cjm
Member

https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/1529555038246428672

https://twitter.com/LPMisesCaucus/status/1529606914375421952

THREAD: LP Mises Caucus features in SPLC "Hatewatch" hit piece (SPLC "Hatewatch": Mises Caucus: Could It Sway the Libertarian Party to the Hard Right?)

THREAD: LP Mises Caucus features in SPLC "Hatewatch" hit piece (SPLC "Hatewatch": Mises Caucus: Could It Sway the Libertarian Party to the Hard Right?)

Woohoo!! Dave Smith and "Part of the Problem" just got an entire section of a SPLC "Hatewatch" article devoted to them! :cool:

Gee, could it be that both sides of political "news" media is nothing but highly paid acting script readers whose sole job is to promote false narratives and tout controlled opposition political personalities to their respective stupid viewer bases?

Evil genius is still genius. Just saying.

Sounds a lot like Donald Trump.

Yes you are. ^That is just simply not true. You can put all of the "walls of text" up that you want. You can falsely claim "Nobody uses the word the other way." It's just NOT true. Most of the time capitalism is state administered capitalism but it doesn't have to be. Most of the time socialism is state administered but it doesn't have to be. In fact it's in some ways easier to have socialism that is not state administered than it is capitalism. Every time I buy something and sell it at a profit I'm supposed to report it to the IRS and collect sales tax. But if I pool resources with people, if I share, if I engage in any type of communal living (other than marriage), there are no government goons breathing down my neck. So no. Nothing you've been saying is even kind of close to true.

Perhaps I'm looking into my crystal ball just a tad ahead of the curve but yeah, it's called building the foundation. Did you already forget about how the liberal billionaire from NY became a Republican standard bearer? You're watching how a liberal billionaire from California tries to accomplish the same feat.

You're right. USMCA exceeded the TPP, which was what my link directly to the US Trade Rep's website explains. This new trade deal is just another leg of the globalist agenda being enacted. TPP was already included in the USMCA. (Trump "withdrew" from TPP sorta like how he withdrew from the WHO, which didn't take effect until after his presidency was over. They just incorporated it into the USMCA and loaded a bunch more of NAU stuff into it and passed it all instead. Cuz' Republicans fall asleep at the wheel when a Republican is playing President, ya know.) You're not. You're posting clearly prepackaged and preformatted media items, complete with embedded banners even and all that from a brand new account. Some of us didn't just fall off the turnip truck. Plus, the info is inaccurate so there's that. If you're not a shill at least step your game up. Many of us on RPF have seen it all.

Musk, of course, means standard semi-auto ARs, not M-4s and other actual machine guns.

Sure he will. Sounds legit and not just political rhetoric.

Remember when Donald signed the TPP into effect by changing the name to the USMCA? https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/united-states-mexico-canada-agreement/fact-sheets/rebalancing (who's the new OP shill account, posting prepackaged propaganda items? smells like a Swordy clone)

LOL as if there's any shortage of men and women like him already in authority positions.... https://www.flgov.com/2019/05/30/photo-release-governor-ron-desantis-meets-with-israeli-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu/

And that's why dictionaries are important. And the dictionary says....you're wrong. But like a typical politician you'll spin the answer. You're being Fauci-like. "I am science." Or "I am the one who gets to decide what the definition is." Nope. Sorry. You don't. Exactly. But I was talking about a group of fellow believers! Which brings us full circle. What was described in Acts 2 id a type of socialism. Glad you finally agree.

Maybe being so close to Israel he got to see early on the data from Israel showing what a total failure mass vaccination is?

Anything can be debated. That said, have you read the book Animal Farm? At the end the "farmers" (capitalists) and the "pigs" (communists) bodies warp until the animals (us peons) looking from one to the other couldn't tell the difference. China is indeed becoming more capitalist as is Russia. America and Western Europe are indeed becoming more socialist. And all of the areas I just mentioned are becoming more statist and authoritarian. Socialism isn't a proxy for statism / tyranny / authoritarianism.

It's possible to have such a discussion, but 99.999% of the time, when the word "CAPITALISM" is used, what is meant is a State-administered CAPITALISM aka CORPORTISM aka FASCISM. Which is why it's best to choose some other, more descriptive word to avoid confusion. See what I did there? Nope. I am not "all over the map." You just don't want to accept the truth. You said you own your own body. The Bible says you don't. It's not that hard.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to TheTexan again.

Right. It's not a legal argument. It's a moral argument. And you've just explained voluntary / Christian socialism. You act like you don't understand it, but clearly you do. It's illegal for a 21 year old to sleep with a 16 year old in some states. It's NOT legal in other states. Is in moral? Is it less moral than an 80 year old sleeping with a 18 year old? It's certainly legal for the 80 year old to sleep with the 18 year old. It's now legal for two men or two women to marry in every state in the union. But it's still a criminal offense in most states for one man to marry two women or vice versa even if the marriage is done in a private ceremony with no state involvement. Solomon and David would both have criminal records in modern America. Should a group of people (a church) be able to preach to its members from 1 Corinthians 6:19 and say "You can't be a part of this body of believers if you are out having illicit sex, doing drugs, listening to that bad music?" Should such a group of people (a church) decide not to continue to associate with people who didn't agree with their idea of what God thinks it's okay for Humans to do with His bodies that he lent to said humans for them to complete their spiritual journey own? I can tell you to give to the poor, stop sleeping with male and/or female hookers, don't get your eyelids pierced, and as long as you can tell me to "bugger off" and I can tell you "Well in that case you can't join my group" we still both have freedom.

Good question. Here's the Biblical answer: 1 Corinthians 6:19 Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? Is that tyranny? Well....it depends. Do you think God is a tyrant? I don't. But some people do. Now, I don't think the state should be willy nilly enforcing what I believe God says is appropriate or not appropriate to do with one's body on everyone. That means I have to support people's right to make a choice about the body that they do NOT own because they neither created it nor redeemed it! Abortion is a special case because there is another created body inside the body that people think they own. But all the radical feminists shouting at the homes of the SCOTUS "My body my choice" would agree with you. So would the "libsoftiktock", those fun loving purple haired teachers that want to teach your children that they can "choose" whether or not they want to be a boy or a girl. I guess it's only a matter of time before it's acceptable for someone to teach children with body integrity dysphoria that they can "choose" to cut an arm or a leg off to fit with the mental ideal they have of themselves. Mmmmm.....okay. Only if you totally misunderstand the Bible and the nature of God. I get it. Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. If you realize that God really owns everything and you're just a steward, and yes that includes your own body, then it's possible for you to live with a group of like minded believers who live for God and not for themselves. But as the Police would sing "We are spirits...in a material world." Or Madonna "We are living in a material world and I am a material girl."

Do you consider China socialist? They have billionaires. But you're missing the point of the Ananias and Saphira story. The people around them were VOLUNTARILY giving up private property! That's the point that you refuse to even acknowledge with your circular reasoning. In your mind, as long as someone can have private property, everybody by definition must have private property. That's simply not the case. People can be voluntarily socialist. They can even allow people in their company who aren't voluntarily socialist. Ananaias and Saphira experienced the social pressure to conform to those around them who were selling everything and holding all things in common, by pretending to sell everything and hold all things in common. If things were the way you're trying to pretend they were, there would have been no reason for A & S to pretend.

Good for you! You never would have joined the fellowship of early Christian believers in Jerusalem. And guess what? That would have been okay! Seriously, it would have. Believers outside of Jerusalem still largely kept whatever wealth they had. In fact, that's how they were able to participate in the "great donation" when Paul collected alms for the church in Jerusalem. Now someone might say "Those lazy Jerusalem Christians! Living off the Christians in Asia Minor!" But there was a very good reason not to be wed to land in Jerusalem. Some forty years after the ascension of Christ, Jerusalem was destroyed! The same Bible that extolled the virtues of each man having "according to his need" (main maxim of socialism) also said the Lord gave to His servants "each according to his ability" (the maxim of free market capitalism). Anyway, the question isn't "Do you want to give up everything you own" but rather "Would you like to participate in something that is collectively owned as opposed to privately owned?" Like....say...cryptocurrency. If you put your money in a traditional "bank" you're putting your trust in something owned by BankOfAmerica or Citibank or Goldman Sachs etc. Who owns the various blockchains? Nobody? Everybody? Oh, but many you're luddite like Anti Federalist. Okay. He's long complained about the ability of "big tech" to censor the private property they own. Like me, he misses the days of USENET. Guess what? USENET was collectively owned. Yeah, the servers were privately owned and each server could control who could log into it and what news groups to participate in, but other than that it was a free for all. (It still kind of sort of exists). Which brings us to Web 3.0, which is shaping up to be a compilation of crypto and USENET. Steemit (I think I learned about this from danno), is (was?) a blogging platform on a blockchain. It actually suffered a 51% attack (I think). So the faithful "steemit injuns" moved on to greener pastures and created https://hive.io. It's more resilient to a 51% attack, boosts two different video sharing platforms, several different blogging platforms, some games, decentralized finance etc. All without a central authority or "owner."

:rolleyes: Wiki? Really? From the freaking dictionary. Definition of socialism 1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 2a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

You're allowed to be wrong. Right. And there's more than one usage for the word "socialism" just like there's more than one usage for the word "capitalism." By the way, the game you and B4L are playing is the same game I see socialists play with the world "capitalism." I define capitalism as anything other than the current crony corporate capitalism and they are quick to say "But that's not capitalism." Ummm.....yes it is. And what the early church did in Acts 2 was a form of socialism whether you are willing to admit it or not. It also has an established meaning that is EXACTLY the way I'm using it.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=how+media+coverage+causes+more+shootings&t=raspberrypi&ia=web https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5296697/ Abstract Mass shootings are a particular problem in the United States, with one mass shooting occurring approximately every 12.5 days. Recently a “contagion” effect has been suggested wherein the occurrence of one mass shooting increases the likelihood of another mass shooting occurring in the near future. Although contagion is a convenient metaphor used to describe the temporal spread of a behavior, it does not explain how the behavior spreads. Generalized imitation is proposed as a better model to explain how one person’s behavior can influence another person to engage in similar behavior. Here we provide an overview of generalized imitation and discuss how the way in which the media report a mass shooting can increase the likelihood of another shooting event. Also, we propose media reporting guidelines to minimize imitation and further decrease the likelihood of a mass shooting.