PDA

View Full Version : Chomsky refutes "libertarianism"




Brassmouth
11-13-2008, 08:35 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxPUvQZ3rcQ

I just wanted to hear some of your responses. Obviously he has a very skewed, if not completely false, view of what American libertarianism is. The applause almost made me retch.

HOLLYWOOD
11-13-2008, 08:51 PM
A Master of Words, is usually... A Master Manipulator.


yes, probably a Master Baiter too!

priest_of_syrinx
11-13-2008, 08:51 PM
2:50 - It sounds like he claims that the United States developed because of corporate fascism. :confused:

Pennsylvania
11-13-2008, 08:55 PM
//

jeepndesert
11-13-2008, 09:01 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxPUvQZ3rcQ

I just wanted to hear some of your responses. Obviously he has a very skewed, if not completely false, view of what American libertarianism is. The applause almost made me retch.

well, he does have some points. unchecked capitalism results in monopolies and excessive wealth in the hands of a few which are certainly more dangerous as governments themselves. once you reach a certain thresold, you can prevent competition from developing because you can simply use your wealth to buy them out or price them out business.

libertarianism does need a reality check. they also need to address the henry george and thomas paine principles. i think adam smith and murray rothbard touch on this subject as well. man does not own the land and natural resources. ownership is simply a convenience in distribution but it still does not fairly distribute.

american and republican party culture has corrupted the whole of original libertarian principles with too much lifting of a subset of principles (the free market) because many are just stupid and miss the full point because they are in a fight against communism, which they falsely equate to socialism.

and libertarianism will continue to fail in american politics until they lift the rest of the principles required for libertarianism to work with the same vigor.

"libertarian socialism" is really just saying, hey, you remember the free market principles but you can't forgot the socialism principles of libertarianism. i prefer the term geolibertarian because it hits the root of the socialist principles necessary for libertarian principles to work. there are still further principles that need to be addressed, such as excessive accumulation of wealth and power--the principle behind anti-monopoly, anti-trust laws.

we use libertarian as an umbrella for principles. libertarianism isn't meant to be a synonym for free market capitalism. if you want free market capitalism, call it what it is.... anarcho-capitalism. libertarianism is not anarcho-capitalism. capitalism is just a component of libertarianism.

of course you also have the social issues which i think most agree except on the abortion debate.

democratic rule, division of power, republic law and all the secured rights, checks and balances, and decentralization of power are also important principles that fall under the banner of libertarianism.

libertarianism is much more than just free market capitalism. the free market is not the cure all--just a necessary convenience.

and i also like to add that i think the austrian school of economics and the federal reserve system has also corrupted libertarianism. i believe it is still debatable on the pros and cons of gold or silver vs. true public fiat currency. something just really strikes me wrong about storing a precious metal in a warehouse just so people can exchange goods and services. not only that, the prices of gold and silver can take wild swings which corrupt the process of a stable means of exchange. the markets of gold and silver can also be manipulated in the same way of any fiat currency, especially when you start tinkering with partial backing. money is a means of exchange and it's properties of a commodity should be diminished. using a commodity like gold and silver doesn't diminish those properties.

there is of course the consideration of free market currencies, but really, the market is there, but nobody really uses them except in a limited capacity within one local community, a few stores which happen to like liberty dollars, and a few local barter systems with marketing and capitalization benefits.

Brassmouth
11-13-2008, 09:07 PM
well, he does have some points.

I don't really think so. There's a video response that refutes him which I think is quite accurate.


unchecked capitalism results in monopolies and excessive wealth in the hands of a few which are certainly more dangerous as governments themselves. once you reach a certain thresold, you can prevent competition from developing because you can simply use your wealth to buy them out or price them out business.

False. In a true free market monopolies are near impossible. Oftentimes the "monopolies" pointed to throughout history only came about as a result of government intervention. The same can even be said for huge non-monopoly corporations such as Wal-Mart, that have enjoyed many government hand-outs.

Paulitician
11-13-2008, 09:40 PM
There's already a dozen threads on Chomsky, and many here have dealt with the subject of monopolies. It gets so tiring. I'm actually not opposed to many libertarian socialist ideas. In fact, I support all libertarianist movements, but a libertarian society in my opinion can not just be expected, it has to continually fought for... it's a constant struggle. So, when people criticize the idea of a free market because they endless monopolies will dominate it (a position that falls on its face IMO), my response is that individuals should always resist these monopolies as voluntary self-interested individuals because we want a just society, free entry etc. I.E. we should resist all tyranny even though the tyranny of the State may not exist. I mean, I don't know what libertarian wouldn't agree with that. My opinion is that voilence and force are not ways to solve problems, or at least shouldn't, but instead complete voluntary cooperation. We don't know how such a situation would end up looking like, and of course there will always be those that use voilence and force (and we'd have to figure ways to deal with this and minimize it), but in my opinion it's stupid to institutionalize it. But anyway, I don't really consider Chomsky a libertarian socialist. I suppose he is philosophically, but he sounds more like a social Democrat more than anything else.

Conza88
11-13-2008, 09:52 PM
Here is an article or interview or something i found of Noam Chomsky attacking "Right-Libertarianism," or whatever he likes to call True Libertarianism. I was wondering how you guys would refute this:

Man: What's the difference between "libertarian" and "anarchist," exactly?Libertarian: based on the non-aggression axiom + property rights.. the role of government is to protect the life, liberty and property of it's people.

Anarchist: well.. it depends on what type of anarchist.. You can have anarcho-capitalist, anarcho-communist (tribes)... basically it comes down to anarchy being without a state, or where it is only voluntary to support it, i.e via taxes etc. Since the state is theft, coercion, and violence - anarchists, well anarcho-capitalists don't want it at all, they contend it as evil - and thus should not be there.. while the minarchists / libertarians contend it is a necessary evil, and as such should be limited to as small as possible.

I'll assume when Chomsky means "anarchist" he's referring to anarcho-capitalists, as he does mention Rothbard. They believe in property rights and the non aggression axiom aswell.

Chomsky: There's no difference, really. I think they're the same thing. But you see, "libertarian" has a special meaning in the United States. The United States is off the spectrum of the main tradition in this respect: what's called "libertarianism" here is unbridled capitalism.

No, they are similar (obviously) but there is a difference. The libertarians believe in the state; just as small as possible. Anarcho-capitalists don't believe in the state. He goes for the linguistic approach, or definition - he just fails to recognise their true nature. Ignorance is what I believe it's called. ;) Unbridled capitalism? That'd be anarcho-capitalism.. The state is negative for libertarians; protect the life, liberty, property... so it steps in if those have been violated etc. Anyway; does he know what true capitalism is? OR does he think the current system is capitalism? :rolleyes:

Now, that's always been opposed in the European libertarian tradition, where every anarchist has been a socialist—because the point is, if you have unbridled capitalism, you have all kinds of authority: you have extreme authority.

He's mixing the terms. It's kind of odd, no doubt he is intelligent - he uses half truths for the set up, but the finale - is the lie or mistruth. The same with marxism etc in a way... you can clearly see there are classes in society; that's the set up, but the 'finale' is why that is, and their proposed solutions to rectify it etc all lead down the wrong path / direction, to a place you REALLY don't want to be.

"if you have unbridled capitalism, you have all kinds of authority: you have extreme authority"... say; unbridled capitalism (and I would REALLY like his definition of "capitalism") like does he know anything about subjective value, trade, positive sum game etc. etc... why is it a BAD thing to begin with? He is dissing economic freedom. The guys ignorant to the extreme. Authority is the state. With anarcho-capitalism, how you going to get extreme authority? :confused:

If capital is privately controlled, then people are going to have to rent themselves in order to survive. Now, you can say, "they rent themselves freely, it's a free contract"—but that's a joke. If your choice is, "do what I tell you or starve," that's not a choice—it's in fact what was commonly referred to as wage slavery in more civilized times, like the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, for example.
LOL! Chomsky would probably learn MORE from this comic book, than his entire studies in economics. How an Economy Grows (http://freedom-school.com/money/how-an-economy-grows.pdf) People can create their own capital, through sacrifice. Also, what's he mean by "Capital"? Factors of production, land and labor? or savings? He could be contending wealth? You can't control ALL labor. (capital) Labor is a product of your property (actions etc.) And if you're a libertarian or anarcho-capitalist - the state doesn't own your body.

You don't need to rent yourself to survive. Voluntarism is not a joke. You decide what you do with your labor and capital. Wage slavery in the 18th and 19th centuries - errrrr NOOooo, they CHOSE to work in factories etc, because according to their SUBJECTIVE value; they were better off doing so, than working the farm! This is the same contention Marx held, and the excuse is he had that view - because of the times... WHICH IS BULLSHIT.

Frederik Bastiat - wrote in the exact same period. He fken pwns Marx & that retarded notion.

The American version of "libertarianism" is an aberration, though—nobody really takes it seriously. I mean, everybody knows that a society that worked by American libertarian principles would self-destruct in three seconds. The only reason people pretend to take it seriously is because you can use it as a weapon. Like, when somebody comes out in favor of a tax, you can say: "No, I'm a libertarian, I'm against that tax"—but of course, I'm still in favor of the government building roads, and having schools, and killing Libyans, and all that sort of stuff.

Those who despise Liberty, sure do take it seriously... Look at how they treated the former "Libertarian" candidate. ;) "I mean, everybody knows that a society that worked by American libertarian principles would self-destruct in three seconds." In bold for the sheer retardedness of this statement. EVER heard of the US Constitution? :rolleyes: This clown really needs to go learn about the Gold Standard - and what it brings = PEACE for starters, among other things. As for his comment about for this; but not for this tax. (Really he should mean coercion) and that libertarians contend that it is ok in some places; roads etc etc. I would agree with this, I argued for privatising the roads with a NEO-con friend... he was like, "yeah that'd work, but it will never happen." :) Which is why I associate / label myself when I have to - as either a libertarian / minarchist / anarcho-capitalist... depending on how good I know the anarchists position / the level of knowledge of the people etc. Slapping someone in the face with anarcho-capitalism, isn't going to work - if they think the minimum wage is good, or that the role of government should be positive... Haha.... :p baby steps.

Now, there are consistent libertarians, people like Murray Rothbard—and if you just read the world that they describe, it's a world so full of hate that no human being would want to live in it. This is a world where you don't have roads because you don't see any reason why you should cooperate in building a road that you're not going to use: if you want a road, you get together with a bunch of other people who are going to use that road and you build it, then you charge people to ride on it. If you don't like the pollution from somebody's automobile, you take them to court and you litigate it. Who would want to live in a world like that? It's a world built on hatred.19
Consistent Libertarians - translation: anarcho-capitalists. Like Murry Rothbard. ;) Well, well, well - Chomsky shows his true colours. Typical socialist; thinks humanity - given the chance at voluntary action - would desolve into hatred. Wow... maybe he should elect himself as a social engineer? And run everyone's lives? :rolleyes: This is the most retarded analysis / commentary on privatizing roads that I have ever seen. The ONLY difference between that and a undergrad socialist tool, is that Chomsky has a reputation that lends his analysis credibility.

Want to know what'd happen in such a situation? Let's ask our old mate Rothbard. I'm certain Chomsky only dropped the name, so he could gain more credence for his "argument".

11 The Public Sector, II: Streets and Roads (http://mises.org/rothbard/newliberty10.asp), Audio (http://mises.org/media.aspx?action=category&ID=87).

The whole thing's not even worth talking about, though. First of all, it couldn't function for a second—and if it could, all you'd want to do is get out, or commit suicide or something. But this is a special American aberration, it's not really serious
His role: He brings the intelligent to the table with his foreign policy, which is usually the most obvious detriment of the state - WAR. As "War is the health of the state"... but what he does then, is after having a discussion with people, he leads them down a hallway, constantly whispering into their ears. Now - there are two doors present at the end of the corridor, "Socialism / collectivism" on the left, and "Liberty / Individualism", on the right. (Not trying to use false paradigm, but in terms of economic labelling, that's what the state likes to use - to keep you in the box - helping propel their notion that; if you like capitalism, you must like war etc etc. See how it works?) Anyway, Noam Chomsky presents both doors to you, the one marked Liberty has "Danger" written all over it etc, painted red, with black stains. The one on the left is clean, green and inviting. He doesn't essentially tell you which one to go into or adopt....
the choice is yours, but you've been prepped - and you just don't know it.

Thing is, it's just the door. Once you open it; that green and clean becomes red, and mean. That's the truth beneath the surface. The one marked Liberty / Individualism, opens up into green fields, and a clean environment. It is privately owned, the person cares about it. Public owned: - well why should "I" do it? :cool:

Conza88
11-13-2008, 09:53 PM
^^ From Chomsky on Libertarianism/Anarchism (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=153224&page=4)

Chomsky = fken pwned...

Brassmouth
11-13-2008, 10:06 PM
Great summary, Conza. However, I disagree with you that there is a distinction between libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism. I think minarchism and anarcho-capitalism are both subsets of libertarianism, assuming the nonaggression axiom is what chiefly defines libertarianism.

Conza88
11-13-2008, 10:25 PM
Great summary, Conza. However, I disagree with you that there is a distinction between libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism. I think minarchism and anarcho-capitalism are both subsets of libertarianism, assuming the nonaggression axiom is what chiefly defines libertarianism.

The Non-Aggression Axiom of Libertarianism by Walter Block (http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block26.html)



The non-aggression axiom is the lynchpin of the philosophy of libertarianism. It states, simply, that it shall be legal for anyone to do anything he wants, provided only that he not initiate (or threaten) violence against the person or legitimately owned property of another. That is, in the free society, one has the right to manufacture, buy or sell any good or service at any mutually agreeable terms. Thus, there would be no victimless crime prohibitions, price controls, government regulation of the economy, etc.

If the non-aggression axiom is the basic building block of libertarianism, private property rights based on (Lockean and Rothbardian) homesteading principles are the foundation. For if A reaches into B’s pocket, pulls out his wallet and runs away with it, we cannot know that A is the aggressor and B the victim. It may be that A is merely repossessing his own wallet, the one B stole from him yesterday. But given a correct grounding in property rights, the non-aggression axiom is a very powerful tool in the war of ideas. For most individuals believe, and fervently so, that it is wrong to invade other people or their property. Who, after all, favors theft, murder or rape? With this as an entering wedge, libertarians are free to apply this axiom to all of human action, including, radically, to unions, taxes, and even government itself.

:)

sailor
11-14-2008, 06:32 AM
Well the man prefers Pol Pot to Ron Paul. What more to say?

Truth Warrior
11-14-2008, 06:37 AM
Noam is the master of the manufactured bogus straw man refutation. :p :rolleyes:

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 07:16 AM
i personally don't care for chomsky nor the extreme application of a single principle especially when it is a false principle because it doesn't address equal access to land and natural resources.

i got refuted on the monopoly concept, but all other points are completely ignored.

even under the monopoly concept, how can you prove that monopolies won't exist if you make the excuse they've developed because of state invention when also monopolies were also prevented because of the existence of state invention.

the concept is most simple in a complete free market because people are free to get extremely rich and buy out their competition or resort to other means to monopolize, including building trusts.

money is dangerous in concentrated large quantities. 1 million dollars to a trillionaire is the same as 1 dollar to a millionaire. think about it. it is as dangerous as a neutron bomb. it is as dangerous in a free market as a fascist state.

but anyway, i'm falling into the neocon trap where the main point gets ignored. what about equal access to land and natural resources????!!!!!!

free market "libertarians" and chomskies are both as bad as the neocons who ignore the important issues.

Truth Warrior
11-14-2008, 07:22 AM
i personally don't care for chomsky nor the extreme application of a single principle especially when it is a false principle because it doesn't address equal access to land and natural resources.

i got refuted on the monopoly concept, but all other points are completely ignored.

even under the monopoly concept, how can you prove that monopolies won't exist if you're excuse they've developed because of state invention when also monopolies were prevented because of the existence of state invention.

the concept is most simple in a complete free market because people are free to get extremely rich and buy out their competition or resort to other means to monopolize, including building trusts.

but anyway, i'm falling into the neocon trap where i ignore the main point. what about equal access to land and natural resources????!!!!!!

free market "libertarians" are as bad as the neocons who ignore the important issues. List some of the "monopolies" ( so called ) in the US economy that are NOT government created, blessed and sanctioned. :rolleyes:

Conza88
11-14-2008, 07:54 AM
i personally don't care for chomsky nor the extreme application of a single principle especially when it is a false principle because it doesn't address equal access to land and natural resources.

i got refuted on the monopoly concept, but all other points are completely ignored.

even under the monopoly concept, how can you prove that monopolies won't exist if you make the excuse they've developed because of state invention when also monopolies were also prevented because of the existence of state invention.

the concept is most simple in a complete free market because people are free to get extremely rich and buy out their competition or resort to other means to monopolize, including building trusts.

money is dangerous in concentrated large quantities. 1 million dollars to a trillionaire is the same as 1 dollar to a millionaire. think about it. it is as dangerous as a neutron bomb. it is as dangerous in a free market as a fascist state.

but anyway, i'm falling into the neocon trap where the main point gets ignored. what about equal access to land and natural resources????!!!!!!

free market "libertarians" and chomskies are both as bad as the neocons who ignore the important issues.


http://data.tumblr.com/zcTqHiK8c6ulufs0XQ1ziN4l_400.jpg

sailor
11-14-2008, 08:04 AM
free market "libertarians" and chomskies are both as bad as the neocons who ignore the important issues.

What the bloody hell are you doing on a pro-Ron Paul message board then?

Ron Paul decided he was going to run for congress after he got familiar with the Austrian school of economics. Austrians are nothing if not pro-market.

The_Orlonater
11-14-2008, 09:30 AM
The Non-Aggression Axiom of Libertarianism by Walter Block (http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block26.html)



:)

One difference between the minarchists and the anarchists is one important thing that I believe only a truly liberal(classical liberal) government can give. A court system and jail to punish those harming others or violating or steal private property.

The_Orlonater
11-14-2008, 09:31 AM
List some of the "monopolies" ( so called ) in the US economy that are NOT government created, blessed and sanctioned. :rolleyes:

Let me think...

I give up.

Truth Warrior
11-14-2008, 09:45 AM
Let me think...

I give up. ME too. ;)

sailor
11-14-2008, 10:10 AM
One difference between the minarchists and the anarchists is one important thing that I believe only a truly liberal(classical liberal) government can give. A court system and jail to punish those harming others or violating or steal private property.

Jail is overrated. I prefer floggings. Makes for a better spectacle.

The_Orlonater
11-14-2008, 10:31 AM
Jail is overrated. I prefer floggings. Makes for a better spectacle.

Heh, maybe. ;)

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 10:54 AM
List some of the "monopolies" ( so called ) in the US economy that are NOT government created, blessed and sanctioned. :rolleyes:

we have laws to stall the process, but i would point to some key sectors approaching the level of a dangerous trust that the robber barons in the central banks have focused upon to increase their power....

mainstream news media, information technology, agriculture, and energy

baaah baah baah, the robber barons own the government, they took over a democratic republic with numerous checks and balances with powerful trusts organized by robber baron funding in such organizations as CFR and Bilderberg and even with anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws.

if you don't stick with all the principles, eventually, the free market is used to install corporate fascism in even the best of free market governments (as if they'd ever exist because you still ignore equal rights to access land and natural resources and the poor will always rise up and destroy your precious utopian child-like delusions of free market government).

sales tax, land value tax, maybe a small corporate tax, all redistributed back equally to every person in the form of a monthly check from government. it is much like thomas paine's agrarian justice. it is the ideal tax system because it is fair, justified, and principled.

ask the native americans. the anglo american empire and their stupid idealogies always miss the whole point. how can man own the land and thus own other men?

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 11:03 AM
what happens to your free market anarcho-capitalist when your mega private security force decides they want to make neutrons and use them on the people? you going to fire them? you going to boycott them? boom, your dead, killed by the free market state.

free market principles are a model. they don't consider full reality. you have to use multiple principles to ensure a utilitarian society because there is no such thing as utopia unless you want to gain control of the central banks, gain control over world government, nuke the world, and start over with highly technical society of androids and uber humans. are you the uber human? no, because you're here on a message board rather than sitting in a private jet in a meeting planning your next step on taking over the world.

Truth Warrior
11-14-2008, 11:07 AM
we have laws to stall the process, but i would point to some key sectors approaching the level of a dangerous trust that the robber barons in the central banks have focused upon to increase their power....

mainstream news media, information technology, agriculture, and energy

baaah baah baah, the robber barons own the government, they took over a democratic republic with numerous checks and balances with powerful trusts organized by robber baron funding in such organizations as CFR and Bilderberg and even with anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws.

if you don't stick with all the principles, eventually, the free market is used to install corporate fascism in even the best of free market governments (as if they'd ever exist because you still ignore equal rights to access land and natural resources and the poor will always rise up and destroy your precious utopian child-like delusions of free market government).

sales tax, land value tax, maybe a small corporate tax, all redistributed back equally to every person in the form of a monthly check from government. it is much like thomas paine's agrarian justice. it is the ideal tax system because it is fair, justified, and principled.

ask the native americans. the anglo american empire and their stupid idealogies always miss the whole point. how can man own the land and thus own other men? That's what I thought, ZERO.

Thanks! :)

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 11:09 AM
and what about free trade between nations?

what about a quadrillion of worthless pyramid scheme of paper security call derivatives?

two things created by the abuse of the free market principles in an imperfect world.

the u.s.a. is on the fast track to 3rd world status because we're living on our last days of high wages world wide, last days on credit card, federal reserve liquidity, and savings invested in worthless derivative investment?

trade tariffs were used by the founding fathers for a reason because there are wide differences between nations that must be considered unless you want your nation's wealth sucked into another nation. we don't live in a utopia. we live in the real world. you have to be utilitarian to survive.

free market principles are great and should be respected and considered. but they aren't the cure all.

Uncle Emanuel Watkins
11-14-2008, 11:11 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxPUvQZ3rcQ

I just wanted to hear some of your responses. Obviously he has a very skewed, if not completely false, view of what American libertarianism is. The applause almost made me retch.

For 50 points. Let me first state that all this discussion of European politics does sound high and mighty. Now on with the question: What does it have to do with American politics? Being that American politics was devoid of the cognizant sciences. Please comment in 5000 or more of your own words.

Bonus Questions: What is a natural law or law of nature? What is a self-evident truth? What is an unalienable right? What do the questions of "unification" and "reduction" mean in the philosophy of science?

brandon
11-14-2008, 11:11 AM
Chomsky is the Frank Luntz of the left.

Both are highly skilled in propaganda techniques, although they use their skills in different ways.

Truth Warrior
11-14-2008, 11:17 AM
and what about free trade between nations?

what about a quadrillion of worthless pyramid scheme of paper security call derivatives?

two things created by the abuse of the free market principles in an imperfect world.

the u.s.a. is on the fast track to 3rd world status because we're living on our last days of high wages world wide, last days on credit card, federal reserve liquidity, and savings invested in worthless derivative investment?

trade tariffs were used by the founding fathers for a reason because there are wide differences between nations that must be considered unless you want your nation's wealth sucked into another nation. we don't live in a utopia. we live in the real world. you have to be utilitarian to survive.

free market principles are great and should be respected and considered. but they aren't the cure all. Step outside your self imposed STATIST box and filter, and take a peak at the REAL world. :rolleyes:

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 11:18 AM
the fair tax is popular for this reason... the $200 monthly prebate.

it doesn't give the homeless man a farm or rent on an apartment so he can function at a day job, but it does provide him 1 meal/day.

it doesn't fully address the principle of equal access to land and natural resources, but it does partially, accidently, in the name of tax progressivity. it is a partial redistribution of natural resource wealth.

add a land value tax, a small corporate tax, and trade tariffs, you can increase that monthly prebate to $600-800 and you're pretty much on your way to a truly fair tax system. and you could easily shut up the welfare state because you are giving everyone, no questions asked, a blanket welfare check every month.

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 11:20 AM
That's what I thought, ZERO.

Thanks! :)

you call 4 major media corporations a free market? no, it's a trust.

even youtube got bought by google, another member of that giant trust called the bilderberg group.

the answer. MANY.

trusts are so dangerous, they tend to fool idiots that think they know the truth and real world.

Truth Warrior
11-14-2008, 11:21 AM
the fair tax is popular for this reason... the $200 monthly prebate.

it doesn't give the homeless man a farm or rent on an apartment so he can function at a day job, but it does provide him 1 meal/day.

it doesn't fully address the principle of equal access to land and natural resources, but it does partially, accidently, in the name of tax progressivity. it is a partial redistribution of natural resource wealth.

add a land value tax, a small corporate tax, and trade tariffs, you can increase that monthly prebate to $600-800 and you're pretty much on your way to a truly fair tax system. and you could easily shut up the welfare state because you are giving everyone, no questions asked, a blanket welfare check every month.

Step outside your self imposed STATIST box and filter, and take a peak at the REAL world. :rolleyes: There ain't NO government "MAGIC". It's ALL just people.

Truth Warrior
11-14-2008, 11:24 AM
you call 4 major media corporations a free market? no, it's a trust.

even youtube got bought by google, another member of that giant trust called the bilderberg group.

the answer. MANY.

trusts are so dangerous, they tend to fool idiots that think they know the truth and real world. No, I ONLY said what I ACTUALLY said.

Your bogus "spin" is NOT helpful, and is merely counterproductive. :p

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 11:29 AM
actually, i was wrong, it was 1 giant trust of trusts.

monsanto can cause food riots in a single day by stopping shipment. the family farm bought out and gone.

the television trust can lie to you why the food riots happened. the people blame iran.

the military trust can start sending bombs to iran.

the energy trust buys up and shuts down the texas oil wells.

now we got energy riots because there is no food on the shelves, our military is bombing iran and taking away our rights with another patriot act, and no gas in the pumps. and most people except for a few readers of alternative media have no clue why.

and if for some reason obama tells us why, obama is shot dead by a CIA agent on the rockefeller payroll, and the american people are dead because the military industrial complex part of the giant bilderberg trust have their own neutron bomb arsenal to bring about their plans of world domination and global enslavement suddenly.

it isn't rocket science. any hollywood producer can tell you how the real world works.

Truth Warrior
11-14-2008, 11:32 AM
actually, i was wrong, it was 1 giant trust of trusts.

monsanto can cause food riots in a single day by stopping shipment. the family farm bought out and gone.

the television trust can lie to you why the food riots happened. the people blame iran.

the military trust can start sending bombs to iran.

the energy trust buys up and shuts down the texas oil wells.

now we got energy riots because there is no food on the shelves, our military is bombing iran and taking away our rights with another patriot act, and no gas in the pumps. and most people except for a few readers of alternative media have no clue why.

and if for some reason obama tells us why, obama is shot dead by a CIA agent on the rockefeller payroll, and the american people are dead because the military industrial complex part of the giant bilderberg trust have their own neutron bomb arsenal to bring about their plans of world domination and global enslavement suddenly.

it isn't rocket science. any hollywood producer can tell you how the real world works.

And OBVIOUSLY, ALL with the blessing of the government. DUH!!! :rolleyes:

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 11:43 AM
No, I ONLY said what I ACTUALLY said.

Your bogus "spin" is NOT helpful, and is merely counterproductive. :p

you're wasting your time debating a chomsky youtube video and debating libertarian, er free market principles, on a message board when the new world order, the fourth reich, is growing in your backyard. chomsky is an idiot and so are you for debating him.

you should be fighting the NWO first and foremost because there is no chance for the libertarian party to get more than 500,000 votes until you do and until you listen to thomas paine and henry george about why the libertarian party principles are flawed.

and you still ignore my very valid and main point that you must tax the people on the use of land and natural resources and redistribute those taxes in the form of a monthly check back to every person. the free market not only leads to dangerous monopolies and trusts, it leads to serfdom, share-cropping, working for the man living from paycheck to paycheck, one month away from being homeless, to pay rent on your 1 bedroom apartment or adjustable rate mortgage; as you fight and compete for natural resources, paying $2 for a bottle of water with plastic that emit estrogen mimicking hormones to sterilize you and turn you into a crying woman. you bend over and take it from the man without even realizing you're his slave. they have got you to love your slavery. you're pathetic.

Truth Warrior
11-14-2008, 11:47 AM
you're wasting your time debating a chomsky youtube video and debating libertarian, er free market principles, on a message board when the new world order, the fourth reich, is growing in your backyard.

you should be fighting the NWO first and foremost because there is no chance for the libertarian party to get more than 500,000 votes until you do and until you listen to thomas paine and henry george about why the libertarian party principles are flawed.

and you still ignore my very valid and main point that you must tax the people on the use of land and natural resources and redistribute those taxes in the form of a monthly check back to every person. the free market not only leads to dangerous monopolies and trusts, it leads to serfdom, share-cropping, working for the man living from paycheck to paycheck, one month away from being homeless unless you got friends and family to take you in, to pay rent on your 1 bedroom apartment or adjustable rate mortgage. as you fight and compete for natural resources, paying $2 for a bottle of water with plastic that emit estrogen mimicking hormones to sterilize you and turn you into a crying woman. you bend over and take it from the man without even realizing you're his slave. they got you to love your slavery. The NWO will come THROUGH the government, MOST likely by TREATIES. :p :rolleyes:

I categorically REJECT the bogus STATIST'S psychoses.

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 11:52 AM
and you want to be a real truth warrior, you'll tune into alex jones at infowars.com everyday so you can start to learn truth rather than debate utopian theory. alex jones won't be around for long. he's giving his life for you.

and he is only around because they find him useful to collect IP addresses of users who listen to his show to form their homeland security red and blue lists.

being a bearer of truth will have you part of the first group of people to be executed in a FEMA concentration camp. lock and load. revolution is coming.

if you're a true truth warrior, you'll enlist and be on the front lines.

Truth Warrior
11-14-2008, 11:57 AM
and you want to be a real truth warrior, you'll tune into alex jones at infowars.com everyday so you can start to learn truth rather than debate utopian theory. alex jones won't be around for long. he's giving his life for you.

and he is only around because they find him useful to collect IP addresses of users who listen to his show to form their homeland security red and blue lists.

being a bearer of truth will have you part of the first group of people to be executed in a FEMA concentration camp. lock and load. revolution is coming.

if you're a true truth warrior, you'll enlist and be on the front lines.

I don't need your bogus BS analyses and crap prescriptions. Take a hike, Goober. :rolleyes:

Geez, what a loon! :p

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 12:00 PM
The NWO will come THROUGH the government, MOST likely by TREATIES. :p :rolleyes:

I categorically REJECT the bogus STATIST'S psychoses.

have fun debating the free market philosophy with your executioner.

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 12:02 PM
I don't need your bogus BS analyses and crap prescriptions. Take a hike, Goober. :rolleyes:

Geez, what a loon! :p

anyone who's popular vocabulary includes "statist" is the loon. you don't live in the real world. you live in a fantasy world with flawed principles. and i proved your principles are flawed because you completely ignore land and natural resource rights in your delusions and denial built with years of eating libertarian propaganda. i know the sickness. i was a libertarian. but i saw i was feeding myself with pure propaganda and had become as blind as the statists.

a model of a corvette is not a corvette. it is a model. this is probably the single most important lesson in any scientific study which just isn't taught well enough in the best of science degrees.

Truth Warrior
11-14-2008, 12:10 PM
anyone who's popular vocabulary includes "statist" is the loon. you don't live in the real world. you live in a fantasy world with flawed principles. a model of a corvette is not a corvette. it is a model. and i proved your principles are flawed because you completely ignore land and natural resource rights in your delusions and denial built with years of eating libertarian propaganda. i know the sickness. i was a libertarian. but i saw i was feeding myself with pure propaganda and had become as blind as the statists.

From what of your's I've read SO FAR, I'm not surprised at all about how you've NOW turned out.

I've only been living in this REAL world for about 40 years now.

How about you, barbarian?

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 12:19 PM
Step outside your self imposed STATIST box and filter, and take a peak at the REAL world. :rolleyes: There ain't NO government "MAGIC". It's ALL just people.

chomsky loves using this same argument. you're spouting chomsky now! as henry kissinger would say, you're a dumb animal to be used as a pawn for foreign policy. bend over and love your slavery.

you ruin libertarian pinciples with your narrow and flawed principles of the free market.

the government, namely the corporate fascists and international banking cartel, wants you to believe they are idiots. they aren't. however, they do have a lot of complete idiots working for them for the all mighty dollar.

they are rich beyond imagination and are quickly gaining power, another 5 trillion in a month, and complete control over the land of the free and home of the brave because they are stupid? the assassination of lincoln and jfk was only the beginning. there is always another woodrow wilson or noam chomsky to sucker.

i must stop even wasting my time with you. you are more retarded than chomsky. you're lost and trapped in the propaganda matrix. you're gone. you're beyond help with your doublespeak name. debating you is like debating an obama zombie under the messiah's street hypnosis.

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 12:28 PM
From what of your's I've read SO FAR, I'm not surprised at all about how you've NOW turned out.

I've only been living in this REAL world for about 40 years now.

How about you, barbarian?

you got 2 years on me

Truth Warrior
11-14-2008, 12:30 PM
chomsky loves using this same argument. you're spouting chomsky now! as henry kissinger would say, you're a dumb animal to be used as a pawn for foreign policy. bend over and love your slavery.

you ruin libertarian pinciples with your narrow and flawed principles of the free market.

the government, namely the corporate fascists and international banking cartel, wants you to believe they are idiots. they aren't. however, they do have a lot of complete idiots working for them for the all mighty dollar.

they are rich beyond imagination and are quickly gaining power, another 5 trillion in a month, and complete control over the land of the free and home of the brave because they are stupid? the assassination of lincoln and jfk was only the beginning. there is always woodrow wilson or noam chomsky to sucker.

i must stop even wasting my time with you. you are more retarded than chomsky. you're lost and trapped in the propaganda matrix. you're gone. you're beyond help with your doublespeak name. debating you is like debating an obama zombie under the messiah's street hypnosis.

Yep, that NON AGGRESSION principle is a REAL pain in the patoot, for you barbaric STATIST pragmatists, all right.

Get a frickin' clue.:p

Xenophage
11-14-2008, 01:20 PM
List some of the "monopolies" ( so called ) in the US economy that are NOT government created, blessed and sanctioned. :rolleyes:

1: My monopoly on sexing up the ladies!

2: My monopoly at owning your face in warcraft!

3: Fuck the government!

4: Wait... what are we talking about, again?

Uncle Emanuel Watkins
11-14-2008, 01:50 PM
Yep, that NON AGGRESSION principle is a REAL pain in the patoot, for you barbaric STATIST pragmatists, all right.

Get a frickin' clue.:p

38 to 40 years are the ages in which one truly begins to start learning. I can remember back when my mind started clicking at that age. I recommend philosophy of science. Go ahead and just skip the presoctrates by just starting off with all the dialogues of Plato and then move on to the full works of Aristotle. From there go to:
Aristotle begat Corpernicus, Corpernicus begat Galileo, Galileo begat Descartes, Descartes begat Newton, Newton begat Immanuel Kant, Immanuel Kant begat . . . and so on.

Mesogen
11-14-2008, 04:13 PM
2:50 - It sounds like he claims that the United States developed because of corporate fascism. :confused:

The British Colonies were founded by corporations.

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 06:13 PM
Yep, that NON AGGRESSION principle is a REAL pain in the patoot, for you barbaric STATIST pragmatists, all right.

Get a frickin' clue.:p

no, you're the statist, and you don't even realize it.

having to work to buy land under property rights law is statist coercion.

you are coerced into slavery when you are required to work for someone else to rent or buy land from someone else.

yes, that non-aggression principle is a pain when you realize that the free market and private property rights are merely a piece of the puzzle, a pragmatic convenience, and not the principle.

you better a clue unless you are happy with less than a million votes. principled blanket welfare through henry george principle is powerful because it is truth and right. that is why most states and local governments have property taxes and sales taxes. too bad they didn't give it back to the people directly.

libertarianism does not equal the free market. someday you may even understand why libertarian socialism is not an oxymoron because money and the free market is a statist form of power as dangerous as any state. anarcho-capitalism is not libertarianism but someone eventually winning the game to build the cyrogenics ark, destroying the earth, and rebuilding it to their liking, with serfdom, puppet governments, perverted libertarianism, corporate fascism, and numerous other ills leading up to that day.

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 07:14 PM
libertarianism a group of applied principles under the non-coercion principle. the primary applied principles under the economic realm include the following....

capitalism, private property rights
geoism, geolibertarianism
socialism, libertarian socialism
utilitarianism, pragmatism

i threw in utilitarianism because you're never going to get it right in a non-perfect world when you have to deal with the complexities of reality. and really the other three principles are utilitarian application of libertarian principle in itself.

then, you have all the individual issues, including such things as division of power, decentralization, individual and minority rights, monetary policy, foreign policy, democracy, law, law enforcement, judicial system, monopoly/trust busting, etc.

great, you understand the merits of anarcho-capitalism and private property rights. however, you don't understand correct application of libertarianism if you don't understand the merits and flaws of the other primary principles and don't understand the flaws of anarcho-capitalism and private property rights.

anarcho capitalism, minarchist, etc., are all bastardizations of libertarianism too heavily based on capitalism. green is a bastardization of socialism and environmentalism (occasionally you'll also get a one word mention of geoism). communism is a bastardization of socialism. the list goes on.

while chomsky is a bastardization of libertarian socialism in itself, and thus, he is an idiot statist and not a libertarian, he has some valid points when he holds true to his label. the same standard can be applied to any anarcho-capitalist because the principle being put forth is just a subset of applied libertarianism, not libertarianism itself.

i was active in the harry browne campaign. he positively addressed geoism by saying, yes, it is a good principle. but that's it. and in all of the history of the united states, thomas paine and henry george are the only ones who directly addressed it?

thomas paine and henry george are the only ones that come close to making geolibertarianism mainstream under the shadow of capitalism. it does get play in pennsylvania and does get play in a bastardized form in local and state governments. like geolibertarianism, libertarian socialism has valid points. screaming statist at anything you believe conficts with capitalism and private ownership rights is not going to get your anywhere until you pay attention to their valid points.

anarcho-capitalism is over-played and will always fail while you ignore geolibertarianism and the merits of libertarian socialism.

Conza88
11-14-2008, 07:32 PM
One difference between the minarchists and the anarchists is one important thing that I believe only a truly liberal(classical liberal) government can give. A court system and jail to punish those harming others or violating or steal private property.

They BELIEVE only a limited government can provide that... but that is WRONG.

Private Courts etc.. I gather you've never done any reading on the said subject. :)

The_Orlonater
11-14-2008, 08:08 PM
They BELIEVE only a limited government can provide that... but that is WRONG.

Private Courts etc.. I gather you've never done any reading on the said subject. :)

Private courts? Well, give me a link then.
I'll argue about it after I read it.

Conza88
11-14-2008, 08:55 PM
Private courts? Well, give me a link then.
I'll argue about it after I read it.

It'd be my pleasure :)

For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto (http://mises.org/rothbard/foranewlb.pdf) (read)

http://mises.org/media.aspx?action=category&ID=87 (audio)

12: The Public Sector, III: Police, Law, and the Courts (http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/audiobooks/rothbard/foranewliberty/12.mp3) (specific audio)

The Possibility of Private Law (http://mises.org/story/1874)
Daily Article by Robert P. Murphy

Many more sources, works on priv law at mises.. :)

Why is it you feel the market can provide for everything the state can... but not justice? You think the state can even do that properly... you think a Constitutional Government will remain limited? lol... :p

Don't go about it the wrong way... "I'll argue about it after I've read it"

That is completely the wrong way to look at it... you've already made up your mind = FAIL.

At least be open about it, the possibility..

:)

Conza88
11-14-2008, 11:14 PM
Just to prove my point....

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/024015.html

Free Talk Live Host Sentenced To 93 Days In Jail
Posted by Manuel Lora at November 14, 2008 08:51 PM

For refusing to follow the dictates (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/022558.html) of the City of Keene, NH, and for denying to participate in the legal process against him, Ian "Freeman" Bernard, host of the nationally syndicated libertarian show Free Talk Live was sentenced today to 93 days in jail. (http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2008/11/14/radio-host-jailed-over-couch/)

Notice, in this video video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlcT-3niVes) shot by a fellow supporter and activist how, within ten seconds of starting the proceedings, Bernard is taken to an alternate courtroom to separate him from the rest.

There is a backstory to all of this. The local despots have been keeping a close eye on the activists, no doubt reading the web forums and keeping informed of their plans for peaceful noncompliance and civil disobedience. Thus, this entire court appearance was planned and executed swiftly. Notice, for example, that the bailiff (in the video above) was already walking, handcuffs ready, before the judge orders Bernard into custody.

Local activists did recently make some headway into getting the court to allow the panning of video cameras in the court. As a listener of the show, I believe that another reason why Bernard was moved to an alternate courtroom was to prevent video of this from getting out.

The sentence of almost 100 days was done, in my opinion, to send a message to those out there who would defy the state.

(All of this reminds me of today's Lew Rockwell show with Dr. Roderick Long (http://www.lewrockwell.com/podcast/?p=episode&name=2008-11-13_067_are_you_an_anarchist.mp3) where they discuss the problems of having the state handle justice.)

EDIT::

We'll keep this going for the clueless....

The Myth of Good Government by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. (http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/myth-of-good-govt.html)

Re-edit edit...

I'm just finished exam and hav embarked on party mode, so I've got a few in me... but seriously, if the folk out there who advocate minimal government... can't see the flaws in their philosophy.. then you're a joke... aye.