Total Posts:23|Showing Posts:1-23
Jump to topic:

Classical Liberalism & Shift in Libertarians

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 6:53:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
What is the difference between Classical Liberalism and modern Libertarianism?

I've heard Noam Chomsky claim that today's "Capitalist" Libertarianism is a new phenomena that is exclusive to America. He said that Libertarianism is traditionally Anarcho-Socialist.

If true, when did Libertarianism in America turn into Rand/Rothbard style and why?
"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
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 7:37:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Chomsky is mostly wrong. The beginning of the libertarian movement was in the minarchist classical liberals.

However, it is true that far leftists used to be known as anarchists instead of communists. He is probably referring to the fact that anarchism is no longer exclusively a radical left wing movement.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 8:05:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2013 7:37:33 PM, BigRat wrote:
Chomsky is mostly wrong. The beginning of the libertarian movement was in the minarchist classical liberals.

However, it is true that far leftists used to be known as anarchists instead of communists. He is probably referring to the fact that anarchism is no longer exclusively a radical left wing movement.

That's incorrect. Many of the founding fathers had very liberal economic ideas. Such as public education and progressive taxation. Thomas Paine was essentially Communist, based on his writings.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 8:17:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2013 8:05:59 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 3/5/2013 7:37:33 PM, BigRat wrote:
Chomsky is mostly wrong. The beginning of the libertarian movement was in the minarchist classical liberals.

However, it is true that far leftists used to be known as anarchists instead of communists. He is probably referring to the fact that anarchism is no longer exclusively a radical left wing movement.

That's incorrect. Many of the founding fathers had very liberal economic ideas. Such as public education and progressive taxation. Thomas Paine was essentially Communist, based on his writings.

Thomas Paine was actually quite an exception.

Outside of him, the founders were strong believers in classical liberalism. And, I don't think anyone today can call public education a very liberal economic idea as the existence of public education is supported across the political spectrum.

As for progressive taxes, the Founders hated the idea of income taxes. Jefferson did endorse progressive estate and property taxes imposed by STATE governments. And, he was talking about taxes MUCH lower than we can imagine today.

The founders were quite laissez faire indeed.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 8:17:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2013 6:53:43 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
What is the difference between Classical Liberalism and modern Libertarianism?

Classic Liberalism is right wing Libertarianism. Anarchism is left wing Libertarianism. Many people who call themselves libertarians today, are not true libertarians. Such as Ron Paul, who is more of an independent.

I've heard Noam Chomsky claim that today's "Capitalist" Libertarianism is a new phenomena that is exclusive to America. He said that Libertarianism is traditionally Anarcho-Socialist.

That's BS. The term "Libertarian" was invented by classic liberals during the enlightenment; it referred to the meta-physical belief in free will. Later in the 19th century Anarcho-Socialists were the first to be referred to as "Libertarians" politically, to differentiate between anarchists and statists; Anarcho-Socialists believed in voluntary socialism, whereas state-socialists believed in forced socialism. Anarcho-socialists are more anarchist than they are socialist.
If true, when did Libertarianism in America turn into Rand/Rothbard style and why?
Libertarians have always been anyone who advocates free will, opposes coercion, and champions liberty.
Classic Liberals advocate a minimized state
Anarchists advocate the abolition of the state.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 8:25:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2013 8:05:59 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 3/5/2013 7:37:33 PM, BigRat wrote:
Chomsky is mostly wrong. The beginning of the libertarian movement was in the minarchist classical liberals.

However, it is true that far leftists used to be known as anarchists instead of communists. He is probably referring to the fact that anarchism is no longer exclusively a radical left wing movement.

That's incorrect. Many of the founding fathers had very liberal economic ideas. Such as public education and progressive taxation. Thomas Paine was essentially Communist, based on his writings.

"liberal economics" is free market economics. I think you mean "progressive economics".

I don't think any of the founding fathers favored progressive taxation. They were generally opposed to direct taxation. Thomas Paine was not a communist, he believed in the free market. "In all my publications, where the matter would admit, I have been an advocate for commerce, because I am a friend to its effects. It is a pacific system, operating to cordialize mankind, by rendering nations, as well as individuals, useful to each other... " ~ Thomas Paine, Rights of Man

The founders believed property was a natural and inherent right; none of them were communists.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 8:28:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2013 8:00:39 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Modern liberals stole classical liberals.
Modern libertarians stole classical libertarian.

Yes this right here. Now liberals in the modern sense more often call themselves progressive. It is quite clever really. Until that label dies, which it did in the early 20th century due to image problems.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 8:31:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2013 8:17:46 PM, DanT wrote:
At 3/5/2013 6:53:43 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
What is the difference between Classical Liberalism and modern Libertarianism?

Classic Liberalism is right wing Libertarianism. Anarchism is left wing Libertarianism. Many people who call themselves libertarians today, are not true libertarians. Such as Ron Paul, who is more of an independent.

I've heard Noam Chomsky claim that today's "Capitalist" Libertarianism is a new phenomena that is exclusive to America. He said that Libertarianism is traditionally Anarcho-Socialist.

That's BS. The term "Libertarian" was invented by classic liberals during the enlightenment; it referred to the meta-physical belief in free will. Later in the 19th century Anarcho-Socialists were the first to be referred to as "Libertarians" politically, to differentiate between anarchists and statists; Anarcho-Socialists believed in voluntary socialism, whereas state-socialists believed in forced socialism. Anarcho-socialists are more anarchist than they are socialist.
If true, when did Libertarianism in America turn into Rand/Rothbard style and why?
Libertarians have always been anyone who advocates free will, opposes coercion, and champions liberty.
Classic Liberals advocate a minimized state
Anarchists advocate the abolition of the state.

Good post on political backgrounds. That's why libertarians has its own subgroups. Right-Libertarians advocate for liberty, free market capitalism as well as limited government. Left-Libertarians are supporters of a mutual, communal society.

I might be wrong technically, but from what I have read, that is the case. That's why I am a right libertarian (as in right wing). Right wing means tradition, but I also believe it represents economics.

You can prove me wrong now DanT :D
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 8:37:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2013 8:17:08 PM, BigRat wrote:
Thomas Paine was actually quite an exception.

He was the most liberal. But he was not the only exception.

Outside of him, the founders were strong believers in classical liberalism. And, I don't think anyone today can call public education a very liberal economic idea as the existence of public education is supported across the political spectrum.

Public education was radical for the time period. And the point is that it's not libertarian.

As for progressive taxes, the Founders hated the idea of income taxes. Jefferson did endorse progressive estate and property taxes imposed by STATE governments. And, he was talking about taxes MUCH lower than we can imagine today.

The founders were quite laissez faire indeed.

The founding fathers were not a group of Libertarians as most see them today. The only thing they were united in was independence from England. Besides that, they had many disagreements.

The Anti-Federalists were essentially the Libertarians. However, the Federalists were the majority and united around a central banking system, an anti-libertarian idea.

The early government was quick to establish subsides and other policies favoring the rich, as the government was primarily made up of the upper class.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 9:08:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2013 8:37:36 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 3/5/2013 8:17:08 PM, BigRat wrote:
Thomas Paine was actually quite an exception.

He was the most liberal. But he was not the only exception.

Outside of him, the founders were strong believers in classical liberalism. And, I don't think anyone today can call public education a very liberal economic idea as the existence of public education is supported across the political spectrum.

Public education was radical for the time period. And the point is that it's not libertarian.

As for progressive taxes, the Founders hated the idea of income taxes. Jefferson did endorse progressive estate and property taxes imposed by STATE governments. And, he was talking about taxes MUCH lower than we can imagine today.

The founders were quite laissez faire indeed.

The founding fathers were not a group of Libertarians as most see them today. The only thing they were united in was independence from England. Besides that, they had many disagreements.

The Anti-Federalists were essentially the Libertarians. However, the Federalists were the majority and united around a central banking system, an anti-libertarian idea.

The early government was quick to establish subsides and other policies favoring the rich, as the government was primarily made up of the upper class.

Public education wasn't considered radical. It was thought of like single payer is today, a distinctly left wing policy but not radical.

Sure, there were libertarians and non libertarins for the time back then. BUt, in today's world, they would all (perhaps excepting Paine) be considered radical, free market libertarians.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 9:12:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2013 8:31:33 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/5/2013 8:17:46 PM, DanT wrote:
At 3/5/2013 6:53:43 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
What is the difference between Classical Liberalism and modern Libertarianism?

Classic Liberalism is right wing Libertarianism. Anarchism is left wing Libertarianism. Many people who call themselves libertarians today, are not true libertarians. Such as Ron Paul, who is more of an independent.

I've heard Noam Chomsky claim that today's "Capitalist" Libertarianism is a new phenomena that is exclusive to America. He said that Libertarianism is traditionally Anarcho-Socialist.

That's BS. The term "Libertarian" was invented by classic liberals during the enlightenment; it referred to the meta-physical belief in free will. Later in the 19th century Anarcho-Socialists were the first to be referred to as "Libertarians" politically, to differentiate between anarchists and statists; Anarcho-Socialists believed in voluntary socialism, whereas state-socialists believed in forced socialism. Anarcho-socialists are more anarchist than they are socialist.
If true, when did Libertarianism in America turn into Rand/Rothbard style and why?
Libertarians have always been anyone who advocates free will, opposes coercion, and champions liberty.
Classic Liberals advocate a minimized state
Anarchists advocate the abolition of the state.

Good post on political backgrounds. That's why libertarians has its own subgroups. Right-Libertarians advocate for liberty, free market capitalism as well as limited government. Left-Libertarians are supporters of a mutual, communal society.

I might be wrong technically, but from what I have read, that is the case. That's why I am a right libertarian (as in right wing). Right wing means tradition, but I also believe it represents economics.

You can prove me wrong now DanT :D

Right wing means tradition (conservatism) and Left wing means reform (progressive). Libertarian means individualist, and Fascist means collectivist (note: the original Italian fascists were socialists).

Left-Libertarians are not supporters of a mutual, communal society, they are supporters of Anarchism.

Anarcho-Capitalists were left wing libertarian, as is Anarcho-Socialists, because they both promote the abolition of the state, which is political reform.
Classic Liberals favor limited government.

Liberal-Conservatives believe in preserving the status quo through inaction, while Traditional conservatives believe in preserving the status quo through action.
A traditional conservative might favor a bailout in order to preserve the economic status quo, while a liberal-conservative would be opposed to a bailout.

Social liberals believe in reform to increase liberty. Populists believe in reform to promote egalitarianism. Populists are anti-elite, Social Liberals are not.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 9:20:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2013 9:08:03 PM, BigRat wrote:
Public education wasn't considered radical. It was thought of like single payer is today, a distinctly left wing policy but not radical.

The US, today, is the only industrialized country in the world without universal healthcare.

Back then, public education had NEVER been implemented before.

Yeah, there's a difference.

Sure, there were libertarians and non libertarins for the time back then. BUt, in today's world, they would all (perhaps excepting Paine) be considered radical, free market libertarians.

This thread is asking for the difference between Libertarianism and Classical Liberalism. As Libertarianism is a pretty mathematical concept in it's strictness and Classical Liberalism is more identified by the general ideas of that time period, I was pointing out were I find the difference.

By today's standards, yes, most of the founding fathers would be moderate libertarians. But that's different than the Libertarian ideology. And if we take into account how radical their ideas were for the time, we could also conclude that their ideas translate to a more leftist tendency.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 9:47:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2013 9:20:28 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 3/5/2013 9:08:03 PM, BigRat wrote:
Public education wasn't considered radical. It was thought of like single payer is today, a distinctly left wing policy but not radical.

The US, today, is the only industrialized country in the world without universal healthcare.

Back then, public education had NEVER been implemented before.

Yeah, there's a difference.

Right. We know public health care sucks balls. We didn't know public education sucks balls (now we do).

Anyways, there is bipartisan support for the existance of public education today while some supported it back then.

Nothing here suggests the Founders weren't libertarian.


Sure, there were libertarians and non libertarins for the time back then. BUt, in today's world, they would all (perhaps excepting Paine) be considered radical, free market libertarians.

This thread is asking for the difference between Libertarianism and Classical Liberalism. As Libertarianism is a pretty mathematical concept in it's strictness and Classical Liberalism is more identified by the general ideas of that time period, I was pointing out were I find the difference.

By today's standards, yes, most of the founding fathers would be moderate libertarians. But that's different than the Libertarian ideology. And if we take into account how radical their ideas were for the time, we could also conclude that their ideas translate to a more leftist tendency.

No sir. Supporting change does not make one left wing. The French revolution was a left wing revolution.

The American Revolution was more right wing (an anti tax revolution from the left... gimme a break).
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 9:52:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2013 7:37:33 PM, BigRat wrote:
Chomsky is mostly wrong.

Source. Show me instances where he is wrong...many of them.

The beginning of the libertarian movement was in the minarchist classical liberals.

No. Chomsky was right in this instance, though I look forward to all of your links to the times he's been wrong. Personally, I've never seen any (maybe I'm not looking in the right places, though).

It began with Godwin, and while he did believe that, in his time, some small form state was necessary, he believe the need for such would diminish over time and an anarchy would replace the minarchy.

These people were anarchists who simply saw an immediate need to be minarchists because it was pragmatic for their era.

However, it is true that far leftists used to be known as anarchists instead of communists. He is probably referring to the fact that anarchism is no longer exclusively a radical left wing movement.

No, he's referring to a book you've never read, Political Justice.
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 1:25:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2013 9:52:39 PM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/5/2013 7:37:33 PM, BigRat wrote:
Chomsky is mostly wrong.

Source. Show me instances where he is wrong...many of them.

Well, he calls himself a socialist. That means he is wrong about much of hhistory and knows nothing of economics.

I'm not gonna spend time running around the internet looking for sources. If you want to argue Chomsky, I will refute specific claims that you make here.


The beginning of the libertarian movement was in the minarchist classical liberals.

No. Chomsky was right in this instance, though I look forward to all of your links to the times he's been wrong. Personally, I've never seen any (maybe I'm not looking in the right places, though).

It began with Godwin, and while he did believe that, in his time, some small form state was necessary, he believe the need for such would diminish over time and an anarchy would replace the minarchy.


These people were anarchists who simply saw an immediate need to be minarchists because it was pragmatic for their era.

Good job saying something that literally refutes nothing that I said.


However, it is true that far leftists used to be known as anarchists instead of communists. He is probably referring to the fact that anarchism is no longer exclusively a radical left wing movement.

No, he's referring to a book you've never read, Political Justice.

Hmmmmm. Again, good job not refuting anything I said.
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 2:42:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 1:25:02 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 3/5/2013 9:52:39 PM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/5/2013 7:37:33 PM, BigRat wrote:
Chomsky is mostly wrong.

Source. Show me instances where he is wrong...many of them.


Well, he calls himself a socialist. That means he is wrong about much of hhistory and knows nothing of economics.

I'm not gonna spend time running around the internet looking for sources. If you want to argue Chomsky, I will refute specific claims that you make here.

SOURCE.
You said he's usually wrong. Show me sources where he is specifically wrong.

The beginning of the libertarian movement was in the minarchist classical liberals.

No. Chomsky was right in this instance, though I look forward to all of your links to the times he's been wrong. Personally, I've never seen any (maybe I'm not looking in the right places, though).

It began with Godwin, and while he did believe that, in his time, some small form state was necessary, he believe the need for such would diminish over time and an anarchy would replace the minarchy.

These people were anarchists who simply saw an immediate need to be minarchists because it was pragmatic for their era.

Good job saying something that literally refutes nothing that I said.

except it did.
However, it is true that far leftists used to be known as anarchists instead of communists. He is probably referring to the fact that anarchism is no longer exclusively a radical left wing movement.

No, he's referring to a book you've never read, Political Justice.


Hmmmmm. Again, good job not refuting anything I said.

I did refute what you said, but you're too stupid to realize it. Read a book, why don'tcha?
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 4:13:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 2:42:16 PM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/6/2013 1:25:02 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 3/5/2013 9:52:39 PM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/5/2013 7:37:33 PM, BigRat wrote:
Chomsky is mostly wrong.

Source. Show me instances where he is wrong...many of them.


Well, he calls himself a socialist. That means he is wrong about much of hhistory and knows nothing of economics.

I'm not gonna spend time running around the internet looking for sources. If you want to argue Chomsky, I will refute specific claims that you make here.

SOURCE.
You said he's usually wrong. Show me sources where he is specifically wrong.

Again, the fact that he is a socialist shows he is wrogn about a lot.

I'm not gonna waste time looking for sources here.


The beginning of the libertarian movement was in the minarchist classical liberals.

No. Chomsky was right in this instance, though I look forward to all of your links to the times he's been wrong. Personally, I've never seen any (maybe I'm not looking in the right places, though).

It began with Godwin, and while he did believe that, in his time, some small form state was necessary, he believe the need for such would diminish over time and an anarchy would replace the minarchy.

These people were anarchists who simply saw an immediate need to be minarchists because it was pragmatic for their era.

Good job saying something that literally refutes nothing that I said.

except it did.

Sorry bud. You can repeat an untrue thing all you want but that doesn't change how it is untrue.

However, it is true that far leftists used to be known as anarchists instead of communists. He is probably referring to the fact that anarchism is no longer exclusively a radical left wing movement.

No, he's referring to a book you've never read, Political Justice.


Hmmmmm. Again, good job not refuting anything I said.

I did refute what you said, but you're too stupid to realize it. Read a book, why don'tcha?

Lol. I love you, one of the least intelligent here, calls other people stupid. I read all the time.

I actually understand history and economics, unlike you.

You are quite ignorant.
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 4:36:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 4:13:42 PM, BigRat wrote:

Again, the fact that he is a socialist shows he is wrogn about a lot.

I'm not gonna waste time looking for sources here.

Oh, so you can't find one.

Me - 1

You - 0

Sorry bud. You can repeat an untrue thing all you want but that doesn't change how it is untrue.

I quoted the father of Libertarianism. You got nothing.

Me - 2

You - 0

Lol. I love you, one of the least intelligent here, calls other people stupid. I read all the time.

I actually understand history and economics, unlike you.

You are quite ignorant.

You have Ad Hominem. I have knowledge acquired through books.

Final score -

Me - 3

You - 0


You always get your @ss kicked before declaring yourself the winner?
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 5:09:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 4:36:56 PM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/6/2013 4:13:42 PM, BigRat wrote:

Again, the fact that he is a socialist shows he is wrogn about a lot.

I'm not gonna waste time looking for sources here.

Oh, so you can't find one.

Me - 1

You - 0

Sorry bud. You can repeat an untrue thing all you want but that doesn't change how it is untrue.

I quoted the father of Libertarianism. You got nothing.

Me - 2

You - 0


Lol. I love you, one of the least intelligent here, calls other people stupid. I read all the time.

I actually understand history and economics, unlike you.

You are quite ignorant.

You have Ad Hominem. I have knowledge acquired through books.

Final score -

Me - 3

You - 0


You always get your @ss kicked before declaring yourself the winner?

Wow. This is just pathetic.

If this were an actual competition, we wouldn't have one of the contestants deciding the score.

Stop embarassing yourself. I'm not going to waste my time responding to the silly things you say.

All you do is say something that is factually incorrect and then say "you're an idiot". It was funny and kinda cute, but now it is just pathetic and sad.
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 5:27:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 5:09:17 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 3/6/2013 4:36:56 PM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/6/2013 4:13:42 PM, BigRat wrote:

Again, the fact that he is a socialist shows he is wrogn about a lot.

I'm not gonna waste time looking for sources here.

Oh, so you can't find one.

Me - 1

You - 0

Sorry bud. You can repeat an untrue thing all you want but that doesn't change how it is untrue.

I quoted the father of Libertarianism. You got nothing.

Me - 2

You - 0


Lol. I love you, one of the least intelligent here, calls other people stupid. I read all the time.

I actually understand history and economics, unlike you.

You are quite ignorant.

You have Ad Hominem. I have knowledge acquired through books.

Final score -

Me - 3

You - 0


You always get your @ss kicked before declaring yourself the winner?


Wow. This is just pathetic.

If this were an actual competition, we wouldn't have one of the contestants deciding the score.

Stop embarassing yourself. I'm not going to waste my time responding to the silly things you say.

All you do is say something that is factually incorrect and then say "you're an idiot". It was funny and kinda cute, but now it is just pathetic and sad.

Once again, has nothing tangible to back up anything he's said -

Me - 32

You - 0
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 5:34:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 5:27:13 PM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/6/2013 5:09:17 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 3/6/2013 4:36:56 PM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/6/2013 4:13:42 PM, BigRat wrote:

Again, the fact that he is a socialist shows he is wrogn about a lot.

I'm not gonna waste time looking for sources here.

Oh, so you can't find one.

Me - 1

You - 0

Sorry bud. You can repeat an untrue thing all you want but that doesn't change how it is untrue.

I quoted the father of Libertarianism. You got nothing.

Me - 2

You - 0


Lol. I love you, one of the least intelligent here, calls other people stupid. I read all the time.

I actually understand history and economics, unlike you.

You are quite ignorant.

You have Ad Hominem. I have knowledge acquired through books.

Final score -

Me - 3

You - 0


You always get your @ss kicked before declaring yourself the winner?


Wow. This is just pathetic.

If this were an actual competition, we wouldn't have one of the contestants deciding the score.

Stop embarassing yourself. I'm not going to waste my time responding to the silly things you say.

All you do is say something that is factually incorrect and then say "you're an idiot". It was funny and kinda cute, but now it is just pathetic and sad.

Once again, has nothing tangible to back up anything he's said -

Me - 32

You - 0


I think this response (a phony score to some contest that is not really happening) says everything about you.
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2013 8:32:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2013 5:34:07 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 3/6/2013 5:27:13 PM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/6/2013 5:09:17 PM, BigRat wrote:
At 3/6/2013 4:36:56 PM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 3/6/2013 4:13:42 PM, BigRat wrote:

Again, the fact that he is a socialist shows he is wrogn about a lot.

I'm not gonna waste time looking for sources here.

Oh, so you can't find one.

Me - 1

You - 0

Sorry bud. You can repeat an untrue thing all you want but that doesn't change how it is untrue.

I quoted the father of Libertarianism. You got nothing.

Me - 2

You - 0


Lol. I love you, one of the least intelligent here, calls other people stupid. I read all the time.

I actually understand history and economics, unlike you.

You are quite ignorant.

You have Ad Hominem. I have knowledge acquired through books.

Final score -

Me - 3

You - 0


You always get your @ss kicked before declaring yourself the winner?


Wow. This is just pathetic.

If this were an actual competition, we wouldn't have one of the contestants deciding the score.

Stop embarassing yourself. I'm not going to waste my time responding to the silly things you say.

All you do is say something that is factually incorrect and then say "you're an idiot". It was funny and kinda cute, but now it is just pathetic and sad.

Once again, has nothing tangible to back up anything he's said -

Me - 32

You - 0



I think this response (a phony score to some contest that is not really happening) says everything about you.

says he won't respond. responds anyway. response has no substance.

Me - 35

You - 0
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...