I ask because they are being used as such - which I think is a scary prospect.
http://polycentricorder.blogspot.com/2008/12/why-i-dislike-hoppeans-and-libertarian.html
Libertarianism attracts kooks. There, I said it. 9/11 skeptics, white nationalists, bona-fide exploitative businessmen seeking to justify their actions (see Huerta de Soto’s comments on libertarianism in Latin America), the list goes on. This isn’t peculiar to libertarianism of course, but for every political philosophy there are groups of people that have not read the literature, have misread it, or wilfully interpret it to fit their particular agenda.
It’s funny that I pissed off some people so much they had to blog me.
I certainly won’t be returning the favor because I don’t care what they think Libertarianism is.
I suppose that is representative of the Mises Institute.
Well Polycentric Order is run by BrainPolice. I didn’t look at the blog entry, so I don’t know if it was him, but many of the bloggers from that group blog are members here. Just checked, that’s BP’s post.
And the C4SS is a mutualist front, as evidenced by Kevin Carson being paid to post blog entries about whatever is bothering him.
That said, some of the comments at a glance are very stupid. I don’t know if they are just taken out of context, but that’s embarrassing to me. It’s also very embarrassing that BrainPolice would bait these comments, and then use them as an expose to diminish Mises.org. After all, his blog here gets him most of his attention online. In the SEO industry, when you run a blog or web page on someone else’s site, that is known as parasite hosting. But you’re not supposed to try to kill the parasite.
Kids. Sheesh.
You might want to slow down and find out who these folks are that you are calling kooks.
Brainpolice has gotten a little paraniod after an Anarchist named Stodles and him got into a cyber war. The basic story is that this Stodlles guy was defending National Anarchism, and ever since BP has gotten a little paranoid. Can’t blame him to much, the whole thing got way out of hand. He should calm down in a couple of weeks.
I don’t know if that is entirely true, isn’t Roderick T. Long also affilated with the C4SS?
Kids need to grow up.
I see your point to a certain extant, but it he does make the forum interesting, and his blog is thought provoking.
How can you name your blog “Polycentric Order”, but object to cities owned by entrepreneurs at the same time? That’s an unlikely, but perfectly sound distribution of property. For some people, it may be convenient to be merely renters and not owners. Some people may be comfortable with limited responsibility so they can enjoy their life instead of worrying about property disputes.
Do we all have to be self-sufficient hermits to be good libertarians?
I personally don’t see any problem in quoting and citing Mises blogs from the community. It would be disappointing if they weren’t discussed or linked.
This is what I brought up on his “Remembering Proudhon” blog post, but he disagreed, and eventually ignored my point.
EDIT: Not to attack him in general; I’m glad he’s here on the forum, and I often find his blog(s) interesting.
80% of those were me I’d say. Good to know, I wouldn’t have it any other way.
Excellent! I’m pissing off all the right people.
And Kinsella is a mensch.
Brainpolice’s blog is serious business, I’d worry for your career if I were you.
Read the comments on the Center for a Kevin Carson Society post.
I stayed up unti nearly 6 AM looking many of them up. Most are in response to him, many are edited out of context etc.
If you read my critique on these monarchal city-states (yes, that’s precisely what they are), you’d see that they aren’t polycentric or decentralized enough from my point of view. It’s a centralized monopoly on a city! I explained in great detail what I’m refering to. The entire point is that a city government selling itself off to a private monopolist who goes on to have absolute control over everyone in the territory, is just a transfer of state ownership really. You very well know that my argument is against such faux privatization of cities, not any kind of justified homesteading.
The idea of everyone being self-sufficient hermits is a non-sequitor from my position.
I’m not paranoid, stodles is. I’m just flabbergasted. He actually hired a private investigator to “drop docs” on me, and claimed I’ve lied about my age and such. There are no docs to drop, I’m not hiding any specific personal information, and that was just an outright dishonest attack. I havent made a video response to him or d4shawn for weeks, I’m blocked by stodles anyways, but they have continued to fan flames. They’ve continued the crusade, via multiple videos over the past few weeks, without any responses from me aside from a few clarifying comments to overcome their dishonesty.
By the way, while I made the original complication of the quotes in a blog post, I wasn’t using them to represent the Mises Institute as a whole, I was using them to represent certain specific sentiments within held by certain people within (roughly relating to Hoppe, hence the title invoking “The Hoppeans” rather than “The Mises Institute”). I have no inherent problem with the Mises Institute, otherwise I wouldn’t be here. Furthermore, I didn’t submit the blogpost to Kevin Carson myself. Apparently Francios Tremblay made a blogpost linking to mine, which is where Kevin Carson got it.
The quotes were a collection of absurd and over-the-top (albiet presumably serious) claims from GilesStratton, Byzantine and a few others. The best label I can grace these people with is simply “confused”.