If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Salon)   Having noted that libertarians defend their failed ideology with cult-like fervor, libertarians step up to the plate and defend their failed ideology with cult-like ferv... heyyy   (salon.com) divider line 223
    More: Followup, Amity Shlaes, trade law, The U.S. Government, military dictatorship, wage earners, African descent, public hospital, protectionist  
•       •       •

1910 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Jun 2013 at 5:10 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



223 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-11 05:11:35 PM
What, nobody wanted to use Somalia?
 
2013-06-11 05:14:10 PM
It's not an "ideology," Sheeple.  It's FREEDOM.


///did I get that right?
 
2013-06-11 05:14:46 PM
That's rich, liberal groupthink rag calls people they don't like a cult. talk about projection.
 
2013-06-11 05:15:28 PM

lockers: That's rich, liberal groupthink rag calls people they don't like a cult. talk about projection.


Cult-like fervor detected.
 
2013-06-11 05:16:19 PM
Only a rich white robber baron would long for a return to the pre-Lochner era.

So, Libertarians.
 
2013-06-11 05:16:32 PM
Correct or not, claiming people are in a cult will likely result in similar responses.  I'm not going to defend the irrationality of plenty of politics tab comments, but sane people can be understandably irate when accused of something they're innocent of.  This article feels like it's begging the question, where any response to accusations of culthood can be justified away by claiming cult-like indoctrincation.
 
2013-06-11 05:16:33 PM

lockers: That's rich, liberal groupthink rag calls people they don't like a cult. talk about projection.


I know, right? Those damn libs should go back to drinking their Obama kool-aid while their accusing others of being cult-like.
 
2013-06-11 05:17:05 PM

kronicfeld: lockers: That's rich, liberal groupthink rag calls people they don't like a cult. talk about projection.

Cult-like fervor detected.


Oh come on now, he's a libertarian, that's just code for "Embarrassed Republican." Or else "raving looney." Lots of overlap, true.
 
2013-06-11 05:17:19 PM

YoungSwedishBlonde: lockers: That's rich, liberal groupthink rag calls people they don't like a cult. talk about projection.

I know, right? Those damn libs should go back to drinking their Obama kool-aid while their accusing others of being cult-like.


they're

/i mad
 
2013-06-11 05:18:50 PM

Gyrfalcon: Only a rich white robber baron would long for a return to the pre-Lochner era.

So, Libertarians.


 i.huffpost.com

/rich white robber baron
//some liberties with homophonic names might've been taken
 
2013-06-11 05:19:57 PM
Libertarians: Still a Way to Generate Page Views.
Additional inflammatory statement to increase ad revenue.
Cha-ching!
 
2013-06-11 05:20:05 PM
I said to a libertarian once after I got tired that each time his "proof" was just libertarian doctrine "Can you give me anything that supports your ideology that is NOT just the dogma of libertarianism itself? You know like actual real world example and empirical evidence?"

He yelled at me saying I didn't want to actually debate things on their merits. LOL


I loved when he told me that all governments with strong central governments we not peaceful or prosperous. You know showing him that countries with strong central government where the top prosperous nations on the planet (US, Germany, France, Japan) of course did nothing to push him off on his circular logic.
 
2013-06-11 05:21:50 PM

lockers: That's rich, liberal groupthink rag calls people they don't like a cult. talk about projection.


The funny thing is, Mr. Lind didn't use the word "cult" once in his original article. All he said was that there is no country that follows the libertarian philosophy in existence today and asked why this is the case.
 
2013-06-11 05:21:50 PM

YoungSwedishBlonde: lockers: That's rich, liberal groupthink rag calls people they don't like a cult. talk about projection.

I know, right? Those damn libs should go back to drinking their Obama kool-aid while their accusing others of being cult-like.


Obam-Aid... Which of course tastes like socialisms and farts.
 
2013-06-11 05:21:50 PM
I still have yet to have my question that was proposed to Ron Paul's campaign answered.

How is voting to limit women's rights multiple times concurrent with the ideological policies of the Libertarian party or even "small government"? (Something Paul has done)

They never get back to me on that one.
 
2013-06-11 05:23:19 PM
It feels like Libertarianism wasn't much of a big thing until GWB made it toxic to call yourself a Republican. All of a sudden now there are farking libertarians EVERYWHERE.
 
2013-06-11 05:24:09 PM
They're a stroppy bunch. Don't even think about messing with the card catalog.
 
2013-06-11 05:24:24 PM

palelizard: Correct or not, claiming people are in a cult will likely result in similar responses.  I'm not going to defend the irrationality of plenty of politics tab comments, but sane people can be understandably irate when accused of something they're innocent of.  This article feels like it's begging the question, where any response to accusations of culthood can be justified away by claiming cult-like indoctrincation.


Except that he picked out some responses and shot them down quite thoroughly.  If he was begging the question, the article would have consisted of entirely "Hah, look at all of these cult members that responded! Fin."

If there are responses out there that are harder to shoot down, that would be a problem, but it doesn't look to me like he just strawman-ed or cherry-picked it to hell.  *shrug*
 
2013-06-11 05:24:35 PM

Alphakronik: I still have yet to have my question that was proposed to Ron Paul's campaign answered.

How is voting to limit women's rights multiple times concurrent with the ideological policies of the Libertarian party or even "small government"? (Something Paul has done)

They never get back to me on that one.


Simple. A libertarian government would follow natural law which says only people who deserve rights should have rights. Women aren't deserving, therefore, they should have no rights.
 
2013-06-11 05:24:52 PM

Alphakronik: I still have yet to have my question that was proposed to Ron Paul's campaign answered.

How is voting to limit women's rights multiple times concurrent with the ideological policies of the Libertarian party or even "small government"? (Something Paul has done)

They never get back to me on that one.


they, being Libertarian, reserve the right to only answer questions they see fit to answer.
It's their kind of freedom.
 
2013-06-11 05:25:00 PM

Serious Black: lockers: That's rich, liberal groupthink rag calls people they don't like a cult. talk about projection.

The funny thing is, Mr. Lind didn't use the word "cult" once in his original article. All he said was that there is no country that follows the libertarian philosophy in existence today and asked why this is the case.


Oh you mean the article entitled "Libertarians: Still a cult".
 
2013-06-11 05:25:08 PM

Alphakronik: I still have yet to have my question that was proposed to Ron Paul's campaign answered.

How is voting to limit women's rights multiple times concurrent with the ideological policies of the Libertarian party or even "small government"? (Something Paul has done)

They never get back to me on that one.


If those rights impeed the rights of another individual, a judgement by the govt on whose rights are more important should be made.
 
2013-06-11 05:25:25 PM

palelizard: Correct or not, claiming people are in a cult will likely result in similar responses.  I'm not going to defend the irrationality of plenty of politics tab comments, but sane people can be understandably irate when accused of something they're innocent of.  This article feels like it's begging the question, where any response to accusations of culthood can be justified away by claiming cult-like indoctrincation.


So it's never okay to accuse a cult of being a cult because they might respond in a cult like fashion?  Yeah, that doesn't make any sense.

Obama supporters get accused of being a cult sometimes.  The response is usually either laughter or head scratching.

Ron Paul supporters get accused of being a cult, and their response usually consists of death threats and conspiracy theories.
 
2013-06-11 05:26:10 PM

lockers: Serious Black: lockers: That's rich, liberal groupthink rag calls people they don't like a cult. talk about projection.

The funny thing is, Mr. Lind didn't use the word "cult" once in his original article. All he said was that there is no country that follows the libertarian philosophy in existence today and asked why this is the case.

Oh you mean the article entitled "Libertarians: Still a cult".


No, I meant this article.
 
2013-06-11 05:26:50 PM

lockers: YoungSwedishBlonde: lockers: That's rich, liberal groupthink rag calls people they don't like a cult. talk about projection.

I know, right? Those damn libs should go back to drinking their Obama kool-aid while their accusing others of being cult-like.

Obam-Aid... Which of course tastes like socialisms and farts.


Have you ever read Salon?  They're pretty critical of Obama over there.  Hint:  Greenwald is a regular contributor.
 
2013-06-11 05:28:16 PM

schrodinger: palelizard: Correct or not, claiming people are in a cult will likely result in similar responses.  I'm not going to defend the irrationality of plenty of politics tab comments, but sane people can be understandably irate when accused of something they're innocent of.  This article feels like it's begging the question, where any response to accusations of culthood can be justified away by claiming cult-like indoctrincation.

So it's never okay to accuse a cult of being a cult because they might respond in a cult like fashion?  Yeah, that doesn't make any sense.

Obama supporters get accused of being a cult sometimes.  The response is usually either laughter or head scratching.

Ron Paul supporters get accused of being a cult, and their response usually consists of death threats and conspiracy theories.


do you have a libertarian thread bat signal?
 
2013-06-11 05:29:40 PM

Fart_Machine: lockers: YoungSwedishBlonde: lockers: That's rich, liberal groupthink rag calls people they don't like a cult. talk about projection.

I know, right? Those damn libs should go back to drinking their Obama kool-aid while their accusing others of being cult-like.

Obam-Aid... Which of course tastes like socialisms and farts.

Have you ever read Salon?  They're pretty critical of Obama over there.  Hint:  Greenwald is a regular contributor.


Used to be, now he's over on the Guardian. Hey, I just wanted to get the obvious troll over with.
 
2013-06-11 05:30:01 PM

Isitoveryet: Alphakronik: I still have yet to have my question that was proposed to Ron Paul's campaign answered.

How is voting to limit women's rights multiple times concurrent with the ideological policies of the Libertarian party or even "small government"? (Something Paul has done)

They never get back to me on that one.

they, being Libertarian, reserve the right to only answer questions they see fit to answer.
It's their kind of freedom.


Actually, that sounds kind of right. I had a guy claim that it was a fact (yes, a fact) that the lower and middle classes used 80% of tax expenditures. I pointed out that based on the chart I'm posting below, you had to roll up everyone from the very bottom income group to the 99th percentile to reach 80% of the value of all tax expenditures. That 99th percentile is over $500,000. When I asked him to either confirm or deny whether he thought a household making $500,000 was in the middle class, he refused by claiming that nobody can say whether one household is middle class or not.


cdn.theatlantic.com
 
2013-06-11 05:30:43 PM

Saiga410: Alphakronik: I still have yet to have my question that was proposed to Ron Paul's campaign answered.

How is voting to limit women's rights multiple times concurrent with the ideological policies of the Libertarian party or even "small government"? (Something Paul has done)

They never get back to me on that one.

If those rights impeed the rights of another individual, a judgement by the govt on whose rights are more important should be made.


Would you care to explain Paul's support for explicitly denying same sex couples the protection of the 14th Amendment's equal protection cause on Libertarian grounds?
 
2013-06-11 05:30:46 PM

Serious Black: lockers: That's rich, liberal groupthink rag calls people they don't like a cult. talk about projection.

The funny thing is, Mr. Lind didn't use the word "cult" once in his original article. All he said was that there is no country that follows the libertarian philosophy in existence today and asked why this is the case.


I think it was covered in the last one--libertarianism is a relatively new philosophy (not in the faux libertarian "I got mine, screw you" philosophy, but in the "I'm not bothering you, don't bother me" manner).  Admittedly, it's one that could only have grown to fruition in the environment promoted by a centralized government dedicated to inalienable rights.  The philosophy would likely get you killed or enslaved for most of humanity's cultural growth.

Instituting a libertarian government would need to be started from the beginning, as the US tried with the Articles of Confederation, since governments rarely honestly grow smaller.  As for the Articles, they didn't work as well as hoped, and the nature of them required more organization.  Some of those problems (the issues with communication speed) may be fixable nowadays, others (like who says what the guys upstream can do with the river) will always plague humanity.

The most likely way to achieve an effectively libertarian society is (in my opinion) one where there's a very powerful dictator who's mostly benevolent and somewhat lazy.
 
2013-06-11 05:34:30 PM
Everything is theft.

/Libertarianism "argument"
 
2013-06-11 05:35:04 PM
Lord knows why anyone wouldn't want to embrace the Democratic Party or the Republican Party these days...
 
2013-06-11 05:36:25 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: Would you care to explain Paul's support for explicitly denying same sex couples the protection of the 14th Amendment's equal protection cause on Libertarian grounds?


I can.  He's an asshole, and his voting record has more in common with theocrat maintaining the status quo so long as HIS rights aren't being infringed.

schrodinger: So it's never okay to accuse a cult of being a cult because they might respond in a cult like fashion?  Yeah, that doesn't make any sense.


That's not what I said.  I said if you accuse someone of being in a cult, just because someone vehemently denies it does not mean they're actually in a cult.
 
2013-06-11 05:37:48 PM

Serious Black: Actually, that sounds kind of right. I had a guy claim that it was a fact (yes, a fact) that the lower and middle classes used 80% of tax expenditures. I pointed out that based on the chart I'm posting below, you had to roll up everyone from the very bottom income group to the 99th percentile to reach 80% of the value of all tax expenditures.


Well I can't speak for the guy you know, but it sounds like the two of you might be talking about completely different things.

What does it mean to "use a tax expenditure"? An "expenditure" is not an "exclusion" or an "exemption". Is he referring to government spending on the whole?
 
2013-06-11 05:38:40 PM

palelizard: Serious Black: lockers: That's rich, liberal groupthink rag calls people they don't like a cult. talk about projection.

The funny thing is, Mr. Lind didn't use the word "cult" once in his original article. All he said was that there is no country that follows the libertarian philosophy in existence today and asked why this is the case.

I think it was covered in the last one--libertarianism is a relatively new philosophy (not in the faux libertarian "I got mine, screw you" philosophy, but in the "I'm not bothering you, don't bother me" manner).  Admittedly, it's one that could only have grown to fruition in the environment promoted by a centralized government dedicated to inalienable rights.  The philosophy would likely get you killed or enslaved for most of humanity's cultural growth.

Instituting a libertarian government would need to be started from the beginning, as the US tried with the Articles of Confederation, since governments rarely honestly grow smaller.  As for the Articles, they didn't work as well as hoped, and the nature of them required more organization.  Some of those problems (the issues with communication speed) may be fixable nowadays, others (like who says what the guys upstream can do with the river) will always plague humanity.

The most likely way to achieve an effectively libertarian society is (in my opinion) one where there's a very powerful dictator who's mostly benevolent and somewhat lazy.


If you can assume a powerful and benevolent dictator, then it really doesn't matter what type of government you have since there's a nice guy at the top making sure everything works out.

It's like designing a car by assuming an unlimited supply of free clean energy, and indestructible unobtainium.  You've moved right out of the realm of practicality into a purely theoretical utopia, where everything just works out.
 
2013-06-11 05:38:57 PM

Nabb1: Lord knows why anyone wouldn't want to embrace the Democratic Party or the Republican Party these days...


i know it's swirling the bottom of the big L little L bowl, but...there is a libertarian undercurrent to the republican party, enough to have it's own 'wing' of the wingnut.

really, these discussions are never about the Libertarian party. because  nodiscussions are about the Libertarian party. even at conventions.
 
2013-06-11 05:39:32 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: Would you care to explain Paul's support for explicitly denying same sex couples the protection of the 14th Amendment's equal protection cause on Libertarian grounds?


Well according to Ron Paul, gay people have no reason to live past their 50s because they don't have kids, so they infect themselves with HIV on purpose and try to infect innocent victims with HIV infected needles for shiats and giggles.

RON PAUL!
 
2013-06-11 05:39:35 PM

Serious Black: Actually, that sounds kind of right. I had a guy claim that it was a fact (yes, a fact) that the lower and middle classes used 80% of tax expenditures. I pointed out that based on the chart I'm posting below, you had to roll up everyone from the very bottom income group to the 99th percentile to reach 80% of the value of all tax expenditures. That 99th percentile is over $500,000. When I asked him to either confirm or deny whether he thought a household making $500,000 was in the middle class, he refused by claiming that nobody can say whether one household is middle class or not.


People are so stubborn, at some point people should just admit they are wrong especially when confronted with undeniable evidence.

I don't know why or when it became soooo shameful to be wrong  I understand it can be embarrassing but isn't it more embarrassing to be wrong and proud of it?
 
2013-06-11 05:39:44 PM

Nabb1: Lord knows why anyone wouldn't want to embrace the Democratic Party or the Republican Party these days...


So that means the Libertarian Party is a good choice?
 
2013-06-11 05:41:45 PM
Another response to my essay has been to claim that a libertarian country really did exist once in the real world, in the form of the United States between Reconstruction and the New Deal.

What morons. It's like they've completely forgotten that the years between the Civil War and 1900 were awful. Depression after recession after depression. In fact, until the Great Depression, that era was called the Great Depression. We now call it the Long Depression. Even my econ instructor refused to acknowledge that time period. He actually said that the US had never had a depression until the Federal Reserve was created, and then we got the Great Depression. My counter was, in part, "If it's the only depression we've ever had, why is it called the GREAT Depression? Wouldn't it just be called The Depression?"
 
2013-06-11 05:42:12 PM

Bane of Broone: Nabb1: Lord knows why anyone wouldn't want to embrace the Democratic Party or the Republican Party these days...

So that means the Libertarian Party is a good choice?


I prefer a P-funk party.  There ain't no party like a P-funk party 'cuz a P-funk party don't stop.

You dig?
 
2013-06-11 05:42:34 PM

Skyrmion: Serious Black: Actually, that sounds kind of right. I had a guy claim that it was a fact (yes, a fact) that the lower and middle classes used 80% of tax expenditures. I pointed out that based on the chart I'm posting below, you had to roll up everyone from the very bottom income group to the 99th percentile to reach 80% of the value of all tax expenditures.

Well I can't speak for the guy you know, but it sounds like the two of you might be talking about completely different things.

What does it mean to "use a tax expenditure"? An "expenditure" is not an "exclusion" or an "exemption". Is he referring to government spending on the whole?


let's just focus on the fact that;

When I asked him to either confirm or deny whether he thought a household making $500,000 was in the middle class, he refused by claiming that nobody can say whether one household is middle class or not.

and agree he's being stubborn.
 
2013-06-11 05:42:54 PM

palelizard: Philip Francis Queeg: Would you care to explain Paul's support for explicitly denying same sex couples the protection of the 14th Amendment's equal protection cause on Libertarian grounds?

I can.  He's an asshole, and his voting record has more in common with theocrat maintaining the status quo so long as HIS rights aren't being infringed.


If you can explain it, why didn't you instead of getting it patently wrong?
 
2013-06-11 05:43:10 PM

Skyrmion: Serious Black: Actually, that sounds kind of right. I had a guy claim that it was a fact (yes, a fact) that the lower and middle classes used 80% of tax expenditures. I pointed out that based on the chart I'm posting below, you had to roll up everyone from the very bottom income group to the 99th percentile to reach 80% of the value of all tax expenditures.

Well I can't speak for the guy you know, but it sounds like the two of you might be talking about completely different things.

What does it mean to "use a tax expenditure"? An "expenditure" is not an "exclusion" or an "exemption". Is he referring to government spending on the whole?


It was in regards to this blog post, where he specifically pulled out the comment that "tax loopholes and deductions are for the rich." He was specifically talking about ways to reduce your tax bill, which encompasses deductions, exemptions, exclusions, credits, and preferential tax rates, all of which are included in the chart I posted.
 
2013-06-11 05:43:29 PM

heap: Nabb1: Lord knows why anyone wouldn't want to embrace the Democratic Party or the Republican Party these days...

i know it's swirling the bottom of the big L little L bowl, but...there is a libertarian undercurrent to the republican party, enough to have it's own 'wing' of the wingnut.

really, these discussions are never about the Libertarian party. because  nodiscussions are about the Libertarian party. even at conventions.


The Libertarian Party has become a branch of the Republican Party as evidenced by their last two Presidential candidates.
 
2013-06-11 05:44:02 PM
a libertarian country really did exist once in the real world, in the form of the United States between Reconstruction and the New Deal.

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-06-11 05:45:33 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: heap: Nabb1: Lord knows why anyone wouldn't want to embrace the Democratic Party or the Republican Party these days...

i know it's swirling the bottom of the big L little L bowl, but...there is a libertarian undercurrent to the republican party, enough to have it's own 'wing' of the wingnut.

really, these discussions are never about the Libertarian party. because  nodiscussions are about the Libertarian party. even at conventions.

The Libertarian Party has become a branch of the Republican Party as evidenced by their last two Presidential candidates.


It sure is funny that libertarians never, ever run on the Democratic ticket, despite their social view supposedly lining up with the left.
 
2013-06-11 05:46:18 PM

Isitoveryet: I don't know why or when it became soooo shameful to be wrong  I understand it can be embarrassing but isn't it more embarrassing to be wrong and proud of it?


ideology is a helluva drug. the more sure you are that you have the answers before the questions are asked, the less the actual answers matter. i don't know that shame or being embarrassed enters into it - it's just that facts are a terrible thing to let get in the way of being 'right' ideologically.

there's a mindset that sees being told that they are wrong as confirmation that they are correct, too, but that's a whole different ball of crazy.
 
2013-06-11 05:47:23 PM

vernonFL: a libertarian country really did exist once in the real world, in the form of the United States between Reconstruction and the New Deal.

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 650x408]


The policies of Reconstruction in the South were anything but Libertarian.  More like an occupation.
 
2013-06-11 05:48:05 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: Saiga410: Alphakronik: I still have yet to have my question that was proposed to Ron Paul's campaign answered.

How is voting to limit women's rights multiple times concurrent with the ideological policies of the Libertarian party or even "small government"? (Something Paul has done)

They never get back to me on that one.

If those rights impeed the rights of another individual, a judgement by the govt on whose rights are more important should be made.

Would you care to explain Paul's support for explicitly denying same sex couples the protection of the 14th Amendment's equal protection cause on Libertarian grounds?


Neither Paul is Libertarian. They are booth Republicans.
 
Displayed 50 of 223 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report