Tab Content
  • Conza88's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 06:09 PM
    Yeah, you clearly didn't understand it. I didn't see any "state" mentioned specifically in that excerpt of yours; aye? Put down the pitchfork. Who is granting the state rights? :rolleyes:
    35 replies | 538 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 03:03 PM
    There are a lot of people hot on this issue.. the 2016 race... on both sides. I don't see him as bashing all liberty supporters, just fighting on his point of view. While the site does not support Trump, and for well established reasons, I also see it as a failure to have the site be an echo chamber of bashing on the lowest common denomination. It doesn't help anyone intellectually. We need our positions to be solid against criticism. Without this, if you develop your talking points from an echo chamber you'll get destroyed once you leave the walls of the echo chamber. So discussion on the issues is valid, even if that means defending wrong information for someone we don't support. Also consider, different people have different MOs for why they support a candidate, for most here there is some strategy. Some will agree with that and some not.
    107 replies | 1127 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 02:47 PM
    Well, I certainly disagree with that, which part of this is irrelevant? (Link to Mission Statement) Thanks.
    107 replies | 1127 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 02:38 PM
    Bossobass has been a strong liberty fighter for a long time. We obviously disagree on the Trump issue but we can still be amicable on matters. So long as people stick with the guidelines they are welcome here. The guidelines include not promoting non-supportive candidates but we can still rationally breakdown issues and the news cycle for everyone to get a better focus on current events. (Not just addressing erowe1). Thanks.
    107 replies | 1127 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 02:31 PM
    Let's please keep this civil. I think Bossobass first post here was sarcasm to spin some common talking points. Things work best by sticking to a logical discussions of the issues but at least, stick with the guidelines, see my sig. Thanks.
    107 replies | 1127 view(s)
  • Conza88's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 08:30 AM
    Yes. Meh. Good for speculators for being treated well in a sense. See; JT's review.
    12 replies | 384 view(s)
  • Conza88's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 08:28 AM
    The pre-1914 world saw no immigration issues or policies, and no real border controls. Instead, there was free movement in the real sense; there were no questions asked, people were treated respectfully and one did not even need official documents to enter or leave a country. This all changed with the First World War, after which states seem to compete with having the least humane view on foreigners seeking refuge within its territory.The “immigration policies” of modern states is yet another licensing scheme of the 20th century: the state has enforced licensing of movement. It is virtually impossible to move across the artificial boundaries of the state’s territory in the search for opportunity, love, or work; one needs a state-issued license to move one’s body, be it across a river, over a mountain or through a forest. The Berlin Wall may be gone, but the basic principle of it lives and thrives. Yet the immigration issue seems to be somewhat of a divide within libertarianism, with two seemingly conflicting views on how to deal with population growth through immigration. On the one hand, it is not possible as a libertarian to support a regulated immigration policy, since government itself is never legitimate. This is the somewhat classical libertarian standpoint on immigration: open borders. On the other hand, the theory of natural rights and, especially, private property rights tells us anyone could move anywhere — but they need first to purchase their own piece of land on which to live or obtain necessary permission from the owner. Otherwise immigration becomes a violation of property rights, a trespass. This is an interpretation of a libertarian-principled immigration policy presented by Hans-Hermann Hoppe a few years ago, which since then has gained increasing recognition and support. I intend to show that the libertarian idea is as powerful as we claim, and that there is no reason we should not be able to reach consensus in the immigration issue. Both sides in this debate, the anti-government-policy as well as the pro-private-property, somehow fail to realize there is no real contradiction in their views. The anti-government-policy immigration standpoint (or, the open borders argument) and the pro-private-property ditto are two sides of a coin; their respective proponents have simply fallen prey to the devil in the details. Let’s go through the main arguments of both camps, and see to their respective strengths and weaknesses, and I’ll show you how this is true. We must not forget libertarianism is not a teleological dogma striving for a certain end; it rather sees individual freedom and rights as the natural point of departure for a just society. When people are truly free, whatever will be will be. Hence, the question is not what the effects of a certain immigration policy would be, but whether there should be one at all.
    35 replies | 538 view(s)
  • Conza88's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 08:19 AM
    I literally cannot fathom this. He did NOT speak nicely of Ron back in the day; and he was always dismissive. He was literally incapable of seeing Ron's nuanced approach; that his real goal was education first & foremost: Stefan was guilty of the purist deviation fallacy. I haven't been listening / paying attention to him or his podcasts for about a year. What did I miss? How on earth has it gone all Trumptard?
    35 replies | 538 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 01:09 AM
    Pointing out reality isn't a downer. All IMO... for some people, you can't complete. Most others aren't going to turn on a dime, it can nominally take around six months or more for someone to go from getting a seed of liberty and turning it into a new world outlook. Within that six months there is a lot of person reflection, withdraw from past ties, leaning new things and then starting to articulate new views. One key is to recognize when you are just planning seeds that you need to accept that you are doing just that, don't expect the quick change. Otherwise, there are a lot of do's and don'ts to this; another major topic. These things are doable for most people, and it's the people that are important, the vessel comes after that. While working towards it, I understand the scope of the problem, so it's in mind. The key however, is that it has to be planned for, and it's why we need better plans. The Liberty Blueprint is just the first layer of plans.
    100 replies | 2671 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-28-2016, 09:53 PM
    There are a few options, one is the courts. File a legal challenge. This would be pretty expensive so you'd want some institutional backing. I found this page, could be of interest to look at: Another option is legislative, basically get legislation drafted up, gain support, and push it through to become law. You'd want a good common sense bill so legislators will look bad to not support it. If they don't you work to expose them. Worst case, you get people to run against them. There are some established techniques to make this happen by applying pain to legislators. Obviously none of this is easy or cheap. I'm not a lawyer but -- state legislators can pass whatever law they want; more or less; the laws however can be challenged in a court which can strike them down.
    13 replies | 342 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-28-2016, 07:25 PM
    That's not the issue at all, you said "as opposed to giving aid and comfort to Hillary Clinton" as if this is a binary option, it is not and calling you out for framing this as a binary option does not equate to being threatened. It is understood that there may be "dozen data points where they are the same or similar to Ron/Rand on issues" and it could be argued that the GOP nominee may end up being better than the Democrat nominee but that doesn't mean that they have earned support, much less should enjoy having ones good name put behind the candidate. Some may think it's the best things, other will degree. I can very much respect people who have high standards of who they will put their name behind.
    95 replies | 1514 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-28-2016, 10:57 AM
    I was just describing a similar system that was put together using similar concepts. Our straw poll system was pretty basic but it was just as fair execpt it was designed to allow people to buy votes, which was the point of the fund raiser. Otherwise the blockchain system presented lacks security as they do not describe a closed loop system to manage ballot stuffing. One could be added. The list of voters who received a key needs to be published, as does the keys that were not used. In this way people can validate that their unused vote was not cast for someone else. You can also flush out names of non voters. Without this the people who control the keys can add votes, thus weaking others. Ballot stuffing. As described you can validate your vote but have no way to know if it was weighed properly.
    10 replies | 157 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-28-2016, 10:13 AM
    While as a site we do not support Trump, we understand some of our members do and we are open to dialog on specific issues that focus on the issues. Starting a thread that insults other members, degrading a supported candidate framed around support for a candidate we are not in favor of, from a news person that isn't seen to have strong credibility will only serve to annoy members and cause problems. I hope it is understandable why this is being closed. Just be a little more careful in the future. We're not trying to kill discussion. Thanks.
    21 replies | 360 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-28-2016, 09:50 AM
    The block chain voting is a good topic, but going too much down a different rabbit hole vs the original topic, so splitting off. A few issues here. . You might need a better way to resolve candidates with the same name and similar looks if anyone can submit ballot access. Spammers would have a field day. There is some value to a private voting booth, it can prwvent your employer or others from pressuring your vote. This block chain could allow for votes to be solid, and massed in large numbers.
    10 replies | 157 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-28-2016, 09:27 AM
    ??? Is he addressing people that are totally opposed to Trump (per title) or the GOP establishment (per article)? If this is to the GOPe, I doubt they'd care to read. How does he know the demographics of other writers? What's the point in bring this up? Is he not making an argument of might over right? Not that either of these two factions are right... Does this statement not implies that 35 year olds will be out of the picture, dead or have lost interest in money and power by the age of 45? Any one see that happening? If your plan is to wait for people 35 years old to move out of the way I think you'll be waiting for at least 35 years, if not longer. Sounds like a bad plan and wishful thinking that the controls of power will be all but handed to you in 10 years.
    9 replies | 188 view(s)
  • Conza88's Avatar
    04-28-2016, 04:17 AM
    Did you make the video ;o
    42 replies | 129 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-27-2016, 07:51 PM
    Recent political events have brought up questions as to how the political parties determine their party nominee for president. Ron Paul supporters ran into a lot of issues in 2008 and again in 2012. Here again, in 2016, more people are crying “foul”. All of this begs the question, what are the issues with the process and what specifically should be changed? Here are the issues that I see being brought up: • Does party leadership have too strong of an influence over the outcome of the delegate process, in part by manipulating rules and leveraging their pre-existing position? • Caucus systems aren’t desired by some people; they just want a primary vote to decide everything. You shouldn’t have to be a master at parliamentary procedures and have the party rule book memorized to have your voice heard. Is it reasonable to reform this overall structure? • Is it fair to have super delegates as part of the process? So what would the perfect liberty movement party nomination system look like? (Not that we’ll agree).
    9 replies | 240 view(s)
More Activity

3 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    Hello, DJ. I hope you have a wonderful Christmas.
  2. View Conversation
    Please help! I'm counting on RPF!
  3. View Conversation
    Your back!!!
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 3 of 3
About DjLoTi

Basic Information

About DjLoTi
I'm cool
I'm a weather man. :)


I'm DjLoTi =) Liveontheisland =) I live on an island =) It's my island =)


Total Posts
Total Posts
Posts Per Day
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
Most Recent Message
12-09-2010 10:53 PM
General Information
Last Activity
12-29-2012 12:06 PM
Join Date
Home Page

4 Friends

  1. Bradley in DC Bradley in DC is offline


    Bradley in DC
  2. Bryan Bryan is offline


  3. Conza88 Conza88 is offline


    • Send a message via MSN to Conza88
  4. Romulus Romulus is offline


Showing Friends 1 to 4 of 4
No results to display...
No results to display...
No results to display...