Total Posts:39|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

To Anarchists: Why You Should Vote

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 12:37:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost."
-- John Adams
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 12:54:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
That really only applies if Ron Paul is in the election.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:01:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 12:54:24 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
That really only applies if Ron Paul is in the election.

Didn't think that he was an anarchist.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:02:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:01:51 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 5/16/2011 12:54:24 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
That really only applies if Ron Paul is in the election.

Didn't think that he was an anarchist.

He is.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:06:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'm not implying that Ron Paul is Anarchist or that you should vote for an Anarchist, i'm just trying to counter those, mostly of the Anarchist camp, who say voting is useless and that you shouldn't do it on the grounds that your vote is just one among many.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Fabian_CH
Posts: 232
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:10:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:06:35 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
who say voting is useless and that you shouldn't do it on the grounds that your vote is just one among many.
The idea that this is a particularly Anarchist argument is ridiculous anyway.

On the other hand, Anarchists may not want to vote in order not to participate in government any more than they're forced to.
"What are we doing? Do we want to feed a starved humanity in order to let it live? Or do we want to strangle its life in order to feed it?"
- Andrei Taganov, We The Living (Ayn Rand)
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:12:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:02:28 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:01:51 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 5/16/2011 12:54:24 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
That really only applies if Ron Paul is in the election.

Didn't think that he was an anarchist.

He is.

How can an anarchist support the constitution?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:12:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Even if you vote for a third party that'll never win your vote still counts for something, at least here in Canada it does. It can make a difference as to how much funding a party gets, at least this is what I've heard so if you really like a particular party voting for them can actually get them more funding.
Fabian_CH
Posts: 232
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:14:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:12:11 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:02:28 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:01:51 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 5/16/2011 12:54:24 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
That really only applies if Ron Paul is in the election.

Didn't think that he was an anarchist.

He is.

How can an anarchist support the constitution?
Easy - he's not an anarchist. Lol. Though LaissezFaire is welcome to try and convince me otherwise.
"What are we doing? Do we want to feed a starved humanity in order to let it live? Or do we want to strangle its life in order to feed it?"
- Andrei Taganov, We The Living (Ayn Rand)
Fabian_CH
Posts: 232
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:16:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:12:42 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Even if you vote for a third party that'll never win your vote still counts for something, at least here in Canada it does. It can make a difference as to how much funding a party gets, at least this is what I've heard so if you really like a particular party voting for them can actually get them more funding.
That then goes into public vs. private funding of parties (unless I misunderstood what you said, I don't now the facts). Exactly the kind of thing where you're starting down the slippery lope (from an Anarchist - or in this case generally Libertarian - point of view) if you participate in government at all.
"What are we doing? Do we want to feed a starved humanity in order to let it live? Or do we want to strangle its life in order to feed it?"
- Andrei Taganov, We The Living (Ayn Rand)
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:16:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:12:42 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Even if you vote for a third party that'll never win your vote still counts for something, at least here in Canada it does. It can make a difference as to how much funding a party gets, at least this is what I've heard so if you really like a particular party voting for them can actually get them more funding.

Exactly, it is also a barganing chip for them. If a party only gets 2% of the vote, they, of course, are not even close to winning. However it shows that they have millions of supporters (in the US anyway, in Canada, 2% is just hundreds of thousands), and they can use that to suggest that they are not fringe but legit and worth taking a look at to try to get more members and grow.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:17:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:02:28 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:01:51 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 5/16/2011 12:54:24 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
That really only applies if Ron Paul is in the election.

Didn't think that he was an anarchist.

He is.

No, he isn't: http://en.wikipedia.org...
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:19:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:16:27 PM, Fabian_CH wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:12:42 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Even if you vote for a third party that'll never win your vote still counts for something, at least here in Canada it does. It can make a difference as to how much funding a party gets, at least this is what I've heard so if you really like a particular party voting for them can actually get them more funding.
That then goes into public vs. private funding of parties (unless I misunderstood what you said, I don't now the facts). Exactly the kind of thing where you're starting down the slippery lope (from an Anarchist - or in this case generally Libertarian - point of view) if you participate in government at all.

you gotta play the game to win the game.

There are really only two ways for Anarchy to take place.

1) Anarchists take off government and shut it down from within, through legit methods, like the current process.
2) Anarchists start a revolution and shut down the government (violently, since the government will resist).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:21:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:19:07 PM, OreEle wrote:

you gotta play the game to win the game.

There are really only two ways for Anarchy to take place.

1) Anarchists take off government and shut it down from within, through legit methods, like the current process.
2) Anarchists start a revolution and shut down the government (violently, since the government will resist).

Anarchism is a joke. I can't even take anarchists seriously anymore, lmao.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:21:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:19:07 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:16:27 PM, Fabian_CH wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:12:42 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Even if you vote for a third party that'll never win your vote still counts for something, at least here in Canada it does. It can make a difference as to how much funding a party gets, at least this is what I've heard so if you really like a particular party voting for them can actually get them more funding.
That then goes into public vs. private funding of parties (unless I misunderstood what you said, I don't now the facts). Exactly the kind of thing where you're starting down the slippery lope (from an Anarchist - or in this case generally Libertarian - point of view) if you participate in government at all.

you gotta play the game to win the game.

There are really only two ways for Anarchy to take place.

1) Anarchists take off government and shut it down from within, through flawed methods, like the current process.
2) Anarchists start a revolution and shut down the government (violently, since the government will resist).

Fix's
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:25:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:10:20 PM, Fabian_CH wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:06:35 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
who say voting is useless and that you shouldn't do it on the grounds that your vote is just one among many.
The idea that this is a particularly Anarchist argument is ridiculous anyway.

I never claimed that. I said that it is an argument made by those who happen to be Anarchist. I didn't say this is an Anarchist argument.

On the other hand, Anarchists may not want to vote in order not to participate in government any more than they're forced to.

I don't get why an Anarchist would oppose infiltrating the government from the inside. It seems like people believe the notion that Anarchists must attack from the oustide and never from the inside in fear of not being truly Anarchistic.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:25:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:21:03 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Anarchism is a joke. I can't even take anarchists seriously anymore, lmao.

Big Brother appreciates your amusement, and encourages you to go about your daily life while he watches you.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:27:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:21:04 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:19:07 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:16:27 PM, Fabian_CH wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:12:42 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Even if you vote for a third party that'll never win your vote still counts for something, at least here in Canada it does. It can make a difference as to how much funding a party gets, at least this is what I've heard so if you really like a particular party voting for them can actually get them more funding.
That then goes into public vs. private funding of parties (unless I misunderstood what you said, I don't now the facts). Exactly the kind of thing where you're starting down the slippery lope (from an Anarchist - or in this case generally Libertarian - point of view) if you participate in government at all.

you gotta play the game to win the game.

There are really only two ways for Anarchy to take place.

1) Anarchists take off government and shut it down from within, through established methods, like the current process.
2) Anarchists start a revolution and shut down the government (violently, since the government will resist).

Fix's

re-fix'd
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:29:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:25:48 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:21:03 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Anarchism is a joke. I can't even take anarchists seriously anymore, lmao.

Big Brother appreciates your amusement, and encourages you to go about your daily life while he watches you.

Not being anarchist =/= being totalitarian
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:30:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:21:03 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:19:07 PM, OreEle wrote:

you gotta play the game to win the game.

There are really only two ways for Anarchy to take place.

1) Anarchists take off government and shut it down from within, through legit methods, like the current process.
2) Anarchists start a revolution and shut down the government (violently, since the government will resist).

Anarchism is a joke. I can't even take anarchists seriously anymore, lmao.

Debate an Anarchist putting up your political views vs. his and you will lose. Your politics are not sound and rest on indefensible principles or perhaps no principles at all.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:30:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:30:05 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:21:03 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:19:07 PM, OreEle wrote:

you gotta play the game to win the game.

There are really only two ways for Anarchy to take place.

1) Anarchists take off government and shut it down from within, through legit methods, like the current process.
2) Anarchists start a revolution and shut down the government (violently, since the government will resist).

Anarchism is a joke. I can't even take anarchists seriously anymore, lmao.

Debate an Anarchist putting up your political views vs. his and you will lose. Your politics are not sound and rest on indefensible principles or perhaps no principles at all.

on this site maybe. The judging is a little less than unbais.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:31:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:29:03 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:25:48 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:21:03 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Anarchism is a joke. I can't even take anarchists seriously anymore, lmao.

Big Brother appreciates your amusement, and encourages you to go about your daily life while he watches you.

Not being anarchist =/= being totalitarian

It does to some anarchists, but I don't think Kinesis was being serious, just joking.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:34:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:30:48 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:30:05 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:21:03 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:19:07 PM, OreEle wrote:

you gotta play the game to win the game.

There are really only two ways for Anarchy to take place.

1) Anarchists take off government and shut it down from within, through legit methods, like the current process.
2) Anarchists start a revolution and shut down the government (violently, since the government will resist).

Anarchism is a joke. I can't even take anarchists seriously anymore, lmao.

Debate an Anarchist putting up your political views vs. his and you will lose. Your politics are not sound and rest on indefensible principles or perhaps no principles at all.

on this site maybe. The judging is a little less than unbais.

I'm not talking about the judging. I'm saying that her arguments would probably be effectively and sufficiently refuted, not just that the Anarchist will get the most favorable votes.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:34:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:31:32 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:29:03 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:25:48 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:21:03 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Anarchism is a joke. I can't even take anarchists seriously anymore, lmao.

Big Brother appreciates your amusement, and encourages you to go about your daily life while he watches you.

Not being anarchist =/= being totalitarian

It does to some anarchists, but I don't think Kinesis was being serious, just joking.

Which is one more reason why Anarchism is absurd and another reason I can't take them seriously. And yes, I'm pretty sure Kinesis was joking, but I was just pointing that out. ;)
Fabian_CH
Posts: 232
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:35:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:30:05 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:21:03 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:19:07 PM, OreEle wrote:

you gotta play the game to win the game.

There are really only two ways for Anarchy to take place.

1) Anarchists take off government and shut it down from within, through legit methods, like the current process.
2) Anarchists start a revolution and shut down the government (violently, since the government will resist).

Anarchism is a joke. I can't even take anarchists seriously anymore, lmao.

Debate an Anarchist putting up your political views vs. his and you will lose. Your politics are not sound and rest on indefensible principles or perhaps no principles at all.
Incidentally, that's what I'm doing right now :)
"What are we doing? Do we want to feed a starved humanity in order to let it live? Or do we want to strangle its life in order to feed it?"
- Andrei Taganov, We The Living (Ayn Rand)
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:36:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:30:05 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:21:03 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:19:07 PM, OreEle wrote:

you gotta play the game to win the game.

There are really only two ways for Anarchy to take place.

1) Anarchists take off government and shut it down from within, through legit methods, like the current process.
2) Anarchists start a revolution and shut down the government (violently, since the government will resist).

Anarchism is a joke. I can't even take anarchists seriously anymore, lmao.

Debate an Anarchist putting up your political views vs. his and you will lose. Your politics are not sound and rest on indefensible principles or perhaps no principles at all.
You seem to be too confident with the anarchists here. You see, not everyone wants to debate theoretical fairy tales. And debating whether or not personal freedom should be totally loose is better than debating "anarchy."
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:37:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:30:48 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:30:05 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:21:03 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:19:07 PM, OreEle wrote:

you gotta play the game to win the game.

There are really only two ways for Anarchy to take place.

1) Anarchists take off government and shut it down from within, through legit methods, like the current process.
2) Anarchists start a revolution and shut down the government (violently, since the government will resist).

Anarchism is a joke. I can't even take anarchists seriously anymore, lmao.

Debate an Anarchist putting up your political views vs. his and you will lose. Your politics are not sound and rest on indefensible principles or perhaps no principles at all.

on this site maybe. The judging is a little less than unbais.

Not really. In fact, we deliberately try to not vote on each other's debates (at least, try not to have multiple anarchists voting on another's debate), so that the debater isn't accused of winning because of bias/friends/etc.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
Fabian_CH
Posts: 232
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:40:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:25:33 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:10:20 PM, Fabian_CH wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:06:35 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
who say voting is useless and that you shouldn't do it on the grounds that your vote is just one among many.
The idea that this is a particularly Anarchist argument is ridiculous anyway.

I never claimed that. I said that it is an argument made by those who happen to be Anarchist. I didn't say this is an Anarchist argument.
Oh, sure, I didn't mean to imply you said so, but I've seen it presented as if it's some unique Anarchist insight.

On the other hand, Anarchists may not want to vote in order not to participate in government any more than they're forced to.

I don't get why an Anarchist would oppose infiltrating the government from the inside. It seems like people believe the notion that Anarchists must attack from the oustide and never from the inside in fear of not being truly Anarchistic.
That depends on what those Anarchists view as their principles. It might well include not putting oneself in a position where one is complicit with government. Of course, coming from a non-Anarchist, that's purely speculation.
"What are we doing? Do we want to feed a starved humanity in order to let it live? Or do we want to strangle its life in order to feed it?"
- Andrei Taganov, We The Living (Ayn Rand)
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:42:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:36:27 PM, Mirza wrote:

You seem to be too confident with the anarchists here. You see, not everyone wants to debate theoretical fairy tales. And debating whether or not personal freedom should be totally loose is better than debating "anarchy."

"Theoretical fairy tales", lmao.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2011 1:44:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 5/16/2011 1:37:02 PM, LaissezFaire wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:30:48 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:30:05 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:21:03 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 5/16/2011 1:19:07 PM, OreEle wrote:

you gotta play the game to win the game.

There are really only two ways for Anarchy to take place.

1) Anarchists take off government and shut it down from within, through legit methods, like the current process.
2) Anarchists start a revolution and shut down the government (violently, since the government will resist).

Anarchism is a joke. I can't even take anarchists seriously anymore, lmao.

Debate an Anarchist putting up your political views vs. his and you will lose. Your politics are not sound and rest on indefensible principles or perhaps no principles at all.

on this site maybe. The judging is a little less than unbais.

Not really. In fact, we deliberately try to not vote on each other's debates (at least, try not to have multiple anarchists voting on another's debate), so that the debater isn't accused of winning because of bias/friends/etc.

The pool of voters is still offset in one direction. It would be like going to stormfront and debating multiculturalism. The members there will honestly think that you were completely destroyed and all your arguments adequately refuted. Doesn't make it accurate.

I'm currently doing a debate on anarchy vs X, and I fully expect to lose because of the voter makeup of the site, not because of the quality of the arguments.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"