Total Posts:69|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The One Real Issue I Take with Libertarians

DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2013 4:10:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
As a Libertarian, I take one major issue with libertarians, and particularly American libertarians.

What is this, you may ask? Well, it is essentially the tendency of libertarian think tanks or groups to devolve into anti-other ideological circle jerking. And, with American libertarians, it annoys me especially when the equate libertarianism to patriotism, or the founding fathers.

It's my general thesis that libertarian philosophy has nothing to do with loving one's country, or following the "Founders." It's simply a political, ideological, and moral philosophy.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2013 4:16:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 4:10:31 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
As a Libertarian, I take one major issue with libertarians, and particularly American libertarians.

What is this, you may ask? Well, it is essentially the tendency of libertarian think tanks or groups to devolve into anti-other ideological circle jerking. And, with American libertarians, it annoys me especially when the equate libertarianism to patriotism, or the founding fathers.

It's my general thesis that libertarian philosophy has nothing to do with loving one's country, or following the "Founders." It's simply a political, ideological, and moral philosophy.

You're probably right. But, all formal groups do this, unfortunately. Which is why I don't ascribe to a party.
My work here is, finally, done.
thett3
Posts: 14,349
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2013 4:17:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I dont like most libertarians I know in real life. They tend to be incredibly arrogant and hostile to people of other ideologies. I remember once last year when the Republican primaries were going on, I was talking to my friend about them and this random guy I didn't know butted in and said "Too bad the only good candidate, Ron Paul isnt gonna win! Hes a libertarian!" and I said "What about being a libertarian makes him an inherently good candidate?" and all the kid said was, in an incredibly snobby voice, "Do you even know what a libertarian is?". Yeah ho-bag, I've probably forgotten more about political philosophy than you'll ever learn. But yeah most of the "libertarians" I know in real life are just anti-establishment, rebellious morons.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2013 4:20:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
My only problem with Libertarians is that they're noisy and irritating; meanwhile, their ideology, like all ideologies, doesn't really mean anything, and can't be argued. Where did you get the idea that you had the right to property? Who says?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2013 4:20:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
My only problem with Libertarians is that they're noisy and irritating; meanwhile, their ideology, like all ideologies, doesn't really mean anything, and can't be argued. Where did you get the idea that you had the right to property? Who says?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2013 4:23:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 4:20:32 PM, 000ike wrote:
My only problem with Libertarians is that they're noisy and irritating; meanwhile, their ideology, like all ideologies, doesn't really mean anything, and can't be argued. Where did you get the idea that you had the right to property? Who says?

Any ideology can be reduced to an unsubstantiated axiom.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2013 4:23:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 4:20:32 PM, 000ike wrote:
My only problem with Libertarians is that they're noisy and irritating; meanwhile, their ideology, like all ideologies, doesn't really mean anything, and can't be argued. Where did you get the idea that you had the right to property? Who says?

I do.

I would ask you the same question about your ideology.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2013 4:28:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 4:23:31 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 3/30/2013 4:20:32 PM, 000ike wrote:
My only problem with Libertarians is that they're noisy and irritating; meanwhile, their ideology, like all ideologies, doesn't really mean anything, and can't be argued. Where did you get the idea that you had the right to property? Who says?

I do.

lol exactly! That's basically the height of justification behind moral claims. And when people feel averse to using themselves as an authority, they go cite one verbose philosopher or another to iterate what they just said in more flowery words.

I would ask you the same question about your ideology.

I don't have one. I hold the position that people essentially support whatever it is they would like to see in the world, regardless of consistency or philosophical foundation, or logical merit....and this is neither wrong nor right. So I'll simply through my weight behind whatever I want to see occur in the world, and leave it at that.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
BigRat
Posts: 465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2013 9:54:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Mostly true. Libertarianism and patriotism have more overlaps in the USA than in most places because of the libertarian economic and political principles the nation was founded upon, but that just means that American patriots support some libertarian policies not that they are libertarians. This is often confused.
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2013 10:15:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 4:17:37 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like most libertarians I know in real life. They tend to be incredibly arrogant and hostile to people of other ideologies. I remember once last year when the Republican primaries were going on, I was talking to my friend about them and this random guy I didn't know butted in and said "Too bad the only good candidate, Ron Paul isnt gonna win! Hes a libertarian!" and I said "What about being a libertarian makes him an inherently good candidate?" and all the kid said was, in an incredibly snobby voice, "Do you even know what a libertarian is?". Yeah ho-bag, I've probably forgotten more about political philosophy than you'll ever learn. But yeah most of the "libertarians" I know in real life are just anti-establishment, rebellious morons.

Most libertarians are arrogant and hostile to other ideologies. Most libertarians don't compromise, and their beliefs are of the "purest" form. For example, anarcho capitalism cannot agree with liberals on much of anything.

I am a pragmatist, I support compromises; like increasing infrastructure spending if we adopt a flat tax.

Pragmatism and compromise is the only way to win anything. We should stand for our principles and beliefs, but when it comes to the actual debate, if we argue for a pure libertarian solution (end entitlements), we will fail. Instead, we should offer more pragmatic solutions like partially personalizing Social Security.

From who I have met on the internet, libertarians appear to be hostile and ideological. I have never met a libertarian in my life, at least to any extent, only progressives and conservatives.

And I don't see any problem with being a patriot as well as having a right-wing libertarian outlook. Where I live, I put up the American flag every day of the summer.
"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
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2013 10:30:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 10:15:52 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2013 4:17:37 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like most libertarians I know in real life. They tend to be incredibly arrogant and hostile to people of other ideologies. I remember once last year when the Republican primaries were going on, I was talking to my friend about them and this random guy I didn't know butted in and said "Too bad the only good candidate, Ron Paul isnt gonna win! Hes a libertarian!" and I said "What about being a libertarian makes him an inherently good candidate?" and all the kid said was, in an incredibly snobby voice, "Do you even know what a libertarian is?". Yeah ho-bag, I've probably forgotten more about political philosophy than you'll ever learn. But yeah most of the "libertarians" I know in real life are just anti-establishment, rebellious morons.

Most libertarians are arrogant and hostile to other ideologies. Most libertarians don't compromise, and their beliefs are of the "purest" form. For example, anarcho capitalism cannot agree with liberals on much of anything.

I am a pragmatist, I support compromises; like increasing infrastructure spending if we adopt a flat tax.

Pragmatism and compromise is the only way to win anything. We should stand for our principles and beliefs, but when it comes to the actual debate, if we argue for a pure libertarian solution (end entitlements), we will fail. Instead, we should offer more pragmatic solutions like partially personalizing Social Security.

From who I have met on the internet, libertarians appear to be hostile and ideological. I have never met a libertarian in my life, at least to any extent, only progressives and conservatives.

And I don't see any problem with being a patriot as well as having a right-wing libertarian outlook. Where I live, I put up the American flag every day of the summer.

I'm working on slowly transforming my entire neighborhood into a moderate libertarian voting block. It's fun. But I'm also probably the most ideologically stringent person that I know. The key is to realize that, when you engage someone in a political dialogue, the goal is to influence them towards your way of thinking. Not to convert them wholeheartedly. Foreign policy and the drug war are great for discrediting both parties, for example. Then you take the various fallacious arguments that the everyone is surrounded by and dismantle them one by one. While I particularly loathe the 'fallacy of moderation' (that a compromise between two ideas is always good), I can recognize that it isn't a particularly important one to destroy, seeing as the 'point of compromise' is moved as the overall ideological makeup of a population shifts. It is also usually clung to for irrational reasons, the fear of peer reprisal being a big one, and reasoned debate has a better chance of annoying the other person than it does of dislodging it. Too many Libertarians try to take a sledge hammer to someone's political ideology instead of chipping away at it bit by bit.

I particularly hate it when people are called 'sheep'. It's condescending, devoid of substance, and counterproductive.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2013 10:41:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 10:15:52 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2013 4:17:37 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like most libertarians I know in real life. They tend to be incredibly arrogant and hostile to people of other ideologies. I remember once last year when the Republican primaries were going on, I was talking to my friend about them and this random guy I didn't know butted in and said "Too bad the only good candidate, Ron Paul isnt gonna win! Hes a libertarian!" and I said "What about being a libertarian makes him an inherently good candidate?" and all the kid said was, in an incredibly snobby voice, "Do you even know what a libertarian is?". Yeah ho-bag, I've probably forgotten more about political philosophy than you'll ever learn. But yeah most of the "libertarians" I know in real life are just anti-establishment, rebellious morons.

Most libertarians are arrogant and hostile to other ideologies. Most libertarians don't compromise, and their beliefs are of the "purest" form. For example, anarcho capitalism cannot agree with liberals on much of anything.

I am a pragmatist, I support compromises; like increasing infrastructure spending if we adopt a flat tax.

Pragmatism and compromise is the only way to win anything. We should stand for our principles and beliefs, but when it comes to the actual debate, if we argue for a pure libertarian solution (end entitlements), we will fail. Instead, we should offer more pragmatic solutions like partially personalizing Social Security.

From who I have met on the internet, libertarians appear to be hostile and ideological. I have never met a libertarian in my life, at least to any extent, only progressives and conservatives.

And I don't see any problem with being a patriot as well as having a right-wing libertarian outlook. Where I live, I put up the American flag every day of the summer.

William James and libertarians don't mix very well.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
imabench
Posts: 21,220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2013 10:51:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 4:10:31 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
As a Libertarian, I take one major issue with libertarians, and particularly American libertarians.

What is this, you may ask? Well, it is essentially the tendency of libertarian think tanks or groups to devolve into anti-other ideological circle jerking. And, with American libertarians, it annoys me especially when the equate libertarianism to patriotism, or the founding fathers.

It's my general thesis that libertarian philosophy has nothing to do with loving one's country, or following the "Founders." It's simply a political, ideological, and moral philosophy.

Whats wrong with a good old fashioned circle jerking? Circle jerking is one of the principles that DDO was founded upon!
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 10:43:23 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 10:51:11 PM, imabench wrote:
At 3/30/2013 4:10:31 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
As a Libertarian, I take one major issue with libertarians, and particularly American libertarians.

What is this, you may ask? Well, it is essentially the tendency of libertarian think tanks or groups to devolve into anti-other ideological circle jerking. And, with American libertarians, it annoys me especially when the equate libertarianism to patriotism, or the founding fathers.

It's my general thesis that libertarian philosophy has nothing to do with loving one's country, or following the "Founders." It's simply a political, ideological, and moral philosophy.

Whats wrong with a good old fashioned circle jerking? Circle jerking is one of the principles that DDO was founded upon!

Hear hear!
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 11:38:14 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 10:30:13 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/30/2013 10:15:52 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2013 4:17:37 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like most libertarians I know in real life. They tend to be incredibly arrogant and hostile to people of other ideologies. I remember once last year when the Republican primaries were going on, I was talking to my friend about them and this random guy I didn't know butted in and said "Too bad the only good candidate, Ron Paul isnt gonna win! Hes a libertarian!" and I said "What about being a libertarian makes him an inherently good candidate?" and all the kid said was, in an incredibly snobby voice, "Do you even know what a libertarian is?". Yeah ho-bag, I've probably forgotten more about political philosophy than you'll ever learn. But yeah most of the "libertarians" I know in real life are just anti-establishment, rebellious morons.

Most libertarians are arrogant and hostile to other ideologies. Most libertarians don't compromise, and their beliefs are of the "purest" form. For example, anarcho capitalism cannot agree with liberals on much of anything.

I am a pragmatist, I support compromises; like increasing infrastructure spending if we adopt a flat tax.

Pragmatism and compromise is the only way to win anything. We should stand for our principles and beliefs, but when it comes to the actual debate, if we argue for a pure libertarian solution (end entitlements), we will fail. Instead, we should offer more pragmatic solutions like partially personalizing Social Security.

From who I have met on the internet, libertarians appear to be hostile and ideological. I have never met a libertarian in my life, at least to any extent, only progressives and conservatives.

And I don't see any problem with being a patriot as well as having a right-wing libertarian outlook. Where I live, I put up the American flag every day of the summer.

I'm working on slowly transforming my entire neighborhood into a moderate libertarian voting block. It's fun. But I'm also probably the most ideologically stringent person that I know. The key is to realize that, when you engage someone in a political dialogue, the goal is to influence them towards your way of thinking. Not to convert them wholeheartedly. Foreign policy and the drug war are great for discrediting both parties, for example. Then you take the various fallacious arguments that the everyone is surrounded by and dismantle them one by one. While I particularly loathe the 'fallacy of moderation' (that a compromise between two ideas is always good), I can recognize that it isn't a particularly important one to destroy, seeing as the 'point of compromise' is moved as the overall ideological makeup of a population shifts. It is also usually clung to for irrational reasons, the fear of peer reprisal being a big one, and reasoned debate has a better chance of annoying the other person than it does of dislodging it. Too many Libertarians try to take a sledge hammer to someone's political ideology instead of chipping away at it bit by bit.

Ha ha yeah...

By chipping away at another person's ideology, I think you mean try to convince them on side issues like the drug war or same sex marriage. It worked for me, at least to convert me.

I don't know how you could convert your whole community though, that would be quite an undertaking.

I particularly hate it when people are called 'sheep'. It's condescending, devoid of substance, and counterproductive.

I am guilty here, once I gave a Facebook post calling those politically ignorant sheep, alongside a Rand Paul quote from his filibuster.
"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
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 11:42:56 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/31/2013 11:38:14 AM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2013 10:30:13 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/30/2013 10:15:52 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2013 4:17:37 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like most libertarians I know in real life. They tend to be incredibly arrogant and hostile to people of other ideologies. I remember once last year when the Republican primaries were going on, I was talking to my friend about them and this random guy I didn't know butted in and said "Too bad the only good candidate, Ron Paul isnt gonna win! Hes a libertarian!" and I said "What about being a libertarian makes him an inherently good candidate?" and all the kid said was, in an incredibly snobby voice, "Do you even know what a libertarian is?". Yeah ho-bag, I've probably forgotten more about political philosophy than you'll ever learn. But yeah most of the "libertarians" I know in real life are just anti-establishment, rebellious morons.

Most libertarians are arrogant and hostile to other ideologies. Most libertarians don't compromise, and their beliefs are of the "purest" form. For example, anarcho capitalism cannot agree with liberals on much of anything.

I am a pragmatist, I support compromises; like increasing infrastructure spending if we adopt a flat tax.

Pragmatism and compromise is the only way to win anything. We should stand for our principles and beliefs, but when it comes to the actual debate, if we argue for a pure libertarian solution (end entitlements), we will fail. Instead, we should offer more pragmatic solutions like partially personalizing Social Security.

From who I have met on the internet, libertarians appear to be hostile and ideological. I have never met a libertarian in my life, at least to any extent, only progressives and conservatives.

And I don't see any problem with being a patriot as well as having a right-wing libertarian outlook. Where I live, I put up the American flag every day of the summer.

I'm working on slowly transforming my entire neighborhood into a moderate libertarian voting block. It's fun. But I'm also probably the most ideologically stringent person that I know. The key is to realize that, when you engage someone in a political dialogue, the goal is to influence them towards your way of thinking. Not to convert them wholeheartedly. Foreign policy and the drug war are great for discrediting both parties, for example. Then you take the various fallacious arguments that the everyone is surrounded by and dismantle them one by one. While I particularly loathe the 'fallacy of moderation' (that a compromise between two ideas is always good), I can recognize that it isn't a particularly important one to destroy, seeing as the 'point of compromise' is moved as the overall ideological makeup of a population shifts. It is also usually clung to for irrational reasons, the fear of peer reprisal being a big one, and reasoned debate has a better chance of annoying the other person than it does of dislodging it. Too many Libertarians try to take a sledge hammer to someone's political ideology instead of chipping away at it bit by bit.

Ha ha yeah...

By chipping away at another person's ideology, I think you mean try to convince them on side issues like the drug war or same sex marriage. It worked for me, at least to convert me.

I don't know how you could convert your whole community though, that would be quite an undertaking.

I particularly hate it when people are called 'sheep'. It's condescending, devoid of substance, and counterproductive.

I am guilty here, once I gave a Facebook post calling those politically ignorant sheep, alongside a Rand Paul quote from his filibuster.

Problem is that for most people, they aren't willing to listen that long to slowly have their ideology chipped away and turn into libertarianism. Either the person has to have to be in an environment where this can slowly occur and the person would willingly put themselves in the environment, or must be easily persuaded.

I don't think any of the two are likely, hence why libertarian seems to be a minority position (although, I'm not sure how many people even know what a libertarian is, hence they call themselves socially liberal and economically conservative).
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 12:02:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/31/2013 11:38:14 AM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2013 10:30:13 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
I'm working on slowly transforming my entire neighborhood into a moderate libertarian voting block. It's fun. But I'm also probably the most ideologically stringent person that I know. The key is to realize that, when you engage someone in a political dialogue, the goal is to influence them towards your way of thinking. Not to convert them wholeheartedly. Foreign policy and the drug war are great for discrediting both parties, for example. Then you take the various fallacious arguments that the everyone is surrounded by and dismantle them one by one. While I particularly loathe the 'fallacy of moderation' (that a compromise between two ideas is always good), I can recognize that it isn't a particularly important one to destroy, seeing as the 'point of compromise' is moved as the overall ideological makeup of a population shifts. It is also usually clung to for irrational reasons, the fear of peer reprisal being a big one, and reasoned debate has a better chance of annoying the other person than it does of dislodging it. Too many Libertarians try to take a sledge hammer to someone's political ideology instead of chipping away at it bit by bit.

Ha ha yeah...

By chipping away at another person's ideology, I think you mean try to convince them on side issues like the drug war or same sex marriage. It worked for me, at least to convert me.

I don't know how you could convert your whole community though, that would be quite an undertaking.

Well, I've converted the four households which are closest to my family. I hit a roadblock with the local crazy Democrat lady, but she's pretty much isolated when it comes to gun control, when she used to have everyone on her side. The town is small (one street), and I've turned the middle, so I'm just watching now.


I particularly hate it when people are called 'sheep'. It's condescending, devoid of substance, and counterproductive.

I am guilty here, once I gave a Facebook post calling those politically ignorant sheep, alongside a Rand Paul quote from his filibuster.

Eh, insults are big part of polemics. It's just a pet peeve of mine.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 12:04:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/31/2013 11:42:56 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 3/31/2013 11:38:14 AM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2013 10:30:13 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
I'm working on slowly transforming my entire neighborhood into a moderate libertarian voting block. It's fun. But I'm also probably the most ideologically stringent person that I know. The key is to realize that, when you engage someone in a political dialogue, the goal is to influence them towards your way of thinking. Not to convert them wholeheartedly. Foreign policy and the drug war are great for discrediting both parties, for example. Then you take the various fallacious arguments that the everyone is surrounded by and dismantle them one by one. While I particularly loathe the 'fallacy of moderation' (that a compromise between two ideas is always good), I can recognize that it isn't a particularly important one to destroy, seeing as the 'point of compromise' is moved as the overall ideological makeup of a population shifts. It is also usually clung to for irrational reasons, the fear of peer reprisal being a big one, and reasoned debate has a better chance of annoying the other person than it does of dislodging it. Too many Libertarians try to take a sledge hammer to someone's political ideology instead of chipping away at it bit by bit.

Ha ha yeah...

By chipping away at another person's ideology, I think you mean try to convince them on side issues like the drug war or same sex marriage. It worked for me, at least to convert me.

I don't know how you could convert your whole community though, that would be quite an undertaking.

I particularly hate it when people are called 'sheep'. It's condescending, devoid of substance, and counterproductive.

I am guilty here, once I gave a Facebook post calling those politically ignorant sheep, alongside a Rand Paul quote from his filibuster.

Problem is that for most people, they aren't willing to listen that long to slowly have their ideology chipped away and turn into libertarianism. Either the person has to have to be in an environment where this can slowly occur and the person would willingly put themselves in the environment, or must be easily persuaded.

I don't think any of the two are likely, hence why libertarian seems to be a minority position (although, I'm not sure how many people even know what a libertarian is, hence they call themselves socially liberal and economically conservative).

I should have mentioned that I live in a swing town in a swing county in a swing state. The people here mostly get pissed off at the incompetence of whichever party is in control and 'vote them out' by voting for the other guy. I usually just have to freshen their memory about the 'other guy' and it's easy pickings from then on out.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
My-Self
Posts: 92
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 12:25:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 4:20:32 PM, 000ike wrote:
My only problem with Libertarians is that they're noisy and irritating; meanwhile, their ideology, like all ideologies, doesn't really mean anything, and can't be argued. Where did you get the idea that you had the right to property? Who says?

A priori logic.
"Genesis could be compatible with anything. Theologians are great at mental gymnastics." ~ phantom
My-Self
Posts: 92
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 12:32:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 4:10:31 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
What is this, you may ask? Well, it is essentially the tendency of libertarian think tanks or groups to devolve into anti-other ideological circle jerking. And, with American libertarians, it annoys me especially when the equate libertarianism to the founding fathers.

That would be the association fallacy. The founding fathers (C) had many ideas (A) in common with libertarianism (B), but that overlap was obviously not 100%. Although A is within B and is also within C, not all of B is within C. Most of them owned slaves!
"Genesis could be compatible with anything. Theologians are great at mental gymnastics." ~ phantom
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 12:58:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/31/2013 12:04:47 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/31/2013 11:42:56 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 3/31/2013 11:38:14 AM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2013 10:30:13 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
I'm working on slowly transforming my entire neighborhood into a moderate libertarian voting block. It's fun. But I'm also probably the most ideologically stringent person that I know. The key is to realize that, when you engage someone in a political dialogue, the goal is to influence them towards your way of thinking. Not to convert them wholeheartedly. Foreign policy and the drug war are great for discrediting both parties, for example. Then you take the various fallacious arguments that the everyone is surrounded by and dismantle them one by one. While I particularly loathe the 'fallacy of moderation' (that a compromise between two ideas is always good), I can recognize that it isn't a particularly important one to destroy, seeing as the 'point of compromise' is moved as the overall ideological makeup of a population shifts. It is also usually clung to for irrational reasons, the fear of peer reprisal being a big one, and reasoned debate has a better chance of annoying the other person than it does of dislodging it. Too many Libertarians try to take a sledge hammer to someone's political ideology instead of chipping away at it bit by bit.

Ha ha yeah...

By chipping away at another person's ideology, I think you mean try to convince them on side issues like the drug war or same sex marriage. It worked for me, at least to convert me.

I don't know how you could convert your whole community though, that would be quite an undertaking.

I particularly hate it when people are called 'sheep'. It's condescending, devoid of substance, and counterproductive.

I am guilty here, once I gave a Facebook post calling those politically ignorant sheep, alongside a Rand Paul quote from his filibuster.

Problem is that for most people, they aren't willing to listen that long to slowly have their ideology chipped away and turn into libertarianism. Either the person has to have to be in an environment where this can slowly occur and the person would willingly put themselves in the environment, or must be easily persuaded.

I don't think any of the two are likely, hence why libertarian seems to be a minority position (although, I'm not sure how many people even know what a libertarian is, hence they call themselves socially liberal and economically conservative).

I should have mentioned that I live in a swing town in a swing county in a swing state. The people here mostly get pissed off at the incompetence of whichever party is in control and 'vote them out' by voting for the other guy. I usually just have to freshen their memory about the 'other guy' and it's easy pickings from then on out.

It is kind of the same around here. I live in a swing state as well, but my country leans toward the Democrats.

I don't know how you bring this up in conversation though, unless you actively campaign. If I bring up politics with family and friends, it usually gets pretty tense. Since we disagree on the vast majority of the issues.
"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
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 1:14:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/31/2013 12:58:20 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/31/2013 12:04:47 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/31/2013 11:42:56 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 3/31/2013 11:38:14 AM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2013 10:30:13 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
I'm working on slowly transforming my entire neighborhood into a moderate libertarian voting block. It's fun. But I'm also probably the most ideologically stringent person that I know. The key is to realize that, when you engage someone in a political dialogue, the goal is to influence them towards your way of thinking. Not to convert them wholeheartedly. Foreign policy and the drug war are great for discrediting both parties, for example. Then you take the various fallacious arguments that the everyone is surrounded by and dismantle them one by one. While I particularly loathe the 'fallacy of moderation' (that a compromise between two ideas is always good), I can recognize that it isn't a particularly important one to destroy, seeing as the 'point of compromise' is moved as the overall ideological makeup of a population shifts. It is also usually clung to for irrational reasons, the fear of peer reprisal being a big one, and reasoned debate has a better chance of annoying the other person than it does of dislodging it. Too many Libertarians try to take a sledge hammer to someone's political ideology instead of chipping away at it bit by bit.

Ha ha yeah...

By chipping away at another person's ideology, I think you mean try to convince them on side issues like the drug war or same sex marriage. It worked for me, at least to convert me.

I don't know how you could convert your whole community though, that would be quite an undertaking.

I particularly hate it when people are called 'sheep'. It's condescending, devoid of substance, and counterproductive.

I am guilty here, once I gave a Facebook post calling those politically ignorant sheep, alongside a Rand Paul quote from his filibuster.

Problem is that for most people, they aren't willing to listen that long to slowly have their ideology chipped away and turn into libertarianism. Either the person has to have to be in an environment where this can slowly occur and the person would willingly put themselves in the environment, or must be easily persuaded.

I don't think any of the two are likely, hence why libertarian seems to be a minority position (although, I'm not sure how many people even know what a libertarian is, hence they call themselves socially liberal and economically conservative).

I should have mentioned that I live in a swing town in a swing county in a swing state. The people here mostly get pissed off at the incompetence of whichever party is in control and 'vote them out' by voting for the other guy. I usually just have to freshen their memory about the 'other guy' and it's easy pickings from then on out.

It is kind of the same around here. I live in a swing state as well, but my country leans toward the Democrats.

I don't know how you bring this up in conversation though, unless you actively campaign. If I bring up politics with family and friends, it usually gets pretty tense. Since we disagree on the vast majority of the issues.

We all talk about it all the time. It's like a pastime. No one here really likes sports, so we argue about politics instead. It can get testy, but no one holds on to grudges about it (except for the one crazy Democrat lady I mentioned). Mostly people here just hate politicians in general and aren't enamored with any of them.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 5:59:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 4:10:31 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
As a Libertarian, I take one major issue with libertarians, and particularly American libertarians.

What is this, you may ask? Well, it is essentially the tendency of libertarian think tanks or groups to devolve into anti-other ideological circle jerking. And, with American libertarians, it annoys me especially when the equate libertarianism to patriotism, or the founding fathers.

I agree. They engage in political rhetoric, without engaging in political diplomacy. If libertarianism ever wishes to become mainstream again, they need to form a political coalition.
It's my general thesis that libertarian philosophy has nothing to do with loving one's country, or following the "Founders." It's simply a political, ideological, and moral philosophy.
It has to do with individualism.
"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
3/31/2013 6:01:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
All political organization is a joke. Libertarian individuals tend to be smart. Libertarian causes are insane.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 6:19:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/31/2013 12:25:42 PM, My-Self wrote:
At 3/30/2013 4:20:32 PM, 000ike wrote:
My only problem with Libertarians is that they're noisy and irritating; meanwhile, their ideology, like all ideologies, doesn't really mean anything, and can't be argued. Where did you get the idea that you had the right to property? Who says?

A priori logic.

Logic cannot produce morality. Regardless of how complicated or binding the argument is, you're making a ludicrous leap from 2 different reasoning dimensions. Illogical will never translate to immoral.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 6:27:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/31/2013 1:14:36 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:

We all talk about it all the time. It's like a pastime. No one here really likes sports, so we argue about politics instead. It can get testy, but no one holds on to grudges about it (except for the one crazy Democrat lady I mentioned). Mostly people here just hate politicians in general and aren't enamored with any of them.

First, that crazy person, what is their profession if you know?

Otherwise, it is cool that you and your neighbors/ friends/ family can talk about politics openly without hatred. That's pretty cool.
"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
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 6:55:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/31/2013 6:27:49 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/31/2013 1:14:36 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:

We all talk about it all the time. It's like a pastime. No one here really likes sports, so we argue about politics instead. It can get testy, but no one holds on to grudges about it (except for the one crazy Democrat lady I mentioned). Mostly people here just hate politicians in general and aren't enamored with any of them.

First, that crazy person, what is their profession if you know?

Otherwise, it is cool that you and your neighbors/ friends/ family can talk about politics openly without hatred. That's pretty cool.

Stay-at-home mom.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 7:57:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/30/2013 4:20:32 PM, 000ike wrote:
My only problem with Libertarians is that they're noisy and irritating; meanwhile, their ideology, like all ideologies, doesn't really mean anything, and can't be argued. Where did you get the idea that you had the right to property? Who says?

Who says libertarianism isn't an irrefutable axiom? How would one go about disproving that if their sole weapon is that of the entomological destroyer, who in turn for dismantling a philosophy at whim, destroys their means of destruction.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2013 8:15:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/31/2013 7:57:18 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/30/2013 4:20:32 PM, 000ike wrote:
My only problem with Libertarians is that they're noisy and irritating; meanwhile, their ideology, like all ideologies, doesn't really mean anything, and can't be argued. Where did you get the idea that you had the right to property? Who says?


Who says libertarianism isn't an irrefutable axiom? How would one go about disproving that if their sole weapon is that of the entomological destroyer, who in turn for dismantling a philosophy at whim, destroys their means of destruction.

The justification which leads us to claim that a circle cannot be square is not the same as the justification which leads us to claim rights. The former is an inexorable fact of our own reasoning abilities which is so true and evident to everyone that it can be called an axiom. Rights....or morality of any nature, stems from an emotional desire for our own subsistence and well-being. It has not always existed and it is easy to conceive as false. So in short, no moral tenet of Libertarianism is an axiom.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault