 
|
This board is closed to new users and new posts. Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years. Details here.
|
|
The Free Talk Live BBS
Profile of lucidhawk
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.
16
General / Re: A short analysis of why "rights" discussions fall apart at the seems..
« on: May 24, 2011, 02:04:40 PM »
?
17
General / Re: A short analysis of why "rights" discussions fall apart at the seems..
« on: May 24, 2011, 01:57:19 PM »I like to say that you only have the right to things you earned. Some like to think entitlements are rights, they ain't.
You didn't earn your life; unless you consider survival/eating food your earning of life?
And you didn't earn your liberty; it's yours and others infringe upon it.
Also acquiring property through first appropriation or inheritance is valid.
18
General / A short analysis of why "rights" discussions fall apart at the seams..
« on: May 24, 2011, 10:36:05 AM »
Natural right philosophers describe the three natural rights as "life","liberty" and "property".
As a libertarian; if I put forth that we have the "right" to these what am I saying?
Am I saying that others are required to protect my life, liberty and property? Or that others are required to give me life, liberty and property?
No
I'm saying I have the right to have and protect my own life, liberty and property and others have their right to do the same.
SO what is functionally different between these and a "right" to health care?
Well actually nothing..
That's the problem.. Conversations break down because the "natural rights" are framed differently than all other rights.
Because unless you change the terminology, you do have a right to health care as long as you don't initiate aggression, fraud or theft.
A "right" to health care should be seen and expressed in the same way as the other rights.
Just as you can't ethically say that people are required to give you property because you have a right to property; the same goes for health care no one is required to give you health care.
Thoughts? Counter points?
As a libertarian; if I put forth that we have the "right" to these what am I saying?
Am I saying that others are required to protect my life, liberty and property? Or that others are required to give me life, liberty and property?
No
I'm saying I have the right to have and protect my own life, liberty and property and others have their right to do the same.
SO what is functionally different between these and a "right" to health care?
Well actually nothing..
That's the problem.. Conversations break down because the "natural rights" are framed differently than all other rights.
Because unless you change the terminology, you do have a right to health care as long as you don't initiate aggression, fraud or theft.
A "right" to health care should be seen and expressed in the same way as the other rights.
Just as you can't ethically say that people are required to give you property because you have a right to property; the same goes for health care no one is required to give you health care.
Thoughts? Counter points?
19
General / Re: Herman Cain for President
« on: May 22, 2011, 09:53:22 AM »
Herman Cain strikes me as someone who just knows how to stroke the patriotist mind penis of lazy unintellectual America..
When I hear him speak it goes something like this:
USA, USA, USA, American, America, America, America, America! USA, USA, American, America, America, USA, America, America! America, America, America, America! Stars and Stripes!
Admittedly even Ron Paul is guilty of quite a lot of this but what he espouses has actual substance.
When I hear him speak it goes something like this:
USA, USA, USA, American, America, America, America, America! USA, USA, American, America, America, USA, America, America! America, America, America, America! Stars and Stripes!
Admittedly even Ron Paul is guilty of quite a lot of this but what he espouses has actual substance.
20
General / No more lame internet debates with this people! Throw the book at Commies!
« on: May 22, 2011, 08:01:31 AM »
The massive number of anarcho-communists and anarcho-syndicalists I've seen on the internet over the past year disturbs to me..
Yeah we can say it's all fine and dandy if they are committed to the nonaggression principle. But attempts at communism always seem to devolve into the worst forms of statism.
Lets not forget that Marx himself said communism was without rulers.
..So these countries that attempted socialism in order to supposedly evolve to communism were attempting to evolve into stateless societies and look at how BAD that went.
For the sake of efficiency.. I want a single book I can refer them to and move on. ..There are plenty of theoretical works that completely decimate socialist paradigms through logic.
But these people don't listen to logic..
So I ask.. Where is a book solely on the history of attempts at communes and communism in the 20th century?
Where is this book? Why hasn't it been written? I can only find a few really crappy sounding books.
I seriously cannot find one even at Mises.org.
This book is demanding itself be written..
Am I going to have to perform necromancy to get Rothbard back from the dead to write this thing?
Yeah we can say it's all fine and dandy if they are committed to the nonaggression principle. But attempts at communism always seem to devolve into the worst forms of statism.
Lets not forget that Marx himself said communism was without rulers.
..So these countries that attempted socialism in order to supposedly evolve to communism were attempting to evolve into stateless societies and look at how BAD that went.
For the sake of efficiency.. I want a single book I can refer them to and move on. ..There are plenty of theoretical works that completely decimate socialist paradigms through logic.
But these people don't listen to logic..
So I ask.. Where is a book solely on the history of attempts at communes and communism in the 20th century?
Where is this book? Why hasn't it been written? I can only find a few really crappy sounding books.
I seriously cannot find one even at Mises.org.
This book is demanding itself be written..
Am I going to have to perform necromancy to get Rothbard back from the dead to write this thing?
21
General / Re: Philosophical piracy on the rise?
« on: May 18, 2011, 04:07:29 AM »Is it just me, or am I seeing an increase in statist posts on liberty oriented facebook walls and other places?
I figure it might have to do with a recruiting effort, trying to subvert the weaker-constitutioned folk... but some of
'em aren't coming across so much like trolls.
Yes..
The statist trolls are scared to death of liberty, not unlike the major news stations and Republican establishment with Ron Paul when they found out he might have sliver of a chance.
Like this horseshit : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNcKbWK0o0U
Do a search on Ron Paul on Youtube 1/2 the videos in the past 2 weeks are anti- Ron Paul videos clearly posted deliberately for no other reason than to smear him.
Why do they waste their time on this?
They don't even present an argument. They just yell buzz words like "racist" "anarchist" and ramble meaningless fluff.
They are dumb and frightened ...and many of them I would dare to guess are paid off shills.
22
General / Re: An english word for the "desire to control others"
« on: May 12, 2011, 09:44:21 AM »
I don't support your goosestepperism!
23
General / Re: An english word for the "desire to control others"
« on: May 12, 2011, 09:39:22 AM »
Not bad but I think it would be best if the word was derived from something like : domination, authoritarian, administration , control, despotic, totalitarian, tyrannical..
Or we could semi-disguise the word : evilism
Example of the word in a conversation :
Statist: "I wish they would restrict gun ownership more."
Libertarian: "I don't know about that.. I try not involve myself in evilism.."
Statist: "Evilism?! I don't support evil?! Evilism?! What's that?!
Libertarian: "The desire to control others through force."
Statist: "But.. but.."
Or we could semi-disguise the word : evilism
Example of the word in a conversation :
Statist: "I wish they would restrict gun ownership more."
Libertarian: "I don't know about that.. I try not involve myself in evilism.."
Statist: "Evilism?! I don't support evil?! Evilism?! What's that?!
Libertarian: "The desire to control others through force."
Statist: "But.. but.."
24
General / Re: What Video Games Are You Currently playing?
« on: May 12, 2011, 09:26:30 AM »
Playing "Splosion Man" on XBLA and "Outland" , both are pretty decent sidescroll platformers.
One of these days I'd like to get back into Red Dead Redemption and Fallout Vegas.
One of these days I'd like to get back into Red Dead Redemption and Fallout Vegas.
25
General / Re: An english word for the "desire to control others"
« on: May 12, 2011, 03:43:41 AM »
http://www.wikihow.com/Create-a-Made-Up-Word
Here are some made up words I have come up with so far:
controlism
athoratism
dominism
domis
aethus
admos
Here are some made up words I have come up with so far:
controlism
athoratism
dominism
domis
aethus
admos
26
General / An english word for the "desire to control others"
« on: May 12, 2011, 03:19:43 AM »We (the liberty minded) must take the conversation away from statists that libertarians are selfish and turn it toward the very real fact that most statists are driven by fear, envy and centrally the desire to control others through force.
...I was thinking about the power of language itself on culture and about the visceral impact of concepts when they are boiled down to single words such as : greed, selfishness, lust and envy etc.
And I realized.. I can't think of a good english word that exists for the 'desire to control others'.
The word "controlling" used in context of describing someones personality; implies this but only when used in context and the word clearly doesn't have quite a sharpness to it like "racist" or "greed".
What if we create this word (or find one. What is it??) and build into it a negative connotation (as it deserves).
Wouldn't this be helpful in framing conversations with statists?
Is it not a central topic of all human liberty to oppose the idea that it's OK/good to control everyone else.. and we don't even have a word for the idea/concept that we are against?
In a way, the relatively new word "statist" (coined by libertarians in the 1940s) has accomplished some of what I'm talking about..
But "statist" really just implies someone who believes in the virtue of the state and the average person does not automatically connect it to the desire to control others.
I believe when you have a good word for a something which there is no word, it's not difficult to get that word to spread..
If this topic is successful I'll add a poll.
27
General / Re: Why a "Constitution" makes sense for a stateless voluntary society..
« on: May 10, 2011, 08:51:19 AM »
Thank you Hans Hoppe :
Video:
http://blog.mises.org/16747/the-power-of-hoppe/
Text version:
http://mises.org/daily/5270/State-or-PrivateLaw-Society
Video:
http://blog.mises.org/16747/the-power-of-hoppe/
Text version:
http://mises.org/daily/5270/State-or-PrivateLaw-Society
28
General / Re: Ron Paul won't beat Obama because Americans will get afraid
« on: May 10, 2011, 08:38:58 AM »
Lew Rockwell the founder and Chairman of the largest most successful liberty website/institute on the planet racist? What? When? Where?!
29
The Rubber Room - Not Safe for Work / Re: Top choice of straight or lesbian porn? (poll)
« on: May 06, 2011, 11:06:20 AM »
41 views and only 1 vote. Bah this poll is a total fail. I'll add your suggestion though.
30
The Rubber Room - Not Safe for Work / Top choice of straight or lesbian porn? (poll)
« on: May 06, 2011, 04:21:03 AM »
Nothing against gay males; but as a straight male I don't really care about making the poll twice as long and seeing guy-guy preferences.