-->
@Greyparrot
no they are not simply you are wrong, try to documtent that
Left-Wing Libertarian? Can it be a thing?
Posts
Total:
60
-->
@Greyparrot
California is not a nordic nation
-->
@zedvictor4
scandanavia are the best free st places
-->
@Greyparrot
@billbatard
@billbatard:
So, let's apply your reasoning in a different context, and test the consistency of your moral and ethics.
I am part of a group of twelve. They elected me their leader. There are 10 men, and two women in total. I propose a referendum where if the vote were to go through, all the men would have to rape all the women. Naturally, the women vote against the prospect of their own rape. Three other men dissent. The vote goes through in a majority decision of 7 to 5. Your resolution to this would be to tell the women: "you will be free to leave we wont kep you here dont let the door hit your ass, it wont be a prison prsions dont leave the door unlocked if you dont like treatment you leave and good luck to you else where" even if it means being coerced out of their lands?
@Greyparrot:
It's the lesser of evils; but evil, even lessened, is still evil. Though, I will say, it's quite amusing that Bay Area residents are fleeing to Nevada given California's staunch support for destructive "left-wing" policy.
-->
@Athias
this is why we have a constitution and limits on democracy
-->
@billbatard
How is it "everyone's land"?excuse me your land? no see thats the problem thats everyones land
-->
@Athias
How is in not? why do you assume property is actually a thing, it isnt to me
-->
@billbatard
So there are aspects of social interaction that will not be subject to democratic decision. Who decides and why?this is why we have a constitution and limits on democracy
-->
@billbatard
Because property is a thing. It's a mechanism for dispute resolution.How is in not? why do you assume property is actually a thing, it isnt to me
-->
@Athias
explain how it is a thing then, i'm stupid explain it to me
-->
@Athias
Again that is why we have a Constitution the Constitution decides how is the constittution agreed upon it was writen long ago and amendment now and then by 2/3rds vote so in the end we the people do decide to curb our own power
-->
@billbatard
explain how it is a thing then, i'm stupid explain it to me
"Society" is an aggregate/circuit of individuals. And because they're individuals, they at times can share similar subjective values, or sustain conflicting values. Property is a mechanism which best resolves disputes over the services of a good or resource by creating a standard premised on an objective self-interest (e.g. exclusive control over one's homestead, labor, skills, etc.) Property extends, for lack of better terms, an innate sense of possession to that which is serviceable to their own self-interests, including the option to appropriate it to themselves exclusively. As long as this mechanism is respected by each individual, it will produce the optimal means to resolve any dispute among them which may arise.
Again that is why we have a Constitution the Constitution decides how is the constittution agreed upon it was writen long ago and amendment now and then by 2/3rds vote so in the end we the people do decide to curb our own power
If democratic decision isn't the ultimate arbiter in social interaction, then who or what is? Who decides that the constitution is the final authority and why? Democracy? Isn't that a contradiction?
-->
@Athias
Which is why homeless people have no problem leaving feces on public property."Society" is an aggregate/circuit of individuals. And because they're individuals, they at times can share similar subjective values, or sustain conflicting values. Property is a mechanism which best resolves disputes over the services of a good or resource by creating a standard premised on an objective self-interest (e.g. exclusive control over one's homestead, labor, skills, etc.) Property extends, for lack of better terms, an innate sense of possession to that which is serviceable to their own self-interests, including the option to appropriate it to themselves exclusively. As long as this mechanism is respected by each individual, it will produce the optimal means to resolve any dispute among them which may arise.
It is not "their land"
it is "our land"
-->
@Greyparrot
Which is why homeless people have no problem leaving feces on public property.It is not "their land"it is "our land"
And because we share a collective consciousness, it was our will that feces be dumped on public property. No dispute, there; no demand for a device that may resolve a potential dispute because no individual has his own interest.
-->
@Greyparrot
As I see it, there is only one land available.
-->
@zedvictor4
Hail Zedra.
the term libertarain was originally a term describing anrchist/socialists who advocated for stateless socialism
-->
@Athias
the us military dude thats who decides
-->
@bsh1
I don't think libertarianism is left- or right-wing. It is it's own thing. I don't see why we should view the political spectrum as linear.A liberal wants government regulation of the economic sphere, but not of the private sphere.A conservative wants government regulation of the private sphere, but not of the economic sphere.A libertarian wants government regulation of neither.A statist/populist wants government regulation of both.
A vast oversimplification, but essentially correct.
Post 10 of this thread is a good example to directly see this manifest in the way people that do identify as being somewhere along the traditional left-right spectrum perceive those that do not. Despite being technically accurate that post is heavily skewed by perception, and all the worse off for it.
The problem that we are noticing arises in part I think due to the tendency of voters to start out having a political ideology (whatever that ideology is or how they came to it) then begin to ponder upon 'political strategy' for various groups or parties that they recognize as aligning with those ideologies to some degree. This 'pondering of strategy' (for lack of a better term that I can think of) is a significant contributing factor towards the individuals tenancy to gradually identify more with the group than with their ideologies that they started with.
What I have said here is a vast oversimplification too, just the tip of the iceberg for the 'red and blue mentality' phenomenon, but I do think for a number of reasons I won't go into here that this is a bigger contributing factor than many people realize.
-->
@billbatard
Martial Law? So the basis of your "social democracy" is militaristic coercion?the us military dude thats who decides
it was for 150 years still is in europe
-->
@Athias
only if you misbahave canada and scandanavia are places i admire and they are very peaceful but nordics tend to be well behaved are you? i have no qualms about sing military force or killig lots of people even civilians the terror was sused both in franch and russian and i am all for that revolutions have to be bloody and the people that make them have to have ice in their veins you make omelt you crack eggs comrade.. and i am actually looking forward to that
-->
@billbatard
Bill.
How about some punctuation and spellchecking?
Nonetheless it makes for fun reading.
Regards.
-->
@zedvictor4
do you have any idea how hard that is with a hangover and the sex pistols playing god save the queen?
-->
@billbatard
I gave up excessive drinking and the Sex Pistols approximately 40 years ago.
Perhaps it's time to move on.
You're not a teenager anymore Bill.
-->
@billbatard
only if you misbahave canada and scandanavia are places i admire and they are very peaceful but nordics tend to be well behaved are you?
So what would be the function of the aforementioned constitution if arbitrated conduct informs legal privileges?
i have no qualms about sing military force or killig lots of people even civilians
Hence, your liberal directives and imperatives exceed no more than my aforestated description--socialist propaganda.
revolutions have to be bloody
Not necessarily.
and the people that make them have to have ice in their veins
You've confused moral conviction with murderous psychopathy.
-->
@Athias
by defintion i am illiberal, study the term
-->
@zedvictor4
meh
-->
@zedvictor4
meh
Meh. Is that Goy or Non-Goy?