I have doubts he ever was a libertarian. . .he threw a hissy fit a few months back, and disappeared. Like the title says, he was only masquerading. . . there is no utopia he's found. . . he simply wants what he wants and if you don't like it then bobbies can come and arrest you.
and it wouldn't fucking matter. Too bad, I used to like a lot of what he said.
he'll be back if he has any principles that don't include aggression against others.
So... I think in the long run, it's all about balance. But how can you force socialism/communism at the tip of a gun like that?
And, imagine, if we didn't have 30% upwards our paychecks stolen for bogus causes, don't you think that we all collectively would give more to those in need?
they're no longer their own countries, they're no longer their own citizens, just a massive, hulking United Kingdom.
With communism, you literally can't force it at the point of a gun. It's often misrepresented, but communism cannot exist on a mass scale, that's what socialism's for. Just look at the derivatives of the words: Socialism - Society. Communism - Community. Whilst Socialism effects collectivism over a society, something requiring force to accomplish, Communism is just collectivist communalism. It's basically an act of political segregation, no worse than the FSP.
I accept that definition of communism, I just reject the idea that it could work on any but the most minute scale.
I accept that definition of communism, I just reject the idea that it could work on any but the most minute scale.
I respect your opinion, but if you ask most Swissmen/women, you'll find that they're one of the happiest peoples in the world, although HIGHLY communistic. Although this is my only basis, and it's hardly scientific, it's why I could support small scale, completely voluntary communism.
However, hulking government is NEVER a good thing. Heck... neither is a hulking corporation of a job... ringing up things on three computers at Sears SUCKS! I just mentioned that to my military member husband yesterday after one of the computers crashed and a customer had to wait 30 minutes to PAY for their purchase because the computer takes 15 minutes to start back up (seriously, no reason for THAT!)...
Anyways, after my rant to him, he said "Why do you not see why I want to get out of the military so badly?" and basically explained that it's a big hulking system that doesn't work well on a personal level like DECENT job would....
So yah... I wish you well Ziggy, but small groups governing a big group of people, even IF they promise to redistribute wealth never end well.
I hope you call back though! I really do enjoy your updates on at least ANY types of progress of Liberty (social OR economical) around the world :-)
I accept that definition of communism, I just reject the idea that it could work on any but the most minute scale.
I respect your opinion, but if you ask most Swissmen/women, you'll find that they're one of the happiest peoples in the world, although HIGHLY communistic. Although this is my only basis, and it's hardly scientific, it's why I could support small scale, completely voluntary communism.
However, hulking government is NEVER a good thing. Heck... neither is a hulking corporation of a job... ringing up things on three computers at Sears SUCKS! I just mentioned that to my military member husband yesterday after one of the computers crashed and a customer had to wait 30 minutes to PAY for their purchase because the computer takes 15 minutes to start back up (seriously, no reason for THAT!)...
Anyways, after my rant to him, he said "Why do you not see why I want to get out of the military so badly?" and basically explained that it's a big hulking system that doesn't work well on a personal level like DECENT job would....
So yah... I wish you well Ziggy, but small groups governing a big group of people, even IF they promise to redistribute wealth never end well.
I hope you call back though! I really do enjoy your updates on at least ANY types of progress of Liberty (social OR economical) around the world :-)
*sigh
No, Switzerland is not Communist, as Switzerland is a nation, not a commune. It's a socialist nation.
Unless... Communism is completely voluntary and socialism is strictly enforced by a government... that would make sense? Is that right?
Unless... Communism is completely voluntary and socialism is strictly enforced by a government... that would make sense? Is that right?
Bingo. The entire idea of a commune is that people are there voluntarily, as they want that life for themselves.
Whatever I might say in this particular rant I’m pro legalizing marijuana, in fact I’m still pro legalizing prostitution & pro liberalizing the gun & gambling laws. But you don’t have to be a libertarian or anarchist to advocate all that.
This is because I’ve dreaded associating myself with the extremes of libertarians, because if I don’t fit in with people’s concept of libertarianism then I get a ton of grief, because maybe I’m not deep down a libertarian.
On the issues I probably do agree with libertarians to some extent or other but I’m not one who’s for automatic hatred of government not matter what, to me its irrational & bigoted. Oh yeah bigoted is the right correct term because with your average bigot no matter what evidence you show them that homosexuals & blacks aren’t bad people they’ll carry on hating. Its just the same with many a libertarian no matter what evidence they’re shown government can do good they’ll never agree & carry on hating.
At this point many a libertarian will disown me & maybe will want to do worse to me just for saying government can do good. ...[G]overnment isn’t perfect when it comes to implementation but at least government recognizes that food & shelter as a human right. Libertarians don’t consider food & shelter a right yet they believe in the right to life, well in my mind you can’t have the right to life unless you have the means to live life. Oh no Ziggy has crossed the threshold into positive liberty & become a hardcore socialist. Worth noting the man who coined the terms positive & negative liberty & warned of the use of positive liberty Isaiah Berlin himself was a social-liberal. Yeah I’m grateful people do pay taxes to fund help for those who are sick & vulnerable. I’m sorry if you don’t think you should care in some way about your fellow man then you’re a fucking sociopath. Sociopathic, stroppy are they apt descriptions to describe libertarians, well not all libertarians but good percentage I’ve encountered.
Another apt description would be dogmatic & when I’ve banged on libertarian philosophy it’s been fair accusation of me. Problem is if you attempt to deviate from libertarian philosophy then you’ll get whole load of crap from libertarians you’re not libertarian, which would be correct I’m nor I’m a born again social liberal & proud of it. However is it not an irony that libertarians who by nature are total individualists yet so dogmatic about it.
I’d still say I’m an individualist to a good extent for instance if you have a group of people & there’s one individual who happens to passively not conform as in having dyed pink hair etc, I don’t believe that the group have the right to beat up upon them to conform. But how to ensure mob rule, tyranny of the majority etc, well having thought about that dilemma the only way to ensure mob rule or the tyranny of the majority is by the means of governance.
Worth remembering my hero JS Mill though argued in favour individual rights & against the tyranny of the majority. But its also argued that Mill argued in favour of state invention in one’s life if required.
Somebody once said a libertarian views a man down a well as still able to have free move just they need make more effort, a liberal thinks that’s ridiculous & gives the man a helping hand.
Yeah libertarians utopian daydreamers who if you don’t agree with their vision then you’re a statist, a fascist or mentally ill.
Recently on a libertarian discussion forum I saw a libertarian asked…
How Feel About Those Who Disagree With You?
1) Adolf Hitler.
2) Adolf Hitler.
3) Adolf Hitler.
That kind of says it all.
I was never really a libertarian as my website illustrates as libertarians don’t generally campaign for betterment of environmentalism nor champion labor rights. I always tried to portray myself as a moderate libertarian but needless to say even as a moderate I was a fundamentalist.
I’ve said that isn’t it an irony that such an individualistic philosophy is so dogmatic & that dogma breeds fundamentalism & extremism. I wonder if many a libertarian doesn’t have some form of autism being as they don’t seem to understand that not everybody is a libertarian.
Plus I wonder if they realize that there’s more to the world then solely an individual’s own interest, take climate change for instance. Yeah climate change something which libertarians will probably bulk out for being a conspiracy & why is that? Its not because it’s a conspiracy its because it means individuals will need to be making sacrifices to save the environment because if we don’t then we’ll have no fit environment to enjoy any kind of liberty in.
I was a libertarian fundamentalist & wasn’t listening to either sense or truth. But its not I’m rejecting libertarians just ceasing to masquerade around as a libertarian. One of the truisms people kept pointing out to me was that being as I’m disabled & considering other problems I’ve suffered in my life if were not for the welfare state then I’d be dead. Yeah I can’t deny that in fact the government does a fairly good job here in Britain in helping disabled people & well it’s not perfect as nothing ever is but its better then nothing or no garneted assistance.
I’ll admit I’ve said F**K LIBERTARIANISM one before only too go back on the sentiment but this time I really am rejecting libertarianism & waving goodbye too many a libertarians, embracing social-liberalism & liberals.
On the issues I probably do agree with libertarians to some extent or other but I’m not one who’s for automatic hatred of government not matter what
Its just the same with many a libertarian no matter what evidence they’re shown government can do good they’ll never agree & carry on hating.
Sure government isn’t perfect when it comes to implementation but at least government recognizes that food & shelter as a human right.
Oh no Ziggy has crossed the threshold into positive liberty & become a hardcore socialist.
I actually know libertarians who think that the expectation to care for their fellow man is socialistic
Yeah I’m grateful people do pay taxes to fund help for those who are sick & vulnerable. I’m sorry if you don’t think you should care in some way about your fellow man then you’re a fucking sociopath.
Sociopathic, stroppy are they apt descriptions to describe libertarians, well not all libertarians but good percentage I’ve encountered. Another apt description would be dogmatic & when I’ve banged on libertarian philosophy it’s been fair accusation of me. Problem is if you attempt to deviate from libertarian philosophy then you’ll get whole load of crap from libertarians you’re not libertarian
I don’t believe that the group have the right to beat up upon them to conform.
But how to ensure mob rule, tyranny of the majority etc, well having thought about that dilemma the only way to ensure mob rule or the tyranny of the majority is by the means of governance.
Worth remembering my hero JS Mill though argued in favour individual rights & against the tyranny of the majority. But its also argued that Mill argued in favour of state invention in one’s life if required.
Too most libertarians what I’m saying right now is socialistic puke but libertarians misunderstand liberals. Liberals aren’t trying to restrain people from succeeding like socialists they’re trying create an environment so that individuals have the opportunity to succeed.
Somebody once said a libertarian views a man down a well as still able to have free move just they need make more effort, a liberal thinks that’s ridiculous & gives the man a helping hand.
Typically libertarian would legalize all guns & that’s it where as a liberal in favour of liberalizing gun ownership will probably think its best to have some form of regulation.
Liberals are prepared to use the system or adapt the system to achieve their aims but many a libertarian just want to destroy the system & nothing short is a sell out.
because secondly I believe government can do good
Yeah libertarians utopian daydreamers who if you don’t agree with their vision then you’re a statist, a fascist or mentally ill.
I was never really a libertarian as my website illustrates as libertarians don’t generally campaign for betterment of environmentalism nor champion labor rights
One of the truisms people kept pointing out to me was that being as I’m disabled & considering other problems I’ve suffered in my life if were not for the welfare state then I’d be dead.
I really am rejecting libertarianism & waving goodbye too many a libertarians, embracing social-liberalism & liberals.
So yeah, after all of the rambling, my point is just that voliuntarism REALLY works. We just get sick of seeing the money pocketed by already wealthy goverment officals before they help the ones in need... Oh yeah, and the fact that they hold a gun to our head, and if we can't contribute, they make us, or send us to jail, or shoot us.
So yeah, after all of the rambling, my point is just that voliuntarism REALLY works. We just get sick of seeing the money pocketed by already wealthy goverment officals before they help the ones in need... Oh yeah, and the fact that they hold a gun to our head, and if we can't contribute, they make us, or send us to jail, or shoot us.
I never stated that volunteering was bad, but that neither for-profit nor not-for-profit organizations in the private sphere ever use the threat of violence against me if I do not sanction nor partake in them.
See, that's why I don't like pot-heads...
You guys should look into Switzerland a little more before calling it socialist. Switzerland is one of the most libertarian countries in the world. It has the second free-est/most capitalist economy in the entire world after Hong Kong, and also has one of the lowest tax burdens in the world. The marijuana laws are among the least restrictive in the world - there are legal weed stores in most states. The gun laws are also amongst the least restrictive in the world. Switzerland also has one of, if not the most, de-centralized forms of government in the world. It is my understanding that many of the highways in the country are privately owned. I know that saying "the best kind of democracy" is kind of like saying "the best kind of cancer", but Switzerland has a pretty neat direct-democracy system where all you need to bring about a national vote is to get 50,000 people to sign your law proposal.
Yes, there is government funded health-care and welfare programs for poor people. But the country is far from socialist.
You guys should look into Switzerland a little more before calling it socialist. Switzerland is one of the most libertarian countries in the world. It has the second free-est/most capitalist economy in the entire world after Hong Kong, and also has one of the lowest tax burdens in the world. The marijuana laws are among the least restrictive in the world - there are legal weed stores in most states. The gun laws are also amongst the least restrictive in the world. Switzerland also has one of, if not the most, de-centralized forms of government in the world. It is my understanding that many of the highways in the country are privately owned. I know that saying "the best kind of democracy" is kind of like saying "the best kind of cancer", but Switzerland has a pretty neat direct-democracy system where all you need to bring about a national vote is to get 50,000 people to sign your law proposal.
Yes, there is government funded health-care and welfare programs for poor people. But the country is far from socialist.
GAH. I was just advocating Switzerlands Socialist program, because, like you said, it's citizens are usually rated as the happiest against other countries,but you say that it's the most CAPITALIST? Are it's citizens taxed on a voluntary basis? I mean, they're socially free, but from what I've heard, very NOT free economically. But, their tax burden isn't too bad compared to what their getting, so overall, it's not a bad deal for them.
I'm just saying, they DO have restrictions on starting up a business at the spur of the moment that say Chinaman will not (I mean, as long as he's in China and not spitting on the sidewalk or smoking pot).
You guys should look into Switzerland a little more before calling it socialist. Switzerland is one of the most libertarian countries in the world. It has the second free-est/most capitalist economy in the entire world after Hong Kong, and also has one of the lowest tax burdens in the world. The marijuana laws are among the least restrictive in the world - there are legal weed stores in most states. The gun laws are also amongst the least restrictive in the world. Switzerland also has one of, if not the most, de-centralized forms of government in the world. It is my understanding that many of the highways in the country are privately owned. I know that saying "the best kind of democracy" is kind of like saying "the best kind of cancer", but Switzerland has a pretty neat direct-democracy system where all you need to bring about a national vote is to get 50,000 people to sign your law proposal.
Yes, there is government funded health-care and welfare programs for poor people. But the country is far from socialist.
GAH. I was just advocating Switzerlands Socialist program, because, like you said, it's citizens are usually rated as the happiest against other countries,but you say that it's the most CAPITALIST? Are it's citizens taxed on a voluntary basis? I mean, they're socially free, but from what I've heard, very NOT free economically. But, their tax burden isn't too bad compared to what their getting, so overall, it's not a bad deal for them.
I'm just saying, they DO have restrictions on starting up a business at the spur of the moment that say Chinaman will not (I mean, as long as he's in China and not spitting on the sidewalk or smoking pot).
I think he means it has one of the least restrictive economies and social policies of it's citizens. It's socialism-lite in a sense, welfare statism done well, but socialist it is. Then again I'd label almost every government on the planet socialist, so I may be biased in this judgement.
I've never made the mistake of calling myself a libertopian. Bunch of douches.
See, that's why I don't like pot-heads...You aren't helping. |
Yes I am. I'm just not helping you.
I'm not supporting prohibition, I am opposing potheads who have very little general interest in libertarian philosophy calling themselves libertarians and becoming the defining face of the movement. Someone like Obama will legalize pot someday, and some of those people will be licking his socialist asshole for it!
And I never supported lynching anybody, I've merely supported the right of property owners to define rules and punishments. I think you keep coming back to what I've said in defense of Singapore, which is far from perfect but still has some attributes worth defending. It would be an even better example if there were no native Singaporeans and 100% of the population was there by choice - you go to Singapore with a kilo of pot you risk your neck. You work for my company, you don't smoke pot. Etc. Those rules are just.
And I am not an alcoholic.
I'm not supporting prohibition, I am opposing potheads who have very little general interest in libertarian philosophy calling themselves libertarians and becoming the defining face of the movement. Someone like Obama will legalize pot someday, and some of those people will be licking his socialist asshole for it!
And I never supported lynching anybody, I've merely supported the right of property owners to define rules and punishments. I think you keep coming back to what I've said in defense of Singapore, which is far from perfect but still has some attributes worth defending. It would be an even better example if there were no native Singaporeans and 100% of the population was there by choice - you go to Singapore with a kilo of pot you risk your neck. You work for my company, you don't smoke pot. Etc. Those rules are just.
And I am not an alcoholic.
We've got some good straight on people here that do smoke pot, and there are some people that are for the Liberty movement that are very fickle and do it for the drugs, and they WOULD be licking Obama's asshole if he legalized it. Hell, they'd lick Bush's to if it was his last move before he left the whitehouse.
You guys should look into Switzerland a little more before calling it socialist. Switzerland is one of the most libertarian countries in the world. It has the second free-est/most capitalist economy in the entire world after Hong Kong, and also has one of the lowest tax burdens in the world. The marijuana laws are among the least restrictive in the world - there are legal weed stores in most states. The gun laws are also amongst the least restrictive in the world. Switzerland also has one of, if not the most, de-centralized forms of government in the world. It is my understanding that many of the highways in the country are privately owned. I know that saying "the best kind of democracy" is kind of like saying "the best kind of cancer", but Switzerland has a pretty neat direct-democracy system where all you need to bring about a national vote is to get 50,000 people to sign your law proposal.
Yes, there is government funded health-care and welfare programs for poor people. But the country is far from socialist.
GAH. I was just advocating Switzerlands Socialist program, because, like you said, it's citizens are usually rated as the happiest against other countries,but you say that it's the most CAPITALIST? Are it's citizens taxed on a voluntary basis? I mean, they're socially free, but from what I've heard, very NOT free economically. But, their tax burden isn't too bad compared to what their getting, so overall, it's not a bad deal for them.
I'm just saying, they DO have restrictions on starting up a business at the spur of the moment that say Chinaman will not (I mean, as long as he's in China and not spitting on the sidewalk or smoking pot).
I think he means it has one of the least restrictive economies and social policies of it's citizens. It's socialism-lite in a sense, welfare statism done well, but socialist it is. Then again I'd label almost every government on the planet socialist, so I may be biased in this judgement.
I think the subtle difference here, BtB, is that you can have a socialist nation, but not a libertarian nation (contradiction in terms.) I'm sure most of the people in the socialist nation are not socialists, but...
Yes, these things are socialist, and there's a lot of socialism in the US too.
Just because a given country has a handful of the things that the ideology proposes doesn't mean the nation itself is socialist/libertarian.
I think the subtle difference here, BtB, is that you can have a socialist nation, but not a libertarian nation (contradiction in terms.) I'm sure most of the people in the socialist nation are not socialists, but...
Yes, these things are socialist, and there's a lot of socialism in the US too.
I agree that having things like tax-funded health-care and education is socialistic, but that's sort of like saying it's libertarian for there to be privately owned restaurants, legal alcohol or whatever. Just because a given country has a handful of the things that the ideology proposes doesn't mean the nation itself is socialist/libertarian.
QuoteJust because a given country has a handful of the things that the ideology proposes doesn't mean the nation itself is socialist/libertarian.
It's a semantics issue, but at the heart of it is why I essentially reject the idea of government at all. There are no such things as "nations". There are people who consider themselves part of a nation, but each person in that group has their own ideas and values. No nation can ever be described in terms of BELIEF system since there will never be only one. Even "libertarian" as a label is grossly inaccurate since it is an umbrella for so many vantage points. Nations don't exist, therefore there can be no socialist nations or libertarian nations.
I'm really pretty tired of the whole "you're not in it for liberty, you're in it for pot" argument. Some people are in it for the pot, yes. Some people are in it for the consentual underage sex. Some are in it for prositution. Some are in it for homeschooling.
get over it, please. People that are for legalization and not for overall liberty aren't libertarians, voluntaryists, anarcho-capitalists. . .whatever. . .
get your own land, and make your own rules. I'll not be around, because I don't like wet brain fools who can't take a toke.
I think that the problem with libertarianism , for Ziggy - and for many others, is that the lack of tax-funded welfare and aversion to foreign aid often equates to social darwinism ie: libertarians advocate 'survival of the fittest' (to the detriment of the weaker and vulnerable elements of society/ the world).
I think that the problem with libertarianism , for Ziggy - and for many others, is that the lack of tax-funded welfare and aversion to foreign aid often equates to social darwinism ie: libertarians advocate 'survival of the fittest' (to the detriment of the weaker and vulnerable elements of society/ the world).
That's a common misconception. Just because we don't want government aid for others does not mean we don't want aid for others--many of us would even personally provide for it.
Quote from: HOO-HAA on Today at 15:34:21QuoteI think that the problem with libertarianism , for Ziggy - and for many others, is that the lack of tax-funded welfare and aversion to foreign aid often equates to social darwinism ie: libertarians advocate 'survival of the fittest' (to the detriment of the weaker and vulnerable elements of society/ the world).QuoteThat's a common misconception. Just because we don't want government aid for others does not mean we don't want aid for others--many of us would even personally provide for it.
I agree - in fact, without government using our tax to fund whatever foreign aid *they* deem necessary, we would most likely choose to donate more to those charitable causes *we* feel most passionate about.
And then there's the contributions that would come from businesses that are altrusitic and/or looking for the PR.
Personally, I currently describe myself as libertarian yet my day job is with a charity. I see no conflict of interests. In fact, as most of our work involves representing clients who are challenging decisions made by the government, I feel quite empowered to do my job by my libertarian mindset.
For Ziggy, however, the libertarian conflict with government welfare programs seemed to be the main problem...
Again, no such thing as a libertarian state, but there is such a thing as a socialist nation--the moment they begin redistributing wealth, they're socialist nations. Just because most of the nations are socialist by this definition doesn't mean the definition needs changing. The twisted definition is a sign of the times.
I'm really pretty tired of the whole "you're not in it for liberty, you're in it for pot" argument.
At this point many a libertarian will disown me & maybe will want to do worse to me just for saying government can do good. It’s been pointed out to me by folk who aren’t the most hardcore socialists that in Britain that government has pretty much ensured that no individual should go without food & shelter. Sure government isn’t perfect when it comes to implementation but at least government recognizes that food & shelter as a human right. Libertarians don’t consider food & shelter a right yet they believe in the right to life, well in my mind you can’t have the right to life unless you have the means to live life.
Oh no Ziggy has crossed the threshold into positive liberty & become a hardcore socialist. Worth noting the man who coined the terms positive & negative liberty & warned of the use of positive liberty Isaiah Berlin himself was a social-liberal.
I know libertarian who’d say that Nick Clegg’s speech yesterday to conference was totally socialistic, which kind makes me laugh & suggest a libertarian should ask an actual socialist in Britain what they think about the Liberal Democrats. I actually know libertarians who think that the expectation to care for their fellow man is socialistic. But most libertarians I know remind me of Kevin The Teenager. Yeah stroppy teenagers an apt description because on the whole libertarians do seem to be stamping their feet & having a tantrum because they can’t always get their own way. I remember having to deal with Zyra’s whole ‘why do I have to pay tax’ whinge. I never told him that maybe because instead of taking insulin for his diabetes he makes himself life threatening ill. Oh & why is that wouldn’t be because he’s schizophrenic & therefore in need of assistance if only he appreciated that. Yeah I’m grateful people do pay taxes to fund help for those who are sick & vulnerable. I’m sorry if you don’t think you should care in some way about your fellow man then you’re a fucking sociopath.
ziggy was masquerading as a libertarian and a man.
ziggy was masquerading as a libertarian and a man.
That, and Elise was talking about SWEDEN, not Switzerland. Christ. Just because they start with the same letter and are both in Europe does not mean that they're the same.
Where has all the love gone?
[...] The World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness Report currently ranks Switzerland's economy as the second most competitive in the world. [...] |