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)   Confessions of a former Buddhist Libertarian who realized his two ideologies could never reconcile   (salon.com) divider line 200
    More: Silly, Buddhist Libertarian, natural response, intellectuals  
•       •       •

5845 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jan 2014 at 1:24 PM (47 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-26 02:13:03 PM  

jigger: And it sure does seem that Salon has a real hard on for libertarianism. It's got a regular schedule of articles about how terrible it is.


Salon is commie propaganda. That is their job. It's what they do.
 
2014-01-26 02:13:07 PM  

jigger: The WindowLicker: Pocket_Fisherman: I'm guessing hipster dude in the article wasn't much of a libertarian, now thinks hes a Buddhist and will lack onto some other "alternative" philosophy in a few years.

Their needs to be a test before you can call yourself a libertarian. I've met hard core moon bad socialists, who claim to be libertarian. You can't give up a philosophy you never really understood to start with.

And here we have a textbook example of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy used un-ironically in the wild.  Try not to point and laugh.

Ugh. To be a Scotsman you have to be born in Scotland. No one is born with a particular political philosophy. The NTS fallacy cannot be used when talking about someone's political philosophy or how they label it. What you're doing is the The NTS fallacy fallacy.


A true libertarian don't give one cotton-pickin rootytoot what you and yer kind are up to providin you'n yer kin stay on y'all's side of the mountain is all
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2014-01-26 02:13:30 PM  

vpb: jigger: So part of Buddhism requires the use of force on people if they don't make the "right" decisions when it comes to "helping" people?

I think that's part of life.  Or at least a part of civilization.


If you don't believe in taxes ("all taxes are theft") then you should not be a part of a civilization.
 
2014-01-26 02:14:01 PM  

ransack.: Well that ended abruptly, I searched for a page 2 link or something.

Did this whiny hipster (who apparently is paid by the adjective) abandon Buddhism or Libetarianism?


Why not both?
 
2014-01-26 02:14:03 PM  

vpb: jigger: So part of Buddhism requires the use of force on people if they don't make the "right" decisions when it comes to "helping" people?

I think that's part of life.  Or at least a part of civilization.


Is it part of Buddhism?
 
2014-01-26 02:14:23 PM  

d23: vpb: jigger: So part of Buddhism requires the use of force on people if they don't make the "right" decisions when it comes to "helping" people?

I think that's part of life.  Or at least a part of civilization.

If you don't believe in taxes ("all taxes are theft") then you should not be a part of a civilization.


I think that's the whole idea behind the soverign citizens deal
 
2014-01-26 02:14:47 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2014-01-26 02:15:04 PM  

jigger: And it sure does seem that Salon has a real hard on for libertarianism. It's got a regular schedule of articles about how terrible it is.


That's because:

1. Libertarianism is truly terrible.
2. Salon must have a fan base that loves to read about how terrible it is.

Actually, #1 is unnecessary, but still true.
 
2014-01-26 02:15:05 PM  

d23: vpb: jigger: So part of Buddhism requires the use of force on people if they don't make the "right" decisions when it comes to "helping" people?

I think that's part of life.  Or at least a part of civilization.

If you don't believe in taxes ("all taxes are theft") then you should not be a part of a civilization.


It's true. There was no civilization before the income tax.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2014-01-26 02:16:32 PM  

ransack.: d23: vpb: jigger: So part of Buddhism requires the use of force on people if they don't make the "right" decisions when it comes to "helping" people?

I think that's part of life.  Or at least a part of civilization.

If you don't believe in taxes ("all taxes are theft") then you should not be a part of a civilization.

I think that's the whole idea behind the soverign citizens deal


yeah.. and the sovereign citizens are paying tolls on every road they use, not using electricity or public water, etc. etc. etc.   If they aren't subject to our laws then we can just kidnap them and deport them, right?
 
2014-01-26 02:17:32 PM  

d23: rev. dave: I read the whole article expecting a few clues that this was either written ironically or satire.  Except for his use of interlocutor it all looks legit.

 So I will bite.  Same thing happened to me, except with Christianity. But in my case the two did not occur simultaneously.  I was an atheist libertarian, classic style.  But as soon as I converted to Christianity, I could not remain a libertarian without shame and guilt.   So in order to sleep at night, I became a liberal.  But I had promised myself I would remain open to becoming a conservative evangelical if I ever had more than 10 million for tax purposes.

The fact that there are so many evangelicals that can somehow reconcile the type of bullshiat Joel Olsteen is feeding them and actual biblical gospel has to do with they *want* to believe these two things are reconcilable and they have a cult of personality somewhere backing that belief up.  In their small minds they have all the evidence they need and it's not contradictory.  EVERYTHING I have ever read about buddhism conflicts with the "fark you, I've got mine jack" philosophy that has become libertarianism today.  If he ever thought the two matched he was really, really REALLY farking self delusional.


Actually I loathe most mainline evangelicals because they don't even follow the teachings.   Buddhism is not always in its purest form either, he did not mention what kind of Buddhism.  My experience with logically consistent atheism forced me to find a form of religion which also remained consistent if not in the same ways.  But I would never have that 10M anyway so it was the never going to happen scenario.
 
2014-01-26 02:17:58 PM  
i173.photobucket.com
 
2014-01-26 02:18:10 PM  
I'm glad he got better.
 
2014-01-26 02:18:30 PM  
I don't think he was really either.

Since the article is from Salon, I think my suspicion is probably true.
 
2014-01-26 02:19:15 PM  
Ugh. That was just awful.
 
2014-01-26 02:20:07 PM  

jigger: vpb: jigger: So part of Buddhism requires the use of force on people if they don't make the "right" decisions when it comes to "helping" people?

I think that's part of life.  Or at least a part of civilization.

Is it part of Buddhism?


You realize that Samurai often were Zen Buddhists?   Yeah, Buddhists, tolerant passivists, every one.

/if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-01-26 02:21:16 PM  

jigger: vpb: I think that's part of life.  Or at least a part of civilization.

Is it part of Buddhism?


Well I didn't say that did I?

People can't coexist without some coercion because there are people who will take but not contribute.  There are plenty of people who would show up at the food bank with their hand out if they were short of food but won't contribute anything when they are able to.

It's called the free rider problem in economics, but it applies to more than just economics.  There are people who won't respect other people's rights without police and a legal system to make them.

That's why you will never have civilization without coercion.
 
2014-01-26 02:21:30 PM  

jigger: It's true. There was no civilization before the income tax.


Yeah, the ancient Egyptian Empire was built on levying taxes. That's an astute observation.
 
2014-01-26 02:22:08 PM  
it's cute when communists pretend that destroying the economy counts as "reducing inequality for goodness cause we're goody happy people who hate success and america"
 
2014-01-26 02:23:17 PM  

Odoriferous Queef: "During college, a friend admitted he was confounded by my politics. He didn't know how to reconcile my libertarianism with my other commitments. We were Buddhists and vegetarians, and ...."


[img.4plebs.org image 250x272]


Hey, he didn't say he was a vegan, at least.
 
2014-01-26 02:25:20 PM  

Gyrfalcon: All pure political theories--libertarianism, communism--fail simply because they assume that somehow all people will think the same way. Libertarianism fails because it assumes everyone will voluntarily contribute for the common good without external constraints like government.

This is demonstrably not true; but they want to believe it anyway because it sounds good.


That and they believe in the benevolence of companies, and somehow they won't turn the working class into indentured servants. I believe libertarianism would devolve into the feudalism within a couple years of implementation.
 
2014-01-26 02:26:40 PM  

jigger: And it sure does seem that Salon has a real hard on for libertarianism. It's got a regular schedule of articles about how terrible it is.


this...

I think they fear losing people from the left side to Libertarianisim. So we get this article every week with a hyperbolic view of the ideology. Classic enemy making tactic.
 
2014-01-26 02:28:46 PM  

vpb: jigger: So part of Buddhism requires the use of force on people if they don't make the "right" decisions when it comes to "helping" people?

I think that's part of life.  Or at least a part of civilization.


Buddhism, as I understand it, is more about internal development.  Helping others is encouraged, but not absolutely necessary -- not even as much as in (say) Christianity -- since there's no one supreme being in charge of judging your actions in life.  The point is self-enlightenment.  Presumably, an enlightened person would choose to help others voluntarily.

Anyway, it all seems pretty orthogonal to the question of what the government is doing one way or the other.  If a Buddhist found him/herself in the role of dictator, then you'd end up with a country much like (pre-invasion) Tibet, since that's what Tibet was: a Buddhist dictatorship.  ...and it wasn't exactly a welfare state.
 
2014-01-26 02:29:41 PM  

jigger: d23: vpb: jigger: So part of Buddhism requires the use of force on people if they don't make the "right" decisions when it comes to "helping" people?

I think that's part of life.  Or at least a part of civilization.

If you don't believe in taxes ("all taxes are theft") then you should not be a part of a civilization.

It's true. There was no civilization before the income tax.


There certainly was a lot less of it.
 
2014-01-26 02:30:04 PM  

Fatty McFatcheeks: jigger: And it sure does seem that Salon has a real hard on for libertarianism. It's got a regular schedule of articles about how terrible it is.

this...

I think they fear losing people from the left side to Libertarianisim. So we get this article every week with a hyperbolic view of the ideology. Classic enemy making tactic.


Yeah it's not like libertarian ideals and politicians have had any affect on national politics the last 4-5 years.  Leave libertarianism alone!
 
2014-01-26 02:30:41 PM  

Fatty McFatcheeks: jigger: And it sure does seem that Salon has a real hard on for libertarianism. It's got a regular schedule of articles about how terrible it is.

this...

I think they fear losing people from the left side to Libertarianisim. So we get this article every week with a hyperbolic view of the ideology. Classic enemy making tactic.


LOL, shouldn't they promote it? It's a big election spoiler for republicans.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-01-26 02:31:07 PM  
Fatty McFatcheeks:

I think they fear losing people from the left side to Libertarianisim. So we get this article every week with a hyperbolic view of the ideology. Classic enemy making tactic.

I don't think anyone fears that.  Libertarianism is a pretty childish philosophy.  Basically it's just anarchy without the ideological basis.
 
2014-01-26 02:35:13 PM  

proteus_b: it's cute when communists pretend that destroying the economy counts as "reducing inequality for goodness cause we're goody happy people who hate success and america"


Who is advocating pure communism? Pure systems are facile. Solutions lie in reasoned thought, not the wholesale buy in to idealism. Capitalism is pretty destructive and unsustainable itself when left unchecked.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-01-26 02:36:10 PM  
Nonrepeating Rotating Binary:
There certainly was a lot less of it.

Even in tribal societies people have to contribute to the welfare of the tribe.  Even social animals work that way.
 
2014-01-26 02:36:24 PM  

rev. dave: Buddhism is not always in its purest form either, he did not mention what kind of Buddhism.


I suppose you could make the argument that Theravada Buddhism has some aspects that are consistent with libertarianism.

The short version is: in Mahayana Buddhism, once you've achieved enlightenment, you're expected to forego Nirvana and stick around and help other people achieve it, too. We only get to Nirvana as a group. Theravada Buddhism is much more individualized: once you've achieved enlightenment, you're good -- it's up to everybody else to find their own way there. If there's a libertarian version of Buddhism, Theravada is it.
 
2014-01-26 02:36:34 PM  
Fatty McFatcheeks ,
jigger: And it sure does seem that Salon has a real hard on for libertarianism. It's got a regular schedule of articles about how terrible it is.
this...
I think they fear losing people from the left side to Libertarianisim. So we get this article every week with a hyperbolic view of the ideology. Classic enemy making tactic.

See 'left wing' and 'briefly tempting'. Things have changed since 2008.

\I have never understood how there can be pro-life libertarians.
 
2014-01-26 02:38:52 PM  

MayoSlather: proteus_b: it's cute when communists pretend that destroying the economy counts as "reducing inequality for goodness cause we're goody happy people who hate success and america"

Who is advocating pure communism? Pure systems are facile. Solutions lie in reasoned thought, not the wholesale buy in to idealism. Capitalism is pretty destructive and unsustainable itself when left unchecked.


What you said might have a place in more calm and subdued places on the internet, but on Fark all liberals want to live in North Korea, all conservatives want to live in Nazi Germany, and all Libertarians want to live in Somalia.

And they are fierce critics of what they believe other ideologies are.
 
2014-01-26 02:39:46 PM  
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-01-26 02:41:09 PM  

d23: vpb: jigger: So part of Buddhism requires the use of force on people if they don't make the "right" decisions when it comes to "helping" people?

I think that's part of life.  Or at least a part of civilization.

If you don't believe in taxes ("all taxes are theft") then you should not be a part of a civilithat'sthat's


I agree. Live off the grid like Ted Kaczynski. THEN come back and tell me you're a libertarian. Otherwise when you use those roads, eat that inspected food, drink that clean water, get treated at that hospital, retire to that social security check, drive over those repaired bridges, you likes you some socialism.
 
2014-01-26 02:45:11 PM  
lordjupiter:

Yeah it's not like libertarian ideals and politicians have had any affect on national politics the last 4-5 years.  Leave libertarianism alone!

I think pot smokers in Colorado and Washington would disagree with you

super_grass:

LOL, shouldn't they promote it? It's a big election spoiler for republicans.

Probably, but some of the ideas are just as attractive to thinkers on the left as well

vpb:

I don't think anyone fears that.  Libertarianism is a pretty childish philosophy.  Basically it's just anarchy without the ideological basis.

There is the hyperbole again, I think what many in the US would be willing to settle on is a Libertarianisim that embraces the individual choices of americans to make their own destiny, and have a small effective federal government to maintain infrastructure, order (including a well run adn effecitve social welfare), and defense. These ideals dont seem to fire up bases or win elections.

I will admit that there are those who personify the hyperbolic view of Libertarianisim, and for some reason they seem to be the ones driving the ideology. I just fail to see that view of the idea getting any kind of realistic traction for change and leads to more Salon articles like this.

Now back to TFD so I can talk about boobs.
 
2014-01-26 02:45:23 PM  

Fatty McFatcheeks: jigger: And it sure does seem that Salon has a real hard on for libertarianism. It's got a regular schedule of articles about how terrible it is.

this...

I think they fear losing people from the left side to Libertarianisim. So we get this article every week with a hyperbolic view of the ideology. Classic enemy making tactic.


Or as an alternate theory, with so many conservatives citing 'libertarian' ideals.  (Rand Paul. Paul Ryan, TPers in general, etc) despite being in the party of the GOP, its convent to let them own the libertarian derp too.
 
2014-01-26 02:47:02 PM  

Enemabag Jones: Fatty McFatcheeks ,
jigger: And it sure does seem that Salon has a real hard on for libertarianism. It's got a regular schedule of articles about how terrible it is.
this...
I think they fear losing people from the left side to Libertarianisim. So we get this article every week with a hyperbolic view of the ideology. Classic enemy making tactic.

See 'left wing' and 'briefly tempting'. Things have changed since 2008.

\I have never understood how there can be pro-life libertarians.


They believe that an unborn human's individual right to life trumps it's mother's individual right to kill it.
 
2014-01-26 02:47:26 PM  
"If you accepted that the individual was sacrosanct..." Buddhism holds that the individual is an illusion.
 
2014-01-26 02:50:44 PM  

badhatharry: Enemabag Jones: Fatty McFatcheeks ,
jigger: And it sure does seem that Salon has a real hard on for libertarianism. It's got a regular schedule of articles about how terrible it is.
this...
I think they fear losing people from the left side to Libertarianisim. So we get this article every week with a hyperbolic view of the ideology. Classic enemy making tactic.

See 'left wing' and 'briefly tempting'. Things have changed since 2008.

\I have never understood how there can be pro-life libertarians.

They believe that an unborn human's individual right to life trumps it's mother's individual right to kill it.


Which, while Ideologicaly pure idea, is not a pragmatic one. There will always be unwanted pregnancy. And forcing laws on the mother does not follow the ideal of individual choice. From a pragmatic point of view, Abortions will continue to happen since it is safest for the mother, but alternatives should be encouraged, not forced.
 
2014-01-26 02:51:48 PM  
What has this site come to? Am I the only Libertarian left on Fark?
 
2014-01-26 02:58:30 PM  

8 inches: What has this site come to? Am I the only Libertarian left on Fark?


No, I'm a Libertarian too, for many years. Likely we've all independently decided that it's pointless to argue with idiots. I've scrolled down so far, and haven't seen "self-ownership" mentioned once, even to mock it. Just for the record, I've met several Libertarians who also were buddhists.
 
2014-01-26 02:59:48 PM  
badhatharry
They believe that an unborn human's individual right to life trumps it's mother's individual right to kill it.


A libertarian that is pro-life.....seems like an oxymoron looking at the definitions below.

The central idea of libertarianism is that people should be permitted to run their own lives as they wish.

Libertarianism is the view that each person has the right to live his life in any way he chooses so long as he respects the equal rights of others. Libertarians defend each person's right to life, liberty, and property-rights that people have naturally, before governments are created. In the libertarian view, all human relationships should be voluntary; the only actions that should be forbidden by law are those that involve the initiation of force against those who have not themselves used force-actions like murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping, and fraud.

lib-er-tar-i-an, n. 1. a person who advocates liberty, esp. with regard to thought or conduct.... advocating liberty or conforming to principles of liberty.

NOUN: 1. One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.
The Challenge of Democracy (6th edition), by Kenneth Janda, Jeffrey Berry, and Jerry Goldman
Liberals favor government action to promote equality, whereas conservatives favor government action to promote order. Libertarians favor freedom and oppose government action to promote either equality or order.
 
2014-01-26 03:03:12 PM  

lenfromak: 8 inches: What has this site come to? Am I the only Libertarian left on Fark?

No, I'm a Libertarian too, for many years. Likely we've all independently decided that it's pointless to argue with idiots. I've scrolled down so far, and haven't seen "self-ownership" mentioned once, even to mock it. Just for the record, I've met several Libertarians who also were buddhists.


Too bad, I was hoping there was only one hopelessly naive blinkered person left.
 
2014-01-26 03:03:47 PM  

Enemabag Jones: \I have never understood how there can be pro-life libertarians.


"Libertarians" are authoritarian when it comes to other peoples' lives.

Think of the "states rights" types who say that eliminating slavery was an encroachment on freedom.
 
2014-01-26 03:05:01 PM  

Fatty McFatcheeks: lordjupiter:

Yeah it's not like libertarian ideals and politicians have had any affect on national politics the last 4-5 years.  Leave libertarianism alone!

I think pot smokers in Colorado and Washington would disagree with you


It was sarcasm.

But, to your point, drug legalization is not an issue owned by libertarians.  It's just the main one party kids latch onto when they reach voting age.
 
2014-01-26 03:07:21 PM  
FTA: When the lens of ideology grows so thick it's all a person sees, a sense of humor is often the first thing to be occluded.

Well put.
 
2014-01-26 03:07:30 PM  

lordjupiter: Fatty McFatcheeks: lordjupiter:

Yeah it's not like libertarian ideals and politicians have had any affect on national politics the last 4-5 years.  Leave libertarianism alone!

I think pot smokers in Colorado and Washington would disagree with you

It was sarcasm.

But, to your point, drug legalization is not an issue owned by libertarians.  It's just the main one party kids latch onto when they reach voting age.


Damn... sarcasm meter is busted.... need moar beer.
 
2014-01-26 03:07:53 PM  

Weaver95: I can relate. Well...except that I became a pagan instead of a Buddhist but...yeah. Similar awakening,


Your character has had an interesting arc in the FARK mythos. There were several seasons in which people were not sure if you had done a heel face turn or face heel turn turn or if they had just misinterpreted earlier episodes. And then for the longest time others were waiting for what seemed to be the inevitable next turn.

You have outlasted many of your contemporaries. I would love to see original Wo Fat return.
 
2014-01-26 03:09:31 PM  

Enemabag Jones: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 255x400]


Libertarians: good at image scaling.
 
2014-01-26 03:12:13 PM  
ikanreed
Enemabag Jones: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 255x400]
Libertarians: good at image scaling.

I tried to find a bigger one, there were two or three and none hot-linked.

I figure most of the people here have seen that page.
 
Displayed 50 of 200 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report