Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
cooperation =/= force
libertarianism is all about force, as there is only one way for one to thrive in the libertarian fantasy land. One can't even work with others to protect eachother or work together to build shelter or gain food- because that would working collectively for the collective good of those involved. That'd be collectivism- that'd be evil.
Ever here of the Nash Equilibrium? Even libertarians understand that cooperating with someone else is generally better than fighting with everyone. we just insist that everyone gets the free choice to cooperate.
Morons who bitch about limiting liberty for the common good should move to Somalia and leave the civilized world the fuck alone with their idiotic bullshit.
Anarchy doesn't work and people like having laws, educational systems, and a government capable of enforcing such laws as mandatory transparency in economic systems, food and work environment safety regulations, and laws outlawing rape and murder. You want total liberty? Go to Somalia see just how great the libertarian pipedream really is.
I'm amazed that people seem to think that the social agreement that they like is so great when it can be used for great evil. The NAZIs socially agreed that Jews had no right to live but did that make it true? According to those who think that our rights come from some kind of social agreement it does.
Boiled down to its true nature, libertarianism is nothing but the infantile screams of a child decrying the idea that he can't write his own rules for himself and that others might seek to hold him to any standard.cooperation =/= force
libertarianism is all about force, as there is only one way for one to thrive in the libertarian fantasy land. One can't even work with others to protect eachother or work together to build shelter or gain food- because that would working collectively for the collective good of those involved. That'd be collectivism- that'd be evil.
psst, you're really betraying your ignorance of libertarian philosophy.
Just sayin...
The libertarian decries government yet still wants a police force. He demands that he be held to no laws or rules he himself does not right yet seeks to impose his rules on those who file the same objection. He cannot tell us where the roads will come from yet insists that his is the path to the future. He pretends to decry rape and murder yet despises the law and the State necessary for a police force and a just court system to ensure a peacable and just society. He demands that we become a society lacking meaningful government capable of enforcing Law yet refuses to so much as visit a nation where his vision can be seen. He claims that a man's own morality and religion guide him and that he be bound only by the laws to which he has personally agreed yet scoffs at the idea of setting foot near any such area as follows precisely that example.
Somalia is the result of the very principles the libertairan espouses as the basis for his fantasy Utopia, yet he refuses to set foot in the world he would create.
Libertarianism recognizes a marginal value and utility to collectivizing actions that wouldn't necessarily be unlawful for the individual to take
Until they pass a law against it. To be Laws, there must be a State to pass and enforce them. Now you're dealing with a collective.
Libertarianism is anarchy and is impossible.
As long as you "agree" to do as the oligarchy tells you.I'm amazed that people seem to think that the social agreement that they like is so great when it can be used for great evil. The NAZIs socially agreed that Jews had no right to live but did that make it true? According to those who think that our rights come from some kind of social agreement it does.
The Nazis did not have a Supreme Court to enforce a bill of rights and other Constitutional protections.
Our Constitution, with its bill of rights, and its Supreme Court, is the product of a social agreement.
cooperation =/= force
libertarianism is all about force, as there is only one way for one to thrive in the libertarian fantasy land. One can't even work with others to protect eachother or work together to build shelter or gain food- because that would working collectively for the collective good of those involved. That'd be collectivism- that'd be evil.
Ever here of the Nash Equilibrium? Even libertarians understand that cooperating with someone else is generally better than fighting with everyone. we just insist that everyone gets the free choice to cooperate.
Exactly! The choice to cooperate with someone else is made between two individuals and not society as a whole.
Come to think of it. Is their really any such thing as 'society as a whole'?
...and the collectivist despots.Ever here of the Nash Equilibrium? Even libertarians understand that cooperating with someone else is generally better than fighting with everyone. we just insist that everyone gets the free choice to cooperate.
Exactly! The choice to cooperate with someone else is made between two individuals and not society as a whole.
Come to think of it. Is their really any such thing as 'society as a whole'?
Only in the minds of dreamers.
I'm amazed that people seem to think that the social agreement that they like is so great when it can be used for great evil. The NAZIs socially agreed that Jews had no right to live but did that make it true? According to those who think that our rights come from some kind of social agreement it does.
The Nazis did not have a Supreme Court to enforce a bill of rights and other Constitutional protections.
Our Constitution, with its bill of rights, and its Supreme Court, is the product of a social agreement.
I'm amazed that people seem to think that the social agreement that they like is so great when it can be used for great evil. The NAZIs socially agreed that Jews had no right to live but did that make it true? According to those who think that our rights come from some kind of social agreement it does.
The Nazis did not have a Supreme Court to enforce a bill of rights and other Constitutional protections.
Our Constitution, with its bill of rights, and its Supreme Court, is the product of a social agreement.
When someone starts talking about the greater good they are not talking about cooperation.
Slavery was for the greater good,
right.. because the Jews totally agreed to that systemI'm amazed that people seem to think that the social agreement that they like is so great when it can be used for great evil. The NAZIs socially agreed that Jews had no right to live but did that make it true? According to those who think that our rights come from some kind of social agreement it does.
right... telling you you're not allowed to rape and murder people is slaveryBoiled down to its true nature, libertarianism is nothing but the infantile screams of a child decrying the idea that he can't write his own rules for himself and that others might seek to hold him to any standard.psst, you're really betraying your ignorance of libertarian philosophy.
Just sayin...
The libertarian decries government yet still wants a police force. He demands that he be held to no laws or rules he himself does not right yet seeks to impose his rules on those who file the same objection. He cannot tell us where the roads will come from yet insists that his is the path to the future. He pretends to decry rape and murder yet despises the law and the State necessary for a police force and a just court system to ensure a peacable and just society. He demands that we become a society lacking meaningful government capable of enforcing Law yet refuses to so much as visit a nation where his vision can be seen. He claims that a man's own morality and religion guide him and that he be bound only by the laws to which he has personally agreed yet scoffs at the idea of setting foot near any such area as follows precisely that example.
Somalia is the result of the very principles the libertairan espouses as the basis for his fantasy Utopia, yet he refuses to set foot in the world he would create.
If a person can't write their own rules then who is? Other people get to decide what gets done for them which is nothing more than slavery. Why do you support slavery?
Ever here of the Nash Equilibrium? Even libertarians understand that cooperating with someone else is generally better than fighting with everyone. we just insist that everyone gets the free choice to cooperate.
Exactly! The choice to cooperate with someone else is made between two individuals and not society as a whole.
Come to think of it. Is their really any such thing as 'society as a whole'?
Only in the minds of dreamers.
I'm amazed that people seem to think that the social agreement that they like is so great when it can be used for great evil. The NAZIs socially agreed that Jews had no right to live but did that make it true? According to those who think that our rights come from some kind of social agreement it does.
The Nazis did not have a Supreme Court to enforce a bill of rights and other Constitutional protections.
Our Constitution, with its bill of rights, and its Supreme Court, is the product of a social agreement.
The same social agreement that supported slavery. When individuals decided that agreement was wrong they forced society to adapt, they did not conform to the social agreement for the common good. The social agreement you are referring to is supposed to protect the individual, not the common good. Why do people keep trying to change it without the permission of all the parties affected by it?
As long as you "agree" to do as the oligarchy tells you.I'm amazed that people seem to think that the social agreement that they like is so great when it can be used for great evil. The NAZIs socially agreed that Jews had no right to live but did that make it true? According to those who think that our rights come from some kind of social agreement it does.
The Nazis did not have a Supreme Court to enforce a bill of rights and other Constitutional protections.
Our Constitution, with its bill of rights, and its Supreme Court, is the product of a social agreement.
I'm amazed that people seem to think that the social agreement that they like is so great when it can be used for great evil. The NAZIs socially agreed that Jews had no right to live but did that make it true? According to those who think that our rights come from some kind of social agreement it does.
The only laments I really have is that all the "solutions" that come from the people who've been charged with protecting the rights of everyone, rather than "solving their problems", always end up causing at least as many, if not more, unforeseen problems than that which they ostensibly sought to solve...Methinks this is no accident.As long as you "agree" to do as the oligarchy tells you.The Nazis did not have a Supreme Court to enforce a bill of rights and other Constitutional protections.
Our Constitution, with its bill of rights, and its Supreme Court, is the product of a social agreement.
What was your solution, again? I mean a real life, doable, workable, viable solution to all these ills you lament ad nauseum? I think I've asked you that, without much luck getting an answer in the past.
