Page 3 of 6 [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

21 Aug 2014, 12:49 am

Raptor wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Sorry man but bombing hospitals and schools with injured people and children in them is not self defense. But just my 2 cents on the matter.


Who do you think I'm talking about? I don't think Raptor has been bombing any schools and hospitals lately but I could be mistaken.

You're not mistaken.
Lowe's and Home Depot have been out of C4 for months. They have the caps and even detcord but not the goshdarned C4. :(


try jerry's they got everything one needs.



Stannis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2014
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,631

21 Aug 2014, 1:02 am

Lukecash12 wrote:

Sure, go ahead and demonize libertarians like Japs during WWII. This paints you in a wonderfully rational light. Or maybe you could try engaging with our proposed alternatives on these issues instead of dismissing them out of hand and perpetrating an argumentum ad absurdum fallacy.


My friend, I've quoted and posted libertarian Noam Chomsky's words many many times in endorsement. I am certainly not opposed to real Libertarians :wink:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwQEgOKEEXI[/youtube]



Last edited by Stannis on 21 Aug 2014, 2:42 am, edited 7 times in total.

Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

21 Aug 2014, 1:04 am

I'm pretty sure basic libertarians don't mind social services for those that actually need it, like the elderly and disabled. They're against the "welfare state", which gives to those that refuse to work, even though they're physically and/or mentally healthy.

I also think there's socialist libertarians that don't mind the "welfare state".

Anyway, I'm an old-school liberal, which is probably close to what people see basic libertarians as, though I don't mind government power as much as long as it's used appropriately.



RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,340
Location: Minnesota, United States

Lukecash12
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2012
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,033

21 Aug 2014, 2:44 am

Stannis wrote:
Lukecash12 wrote:

Sure, go ahead and demonize libertarians like Japs during WWII. This paints you in a wonderfully rational light. Or maybe you could try engaging with our proposed alternatives on these issues instead of dismissing them out of hand and perpetrating an argumentum ad absurdum fallacy.


My friend, I've quoted and posted libertarian Noam Chomsky's words many many times in endorsement. I am certainly not opposed to real Libertarians :wink:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwQEgOKEEXI[/youtube]


For sure bro, what exactly did you mean by "right libertarians" then? I'm a registered libertarian here in america and I just don't see what you're referring to when I look at the people I've voted in who are actually registered as libertarians. Republicans aren't libertarian, they can lean towards libertarian ideas but they are still pretty different.


_________________
There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.
Nahj ul-Balāgha by Ali bin Abu-Talib


Stannis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2014
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,631

21 Aug 2014, 3:42 am

Lukecash12 wrote:

For sure bro, what exactly did you mean by "right libertarians" then? I'm a registered libertarian here in america and I just don't see what you're referring to when I look at the people I've voted in who are actually registered as libertarians. Republicans aren't libertarian, they can lean towards libertarian ideas but they are still pretty different.


You should look at the material that people post. /\

Then watch this. Skip forward to 14:50 It tells an important truth about U.S conservatisms "government can't work" mantra.

Thomas Frank. Toxic Civics for the 20th Century.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASwmUQwb3W8[/youtube]



Last edited by Stannis on 21 Aug 2014, 3:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,440
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Aug 2014, 11:52 am

Raptor wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Stannis wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Stannis wrote:
I know a lot of people on WP advocate things like ethnic cleansing, and nuclear genocide.

Who?

You'll find them in many threads about the middle east.

Ethnic cleansing? Realy? Just because the enemy is of another ethnicity does not advocate ethnic cleansing.
Beng pro-nuclear weapons does not make someone a genocidal maniac. Peace through superior firepower or at least balance of power comes to mind which is a different animal all together.


Thus far it doesn't seem we are achieving peace through superior fire-power.....if you think that just look at the current state of the world and tell me we are really moving towards 'peace' :lol:

It's about helping to ensure our nation does not come under attacked, not what goes on in the rest of the world. Last time I looked out my window I didnt see any ICBM contrails in the sky, tanks coming down my street, or paratroopers descending from above.


Well then it is not peace though superior fire power now is it, also it seems our nation does a lot of concerning itself with what goes on in the rest of the world and even plays a role in causing problems in the rest of the world...not just by the conflicts we get involved in but exploitation of people in third world countries and destruction of various environments in the name of corporate wealth, and of course our government and the very wealthy people of this country benefit.

Doesn't really seem like peace through superior firepower........or like we have all that just to ensure this country doesn't come under attack.


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,440
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Aug 2014, 11:54 am

K_Kelly wrote:
IT'S NOT FAIR, why must conservatives have a huge demographic disadvantage? It's not very fair. How would liberals like it if most on the internet skewed conservative?


I have yet to see most of the internet skewed as liberal........I've seen pleanty of conservatives/republicans, libertarians and other right wingers all over the internet. I would imagine there is a mixture of people of all kinds of political views on the internet. Also though what should people just start becoming conservative so you feel the internet is more fair?


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,440
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Aug 2014, 11:55 am

Dox47 wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Sorry man but bombing hospitals and schools with injured people and children in them is not self defense. But just my 2 cents on the matter.


Who do you think I'm talking about? I don't think Raptor has been bombing any schools and hospitals lately but I could be mistaken.


Ah nevermind totally was thinking of something else....though the something else was being referenced but I can see where i misunderstood...so just ignore that it would be meaningless to this thread.


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,440
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Aug 2014, 12:00 pm

Lukecash12 wrote:
Stannis wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Stannis wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
There's plenty of conservatism, reactionary thought, etc on the internet.....PLENTY!

Don't let the supposed preponderance of liberal thought fool you.




Conservatives rejoice! If you want to be told you're great for being rich or white or male, or kick the s**t out of minorities, or scapegoat the poor while championing semi plausible excuses to funnel public funds to the rich, then you are, I think, well catered for on the internet.

I know a lot of people on WP advocate things like ethnic cleansing, and nuclear genocide. There are also plenty of conservative voices on the internet from Free Republic, to the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, to hundreds of Newscorp publications, MRA's, rightwing "libertarian" astroturfers, and more.


Then there are the right wingers even here that want welfare to be cut/eliminated and their alternative solution/plan to address poverty is usually '...............' I wonder if its because they really draw a blank and cannot think of any other ways of adressing poverty in this country or they just don't want to actually say they are fine with all the people who depend on it ending up dead, or 'oh charity will be just as efficient' which I find naive.


Yep. it seems like right libertarians expect the poor to exchange basic provisions that they need for their survival, for some theoretical rights that they'll never have the resources to take advantage of in any meaningful way.

Right Libertarianism exists to benefit rich people. Right Libertarian movements put massive resources into obscuring class consciousness: tricking poor and middle class people into thinking that their interests are synonymous with those of the mega rich. By eliminating the welfare state, Rand Paul would strip many people of their positive rights, and thus the opportunity for them to derive much benefit from their negative rights.

He seems to be on the right side of some of the more draconian police state stuff, though.
.


Sure, go ahead and demonize libertarians like Japs during WWII. This paints you in a wonderfully rational light. Or maybe you could try engaging with our proposed alternatives on these issues instead of dismissing them out of hand and perpetrating an argumentum ad absurdum fallacy.


OK what are your proposed alternatives for poverty? my whole issue is I do ask conservatives, republicans, libertarians ect who think welfare should be eliminated how then they think poverty should be adressed, most seem to have no real response so a little hard not to assume its either that they don't have an alternative idea or are ok with all those people being left to die and just don't want to say that since it's distasteful to say '(insert group of people) should just die'

Also if you where being demonized like a jap during WWII, it would be much worse than what you've endured here with someone taking an issue with a political philosophy you obviously agree with at least to an extent.


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,440
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Aug 2014, 12:07 pm

NobodyKnows wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Thus far it doesn't seem we are achieving peace through superior fire-power.....if you think that just look at the current state of the world and tell me we are really moving towards 'peace' :lol:


I'm not going to claim that the world is rosy, but when I last checked the academic consensus was that the number of people dying in war was at an all-time low. Read some medieval history. (Spooky stuff.) Even the last 250 years were full of major wars: Napoleon's march on Moscow, Waterloo, the Franco-German war, the Mexican Revolution, the Spanish-American War, the Russo-Japanese War, WWI, WWII, the Russian war in Afghanistan, the Sino-Vietnamese War... I'm forgetting most of them.

I remember a question that you posted several months ago about what libertarianism had to offer people in need. I didn't answer because I didn't consider myself a libertarian and didn't have a specific answer, but not everyone who's skeptical of state power is disinterested in that issue. I quit a tech job to work at a non-profit job that paid almost nothing because I hoped to make a bigger difference there. My problem with government-backed liberalism is the same one that I had with religion - they talk a lot about justice and helping people, but they skim off most of the resources and put most of their effort into protecting their power. It's a church-state.


Yes maybe people dying in war specifically is at an all time low....but war is not the only sign of a lack of peace at least in my opinion.

Also I hardly expect someone who is not a libertarian to be able to answer that from that perspective...so makes sense. Also though I am very skeptical of our government and certianly wary of things moving towards an oppressed state and what not but I think it is a governments responsibility to more less look out for the best intrests of the citizens as a whole....not just the very wealthy, not just the the very wealthy and upper middle class but everyone even the poor and homeless citizens....to me providing welfare is part of that. With that said I would not agree with government oppression of personal rights and freedoms, there still has to be representation of the people in the government to ensure policies are made that reflect what the voters/citizens vote for and what not.


_________________
We won't go back.


Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 45,472
Location: Houston, Texas

21 Aug 2014, 12:52 pm

I think the religious and political beliefs of those on the spectrum are just as diverse and varied as our NT counterparts.


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!

Now proficient in ChatGPT!


sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

21 Aug 2014, 1:49 pm

Dillogic wrote:
I'm pretty sure basic libertarians don't mind social services for those that actually need it, like the elderly and disabled. They're against the "welfare state", which gives to those that refuse to work, even though they're physically and/or mentally healthy.

I also think there's socialist libertarians that don't mind the "welfare state".

Anyway, I'm an old-school liberal, which is probably close to what people see basic libertarians as, though I don't mind government power as much as long as it's used appropriately.


the problem is i look physically and mentally healthy. there for I must just be lazy and refuse to work.
but I want to work. i like working I try to find work. despite looks. I clearly have a disadvantage.
to the tea party if you aren't in a chair/crutchs/walker. then you aren't disabled. also quite a lot of them don't care if you are. you should die, survival of the fittest. and if you in a wheel chair then you wouldn't survive so why should they pay to defy nature for you. besides they have the same job they've had for years and it should be easy for to find work. my challenge to them is fine give me your job and you go find a new one since it is so easy.

i also find it funny how when they lose work they go to welfare. the very thing they said they hate but they'll gladly go on it.
its the old have and have nots. when you have its easy to judge and say those who don't just suck or are lazy. I imagine if I was born into a rich family I would think like that. why isn't everyone rich we'll rich if we can do then anyone can.

but one can only be rich if others aren't rich. if we were all equal then the terms poor, rich, middle class would have no meanings.

the reality is they want the poor to stay poor and die off , more for them.



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

21 Aug 2014, 1:52 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Stannis wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Stannis wrote:
I know a lot of people on WP advocate things like ethnic cleansing, and nuclear genocide.

Who?

You'll find them in many threads about the middle east.

Ethnic cleansing? Realy? Just because the enemy is of another ethnicity does not advocate ethnic cleansing.
Beng pro-nuclear weapons does not make someone a genocidal maniac. Peace through superior firepower or at least balance of power comes to mind which is a different animal all together.


Thus far it doesn't seem we are achieving peace through superior fire-power.....if you think that just look at the current state of the world and tell me we are really moving towards 'peace' :lol:

It's about helping to ensure our nation does not come under attacked, not what goes on in the rest of the world. Last time I looked out my window I didnt see any ICBM contrails in the sky, tanks coming down my street, or paratroopers descending from above.


Well then it is not peace though superior fire power now is it, also it seems our nation does a lot of concerning itself with what goes on in the rest of the world and even plays a role in causing problems in the rest of the world...not just by the conflicts we get involved in but exploitation of people in third world countries and destruction of various environments in the name of corporate wealth, and of course our government and the very wealthy people of this country benefit.

Doesn't really seem like peace through superior firepower........or like we have all that just to ensure this country doesn't come under attack.


well its half cause whenever something goes wrong in another nation they cry out "save us USA" or omg look at the death in that nation "why doesn't the usa do something" when we became a super power both people in our nation and people in other nations decided the US had to be the world police. even if it bankrupts us and destroys us.



NobodyKnows
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Jun 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 635

21 Aug 2014, 2:02 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Also though I am very skeptical of our government and certianly wary of things moving towards an oppressed state and what not but I think it is a governments responsibility to more less look out for the best intrests of the citizens as a whole....not just the very wealthy, not just the the very wealthy and upper middle class but everyone even the poor and homeless citizens....to me providing welfare is part of that. With that said I would not agree with government oppression of personal rights and freedoms, there still has to be representation of the people in the government to ensure policies are made that reflect what the voters/citizens vote for and what not.


I can give a couple of examples of what a freer society might have to offer:

One of the biggest expenses for poor people is housing. Zoning rules tend to keep property prices high, and many were put there for that very purpose at the behest of middle- or upper-class land owners. Allowing more rentals and multi-unit buildings would probably lower housing costs.

Marco Rubio has suggested being more flexible about the qualifications needed to apply for federal jobs. I've always found it silly to require a college degree to work as an Americorps community organizer:

Earlier I wrote:
You don't need a high school education to work as an Americorps community organizer, let alone any type of university degree. There's almost no math, and even a lot of "educated" staffers that I've worked with had sloppy grammar. You need to know how to use a spreadsheet, word processor, and e-mail client, how to fix a paper jam in a printer, and how to be polite to people. They didn't spend much time on any of those topics at my school.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

21 Aug 2014, 6:31 pm

Raptor wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Stannis wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Stannis wrote:
I know a lot of people on WP advocate things like ethnic cleansing, and nuclear genocide.

Who?

You'll find them in many threads about the middle east.

Ethnic cleansing? Realy? Just because the enemy is of another ethnicity does not advocate ethnic cleansing.
Beng pro-nuclear weapons does not make someone a genocidal maniac. Peace through superior firepower or at least balance of power comes to mind which is a different animal all together.


Thus far it doesn't seem we are achieving peace through superior fire-power.....if you think that just look at the current state of the world and tell me we are really moving towards 'peace' :lol:

It's about helping to ensure our nation does not come under attacked, not what goes on in the rest of the world. Last time I looked out my window I didnt see any ICBM contrails in the sky, tanks coming down my street, or paratroopers descending from above.


Sweetleaf wrote:
Well then it is not peace though superior fire power now is it, also it seems our nation does a lot of concerning itself with what goes on in the rest of the world and even plays a role in causing problems in the rest of the world...not just by the conflicts we get involved in but exploitation of people in third world countries and destruction of various environments in the name of corporate wealth, and of course our government and the very wealthy people of this country benefit.

And if we took an isolationist stance the liberals would be screaming for US intervention the next time some banana republic or sandbox dictatorship decides to have a genocide. Personally, I could care less one way or the other about some other country's human rights issues and would just as soon we stayed at home and protected our own interests. Since I can't see that happening and we're going to have to continue to be what passes for a stabilizing force in the world then we should have a terrifyingly formidable force to do our bidding with.[/quote]

Quote:
Doesn't really seem like peace through superior firepower........or like we have all that just to ensure this country doesn't come under attack.

Peace through superior firepower or peace through strength, or whatever. It's a rule of thumb and one I continue to believe in and support.


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson