Welcome to the Free Talk Live bulletin board system!
This board is closed to new users and new posts.  Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years.  Details here.
185859 Posts in 9829 Topics by 1371 Members
Latest Member: cjt26
Home Help
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Profile of Peppermint Pig
| |-+  Show Posts
| | |-+  Messages

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Peppermint Pig

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8
46
General / Red Dead Redemption Multiplayer, Anybody Playing?
« on: July 23, 2010, 08:38:21 PM »
I'm actually just starting the game while my brother has been playing a while. We're on the PS3 here. Wouldn't mind joining up with any other liberty advocates in multiplayer for a good time. You'll find me as Peppermint_Pig. My brother is Stone_Goblin. Feel free to add us as friends with a little heads up as to who you are. :)


47
General / Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« on: July 13, 2010, 03:55:37 PM »
Quote
No, you're just a fucking fink if you don't, and everyone gets to call you one.

Right.

Quote
Now watch the market collapse when there's no money in writing.

You're watching the record industry collapse, no? Might want to think through what I said. No one is entitled to profits just because they think their business model is valid. Just because you think you have good ideas doesn't mean your ideas deserve to be implemented at the expense of others through force. This is intellectual sloth, and it's common in people who believe in government as some kind of tool for positive change.

Quote
So your opinion doesn't matter to him, I would guess. Dude writes good books. If you want to read a good book, buy the thing and read it. If not, don't.

Again, bringing the state in ain't cool, but pretending that something has no value just because you want it for free is bullshit.

I agree with your point on value, though I must caveat: Value is subjective to the individual, and you cannot as an individual escape the realm of value. If you go against the wishes of an author, then you should be ready to accept the consequences.

48
General / Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« on: July 13, 2010, 03:35:27 PM »
This is all very disappointing.

I'm not sure that Smith is considering the repercussions of antagonizing his core audience and supporters of his work. If he's having difficulties with his sales, I can understand how that might influence his reaction to the example of what he alleges as a plagiarism, but opening with inferences of legal action are not conducive of a positive solution.

One could easily do better with an original pledge, though you think he would have been inspired by those who were in turn inspired by his writing. But I guess that's besides the point now that he's voiced his opinion. A little more time and opportunity for discussion would be helpful.. Ian's response and intent looks hasty to me.

I, for one, would want to give credit where it is due, which apparently was given in the forums when the author was mentioned. I do not feel that people must be obligated to give credit, however. By extension, no one is entitled to profits.

I don't own any of his books. This incident does not increase my interest to do so.


49
General / Re: The 24 types of libertarian
« on: July 07, 2010, 01:52:33 PM »
That sounds good. Work with the wording on indoctrinator.. might be hard to fit it in.

That's great Rillion, though these are supposed to be statists.... I think the conspiracy theorist arguing inside job and wanting the government to investigate it would work for that freeloader panel.

50
General / Re: The 24 types of libertarian
« on: July 07, 2010, 01:01:55 PM »
Second panel is great. Stockholm Syndrome is effective too.

Still the same critique about nanny stater: Could be a teacher's union thing.. Teacher: 'Our' children are becoming mindless zombies because you won't raise my salary!

Be sure to update the credits/link material. :P


51
General / Re: The 24 types of libertarian
« on: July 07, 2010, 12:33:00 PM »
These are great. I would suggest moving Nanny Stater from first row fourth column to the fifth row third column. Currently, it doesn't work because the character looks like they're trying to make an appeal FOR something. I think that would be better used with the 'for the cihldren' argument: The Teacher - Raise My Salary, It's For The Children!

Fourth row, first column might be better for the elitism angle like 'too smart for freedom'... Maybe one of those political wonks/wonkette (pit of vipers) types who is obsessed with political drama and ridicules anything pro liberty.

Third Row, Third Column: Conspiracy Theorist: 9/11 Was an Inside Job!!! Why isn't government investigating this??

Second Row, Second Column could be an anti-immigration panel... that or the guy with guns: I'll be damned if I sit idly by while those immigrants invade the land of the free!!

Not sure about the guy smiling on the computer...

Is there a higher resolution copy of this??

52
General / Re: Dear Alex Jones Fans Who Just Found Out About FTL
« on: June 16, 2010, 12:13:57 AM »
I'm referring specifically to "Pantheism" and "The Law of Attraction."

I consider both to be utter BS.


THIS.

Ian's confused perhaps? Pantheism is a more vanilla version of religious mysticism. He espouses it as if its purpose is to be accepted by others, but it's not too clear why he supports it for himself, which would essentially be the question of value.

Panpsychism, however, is something entirely different altogether and worthy of consideration.

53
General / Re: Lego Rifle
« on: June 15, 2010, 11:48:21 PM »
Did somebody mention Lego?? :)

That's awesome!

Laetitia, if you need any parts for your sons to build, stop by our BrickLink shop and take a look.

54
General / Re: Open-borders is not pro-liberty
« on: June 15, 2010, 11:44:11 PM »
Quote
All I hear on from the folks answering me on this thread is how I should just forget my culture, how cultues suck anyhow (unless they are the cultures of the third world people you seem to want to be flooded by) and how I need to get over the past and blah, blah, blah. I could get the exact same arguments on a Leftist-communist website. I see no point in continuing this debate.

Feel free to pursue your culture. Just don't force me to support it.

The pro-liberty argument is consistent. No one has the authority to initiate force against individuals engaged in peaceful action or exchange.


55
General / Re: Take Yer "Liberty" And Shove It!
« on: May 15, 2010, 11:33:36 AM »
Quote
I don't give a shit if you don't think I'm relevant.

That's fine. I'm discussing your ideas. I never suggested whether you were or not.

Quote
...and I guess that's the best I can do. I CERTAINLY am not trying to be a pretentious show off ...like you, by using big words like "ontological" ....and things like that. I don't need to use those words to make my point. I don't even need to use "logic" or whatever to make my point. I don't even need to make a point.

I can tell that you are getting all freaked by my method of approach. You want to throw all kinds of words at me like "ontological"...as if it's going to make my knees buckle.

If you're not intimidated by the use of big words, then why are you complaining?? If you're offended by the use of words to explain a position, you're in the wrong place.

Pull up your big kid pants, princess. The burden of proof is on you to prove your position with, yes, the use of logic, deduction, or empirical evidence. You're not willing to have that discussion...

Quote
You can't argue with me...because there is nothing to argue with.

Yet more deflection and avoidance. Well aren't you a philosopher king, or princess rather...

56
General / Re: Take Yer "Liberty" And Shove It!
« on: May 15, 2010, 12:42:31 AM »
Quote
You make too many words.... ideas....and quotes. And then when I don't address every single thing in yer flurry of things, you suggest that I am trying to avoid something.

I'm not expecting you to respond to everything I'm saying. But when you choose to comment or critique on what I say, try actually addressing the content of my post. Your non sequitur assertions are an avoidance tactic.

This...
Quote
Q: What is a conceptual trap?

A: "Liberty" is a conceptual trap.

Q: Why is "liberty" a conceptual trap?

A: Because the foundational practice of existence is mere survival, while striving for pleasure over pain, and so whatever techniques to achieve such a goal will be employed...and this includes the designs of concepts...such as "liberty". And all of these techniques are disingenuous, and so therefore....The NAP Is Crap...and Crap Is The NAP.

and this...
Quote
And so therefore...it is all about exploitation in this quest for comfort. Lew Rockwell is the "poster boy" of this.

are conflicting statements. If existence is mere survival, and creatures inevitably take advantage of other creatures to survive, then to argue it is exploitation is irrelevant as this is an opinion of subjective moral value and therefore outside the realm of ontological discourse. The NAP is also irrelevant in this framework, as is any ethical argument you're trying to drive home with, especially these specious and derisive Lew Rockwell statements of yours. So... disingenuous? According to what??? A world absent of any values, except of course the ones you decide are relevant?

57
As in turning it on and off when it's appropriate? Sure.

58
General / Re: Take Yer "Liberty" And Shove It!
« on: May 14, 2010, 10:06:42 AM »
Quote
The "NAP" will not be "internalized", because the NAP is bullshit. As I mentioned ...it's just a veil to cover up the ugliness.

People can recognize the imperfect nature of the world and still value an ideal such as non-aggression. Your position is predicated on the notion that the NAP is bullshit, which isn't an actual argument. If people, in understanding the NAP, choose therefore to not initiate force on someone then it is not bullshit, and it's not a veil. It is effective and informative proof of the non-aggression principle in action.

Quote
I bring up Lew Rockwell because he is a sort of iconic figure in the movement, and since he is rich, and no romantic homeless vagrant spewing sublime and divine teachings, Rockwell can be used as an example for the libertarian ways, that is, pure exploitation in order to maintain a life of comfort.

You have no grasp of value theory whatsoever. If being rich makes someone's arguments wrong, how rich, or how poor must someone be in order to be correct? How does that make any fucking sense at all? Who has the authority to decide who is right?

Just because you give money to someone who is 'poor' doesn't mean your arguments are correct or that you're a good person, particularly if you take that money forcefully from someone else, according to the NAP. Under what ethical principle do you justify your position? 

Quote
Rockwell's veils of "liberty" and "freedom" are merely there to cover up his elitism, and desire to subjugate. And that's why I say...no matter what....somebody will have to clean Lew Rockwell's dirty shorts, but I'm not going to do it....nor will I continue to try to convince others into doing it ....by promoting a conceptual trap called "Liberty".

You're basing your position on what Rockwell thinks and then projecting that onto libertarianism.

Absolute liberty isn't possible. Is that why you're a nihilist, because you're frustrated that the universe doesn't afford you a utopia? You do not speak like you understand libertarianism at all.

Quote
And I don't "as if you believe you are the first person to ever discover that the world is imperfect and people can use imagery...blah blah blah." But, sometimes people need to be reminded of these things, otherwise, that search for "truth" may go on forever, while the individual forever gets ripped off by swindlers and hustlers.

Yes, you do, and you do it again in the same paragraph. You run away from the mere mention of a philosophical or ethical debate to attack Lew Rockwell and claim people are frauds.. but frauds according to what? Your own non-committal ranting? IF you wanted to discuss libertarian ideology, then you wouldn't be going through all this avoidance.
   

59
General / Re: Take Yer "Liberty" And Shove It!
« on: May 13, 2010, 04:46:44 PM »
Quote
It was some 5-6 years ago when I decided to identify as a "Libertarian", and even though I had problems adjusting to certain liberty-oriented ideas, I figured that over time, these things would get sorted out. But the problem of the human condition, and nature's perpetual pulverization does not allow any ideology to take hold in any valid sense.

Let's turn this around and see if you are actually willing to have a discussion instead of repeating the same thing over and over again...

Do you treat others as your slaves (considering you seem eager to accuse others of being slave masters)? By identifying as a libertarian, have you successfully internalized an understanding of the non-aggression principle??

Becoming libertarian doesn't mean other people are going to magically stop treating each other like shit. Libertarianism is not, nor will it ever be THE solution for every problem. It is an ideology, a compass for action, not a blueprint for society. It is meant for individuals to understand first and foremost. This is why it is not a political ideology and cannot be judged as a failure on abstract grounds such as 'society' or 'nation state'. These measures are inconsistent, inappropriate, and lack informative value compared to addressing the value of the ideas and the value of the individual based on their actions.

Quote
If you fall for any of this "liberty" or "freedom" crap, it means that Lew Rockwell got you to bite his hook, and pretty soon, Rockwell will be getting you to scrub his dirty underwear for him.

When you lift all these veils away, you are presented with the same thing: The Master & Servant Relationship. The veil of Libertarianism/Minarchy/Anarchy and what not.... is the deception of the master, and so, libertarianism is a waste of time for the ones who a playing a servant role.

The truth is ugly, and so if you see something that looks nice, it's the veil designed to cover up the ugliness of the thing. Libertarianism is another system of deception and exploitation, and that's it, and I am convinced that all systems are the same, so there is no point in seeking out another system.

Pointless spiel is pointless. Why should anybody care what you think if the profession of one's values is reduced to an explicit conflict of master vs slave? Why are you obsessed with Lew Rockwell?? Do you believe you're convincing anyone that you have a solution when you refuse to respond to criticism?

You don't answer people's questions and you repeat the same rhetorical nihilism as if you believe you are the first person to ever discover that the world is imperfect and people can use imagery to promote lies. Yeah.. You're so insightful! lol

60
General / Re: Stock Market Game Thread
« on: May 13, 2010, 03:27:20 AM »
Funaroo! I might try this.

Is this a race to the bottom?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8

Page created in 0.017 seconds with 30 queries.