Total Posts:35|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Rothbard as a Kid

Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2013 11:20:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/18/2013 11:19:45 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Private property is monopoly.

How to be a communist: say oxymoronic things.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2013 11:24:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
You're hugely misrepresenting that kid in thinking he's anarchist, dude. You think he's capitalist? Private property is obviously monopoly. Consider the kid's tirade about passports; are there not similar documents to go with private property?
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2013 11:32:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
He's actually communist, or as an end result anyway. I've always stated that my declaring myself communist was to express sentiment. Breeding man for love rather than hate has always been my solution. You're just mad and haven't a clue.
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 6:51:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/18/2013 11:24:37 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
You're hugely misrepresenting that kid in thinking he's anarchist, dude. You think he's capitalist? Private property is obviously monopoly. Consider the kid's tirade about passports; are there not similar documents to go with private property?

http://darkernet.in...
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 10:38:15 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/18/2013 11:24:37 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Private property is obviously monopoly.

Make an argument.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 11:43:54 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 10:48:02 AM, Brain_crazy wrote:
At 9/18/2013 11:08:14 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:


He's cool.

stupid kid. he's just like marx a lot of criticism no answers.

The irony of this reply..
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 11:58:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 6:51:49 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 9/18/2013 11:24:37 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
You're hugely misrepresenting that kid in thinking he's anarchist, dude. You think he's capitalist? Private property is obviously monopoly. Consider the kid's tirade about passports; are there not similar documents to go with private property?

http://darkernet.in...

And you're certain of the connotations to go with that? Anarchist on here generally means anarcho-capitalist.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 12:00:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 10:38:15 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
At 9/18/2013 11:24:37 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Private property is obviously monopoly.

Make an argument.

I made one, which you've ignored. To own property is to hold a monopoly on property. Nations are just private property on a larger scale. This is pretty simple stuff.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 12:03:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 11:58:28 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/19/2013 6:51:49 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 9/18/2013 11:24:37 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
You're hugely misrepresenting that kid in thinking he's anarchist, dude. You think he's capitalist? Private property is obviously monopoly. Consider the kid's tirade about passports; are there not similar documents to go with private property?

http://darkernet.in...

And you're certain of the connotations to go with that? Anarchist on here generally means anarcho-capitalist.

There is, after all, anarcho-communism as well as anarcho-capitalism.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 12:05:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
http://en.wikipedia.org...

"Anarchist schools of thought can differ fundamentally, supporting anything from extreme individualism to complete collectivism."

Charlie Chaplin certainly seems to me to lean towards the latter.
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 1:37:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"Mine!" -libertarianism summed up, complete with an ethical system and a political and economic framework.
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 4:04:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 1:37:03 PM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
"Mine!" -libertarianism summed up, complete with an ethical system and a political and economic framework.

You are implying something is wrong with being defensive over your own possessions, vs. letting people who feel entitled take them under the guise of 'fairness', which is really just thievery.
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 4:33:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 12:00:46 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/19/2013 10:38:15 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
At 9/18/2013 11:24:37 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Private property is obviously monopoly.

Make an argument.

I made one, which you've ignored. To own property is to hold a monopoly on property. Nations are just private property on a larger scale. This is pretty simple stuff.

Difference:
Owners of private property claim legitimate ownership over their own property; states claim ownership over property that is not legitimately theirs.

Have you ever been invited into someone's house before?
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 5:14:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 4:33:55 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
At 9/19/2013 12:00:46 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/19/2013 10:38:15 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
At 9/18/2013 11:24:37 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Private property is obviously monopoly.

Make an argument.

I made one, which you've ignored. To own property is to hold a monopoly on property. Nations are just private property on a larger scale. This is pretty simple stuff.

Difference:
Owners of private property claim legitimate ownership over their own property; states claim ownership over property that is not legitimately theirs.

Have you ever been invited into someone's house before?

It is as legitimately theirs as it is legitimately yours. You have, no doubt, bought it from someone else, who bought it from someone else, and then down the line one of those people almost certainly bought the land from the government, which bought it from the French, which stole it from (in my state) Native Americans, who almost certainly were not the original inhabitants.
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 7:58:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 4:04:32 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 9/19/2013 1:37:03 PM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
"Mine!" -libertarianism summed up, complete with an ethical system and a political and economic framework.

You are implying something is wrong with being defensive over your own possessions, vs. letting people who feel entitled take them under the guise of 'fairness', which is really just thievery.

Right. Let's try being coherent now.
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 8:40:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 1:37:03 PM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
"Mine!" -libertarianism summed up, complete with an ethical system and a political and economic framework.

I don't understand why having a consistent rule regarding private property is considered selfish, or equated to "Mine!'.. whatever that means. It's just as much about respecting other people's property as about defending your own. The rejection of this rule leads to some sort of utilitarian slippery slope.. Do you own anything? How can you justify owning that thing, when it could be better used by countless other people?
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 11:22:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 11:58:28 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/19/2013 6:51:49 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 9/18/2013 11:24:37 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
You're hugely misrepresenting that kid in thinking he's anarchist, dude. You think he's capitalist? Private property is obviously monopoly. Consider the kid's tirade about passports; are there not similar documents to go with private property?

http://darkernet.in...

And you're certain of the connotations to go with that? Anarchist on here generally means anarcho-capitalist.

In the video he clearly criticizes all forms of Government and political power, while praising free enterprise.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 12:00:54 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 11:22:39 PM, sdavio wrote:
At 9/19/2013 11:58:28 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/19/2013 6:51:49 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 9/18/2013 11:24:37 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
You're hugely misrepresenting that kid in thinking he's anarchist, dude. You think he's capitalist? Private property is obviously monopoly. Consider the kid's tirade about passports; are there not similar documents to go with private property?

http://darkernet.in...

And you're certain of the connotations to go with that? Anarchist on here generally means anarcho-capitalist.

In the video he clearly criticizes all forms of Government and political power, while praising free enterprise.

Didn't cop that bit about free enterprise. Still, though. It doesn't really mean very much.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 12:03:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 4:33:55 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
At 9/19/2013 12:00:46 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/19/2013 10:38:15 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
At 9/18/2013 11:24:37 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Private property is obviously monopoly.

Make an argument.

I made one, which you've ignored. To own property is to hold a monopoly on property. Nations are just private property on a larger scale. This is pretty simple stuff.

Difference:
Owners of private property claim legitimate ownership over their own property; states claim ownership over property that is not legitimately theirs.

Arbitrary. And there's much land in Ireland still owned by the heirs of English landlords, too.

Have you ever been invited into someone's house before?
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 7:27:34 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 4:33:55 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
At 9/19/2013 12:00:46 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/19/2013 10:38:15 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
At 9/18/2013 11:24:37 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Private property is obviously monopoly.

Make an argument.

I made one, which you've ignored. To own property is to hold a monopoly on property. Nations are just private property on a larger scale. This is pretty simple stuff.

Difference:
Owners of private property claim legitimate ownership over their own property; states claim ownership over property that is not legitimately theirs.

Have you ever been invited into someone's house before?

(1) why is Lockean homesteading the only legitimate way to originally own property?
(2) what do we do given that most property *hasn't* been homesteaded (or otherwise traded) in a way that Ancaps would consider legitimate?
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 10:24:39 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/20/2013 7:27:34 AM, Noumena wrote:
(1) why is Lockean homesteading the only legitimate way to originally own property?

I think a better question would be: What alternative system for determining original ownership would be legitimate and why? The Lockean principle is one of "highest claim", i.e., in a conflict of claims we need to evaluate who has the higher claim to the property. First-come-first-serve seems like a fairly self-evident way to make that determination. But if you really want to delve into the reasoning, go read some Locke.

(2) what do we do given that most property *hasn't* been homesteaded (or otherwise traded) in a way that Ancaps would consider legitimate?

We can't right all the wrongs of history because doing so would commit even more wrongs. For example, giving NYC back to Native Americans would displace millions of people from their homes and do untold amounts of economic damage to the country and the world. Besides, even if the land does "rightfully" belong to NAs there is still infinitely more value in the actual buildings and other property built on that land. Shouldn't the people who built NYC own that? And if we gave the land back to NAs, wouldn't they at least have to compensate the owners for the added value of the buildings, etc? The people who originally committed the crimes of stealing land from NAs are long dead, and the people who own it now are not guilty of theft. Would it be just to take it from them? On the flip side, the original NA owners are also long dead, and while you could make the argument that their heirs should probably own the land, we have no way of knowing if that land would have actually been passed down through generations instead of being traded had it not been stolen in the first place. It's a difficult problem.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 10:54:02 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Yeah, WSA. You're right. What we need to do is have Africans draw lines in the literal sand to stake their claim and it will all work well from there. I mean it's obvious. The rich definitely won't just rape the poor. I mean that's not happening now, is it? Why'd you guys have to get Lockean?
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 1:01:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/20/2013 10:54:02 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Yeah, WSA. You're right. What we need to do is have Africans draw lines in the literal sand to stake their claim and it will all work well from there. I mean it's obvious. The rich definitely won't just rape the poor. I mean that's not happening now, is it? Why'd you guys have to get Lockean?

In the countries that respect private property the most and have the most eocnomic freedom, the population is wealthier than those with less economic freedom. This is a statistical fact. African countries are notorious for lacking economic freedom except for a few countries such as Mauritius and Botswana.

The most damning piece of evidence against you: A chart showing Economic Freedom and the Income Level of the Poor [http://www.econlib.org...]. The poorest 10% of citizens in the freest countries earn on average 8.5x as much as the poorest 10% in the least economically free countries (most notably socialist states, many of which are in Africa).

So, given that this is a reality. Would you rather have the poor be extremely poor in socialist and communist countries or would you rather have the poor by 8.5x as rich in economically free countries?
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 3:49:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/20/2013 1:01:42 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
At 9/20/2013 10:54:02 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Yeah, WSA. You're right. What we need to do is have Africans draw lines in the literal sand to stake their claim and it will all work well from there. I mean it's obvious. The rich definitely won't just rape the poor. I mean that's not happening now, is it? Why'd you guys have to get Lockean?

In the countries that respect private property the most and have the most eocnomic freedom, the population is wealthier than those with less economic freedom. This is a statistical fact. African countries are notorious for lacking economic freedom except for a few countries such as Mauritius and Botswana.

The most damning piece of evidence against you: A chart showing Economic Freedom and the Income Level of the Poor [http://www.econlib.org...]. The poorest 10% of citizens in the freest countries earn on average 8.5x as much as the poorest 10% in the least economically free countries (most notably socialist states, many of which are in Africa).

So, given that this is a reality. Would you rather have the poor be extremely poor in socialist and communist countries or would you rather have the poor by 8.5x as rich in economically free countries?

It's not that socialism holds people down, dude. It's not that no socialism allows for progression, but the eradication of the virulent monopolies already in place that does this. Think about it. I mean a state really isn't so different from a corporation, just a corporation taken to the extreme. What if a select few owned all the world's resources, say; would these few not be equivalent to your political despots? And they would have legitimate claim to their despotism, as per what you and many others stand behind, and with that your position is reduced to absurdity, just more of the same. Again, are there not documents similar to passports to go with private property?

But sure, malignant monopolies should be torn down, but then in what fashion will we avoid them reforming? Oh, that will just sort itself out? I dunno, dude. To me, your statistics are perhaps but illustration of reinvigorated power struggle where an old tyrant has fallen, but then maybe technology will set us free. One thing is for sure, though: we must wage a war on power. Complete collectivism is the sentiment behind your kid's tirade, whatever you would take 'free enterprise' for.