands in 18th or 19th century, I think.

Sorry, but could not find an actual point to respond to in these paragraphs. I have no idea what you mean by 'political relevance is factual disaster,' nor am I sure how to respond to someone who does not think the future will be impacted by those that are politically powerful.

(14-08-2014 12:34 PM)Michael Colton Wrote:  If you are so much into evidence, you might want to get some evidence that government programs solve any problems, such as economic crises and market bubbles, poverty, crime, unemployment, terrorism and drug abuse Consider

I was not offering you an alternative, I was merely criticizing your original statement as being meaningless. I have no interest in trying to change your mind about your worldview - I was simply trying to suggest a less silly way of going about introducing people to it.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Michael Colton's post
14-08-2014, 01:36 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(14-08-2014 01:04 PM)Michael Colton Wrote:  I was helping you distinguish between terms, not asking for a philosophical justification. I apologize if I was not clear.
Thank you. This is the first apology I got in a long, long time Bowing

(14-08-2014 01:04 PM)Michael Colton Wrote:  Subforms of anarchism typically have either: anti-corporate monopoly tendencies or reformulations of modern conceptions of private property. Hypercapitalists do not.
Well, I thought anarchism is a (anti)political idea and the economic adjuncts get added for practical reasons, such as economics and the need to eat. In which case, it is not anybody's business to decide if corporations or monopolies are good or bad, if they occur naturally, it's how economy works. Actually, it's how money work.
I've looked into non-monetary economic systems and they're not very practical or efficient, some require things like military organization of society, not for war but for industry. Money are just such a good instrument of economic calculation.

(14-08-2014 01:04 PM)Michael Colton Wrote:  Sorry, but could not find an actual point to respond to in these paragraphs. I have no idea what you mean by 'political relevance is factual disaster,' nor am I sure how to respond to someone who does not think the future will be impacted by those that are politically powerful.
Oh, also I think future will be impacted by the politically powerful, just in a very destructive and immoral way, that's what I mean.

(14-08-2014 01:04 PM)Michael Colton Wrote:  I was not offering you an alternative, I was merely criticizing your original statement as being meaningless. I have no interest in trying to change your mind about your worldview - I was simply trying to suggest a less silly way of going about introducing people to it.
I probably do get a bit silly after all this debating. Too much libertarian jokes about the government on Facebook Shy

But if you want to see how much Austrian economics makes sense over the orthodox economics, read Frédéric Bastiat. (well, he's wasn't an Austrian and he lived before them, but you get the point) If you read Petition of the candlestick makers, you will see in true light every single duty, tax or embargo ever imposed. If you read What is seen and what is not seen, you'll see Keynesianism for what it is and all the subsidies and regulations of European Union.
http://bastiat.org/
Thanks to Bastiat, I consider political economics a pseudoscience, just like theocratic governments espoused creationism.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-08-2014, 01:44 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(14-08-2014 01:36 PM)Luminon Wrote:  But if you want to see how much Austrian economics makes sense over the orthodox economics, read Frédéric Bastiat. (well, he's wasn't an Austrian and he lived before them, but you get the point) If you read Petition of the candlestick makers, you will see in true light every single duty, tax or embargo ever imposed. If you read What is seen and what is not seen, you'll see Keynesianism for what it is and all the subsidies and regulations of European Union.
http://bastiat.org/
Thanks to Bastiat, I consider political economics a pseudoscience, just like theocratic governments espoused creationism.

Economics has always been a social science, not a 'natural' or 'true' science. It is such by definition.

And I have studied some Austrian economics. I disagree with it, but as I said I was not intending to debate your worldview with you - just criticize the 'deep down everyone is libertarian' point.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-08-2014, 02:28 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(14-08-2014 01:44 PM)Michael Colton Wrote:  Economics has always been a social science, not a 'natural' or 'true' science. It is such by definition.

And I have studied some Austrian economics. I disagree with it, but as I said I was not intending to debate your worldview with you - just criticize the 'deep down everyone is libertarian' point.
Is your life style libertarian? Or do you like people to tell you what to do?
OK, I take it back, there are many people who want to be told what to do. Soldiers, Hare Krishna monks, submissive girls... But I'd bet there was some messed up stuff in their life or they would not end up that way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2014, 07:45 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Arachnism
[Image: 200px-Spideranarchy.gif]
As an arachnist, I propose to spin a free market network with lots of web business. Also, no arachnist should show political preference by tearing off left or right wing of the fly prey or attack flies outright, that's a violation of NAP. Flies will attack the web maliciously by ramming and writhing and we'll just defend ourselves Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: