I just explained to you, that all rights are property rights.
But they have to violate property rights to do so.
Do you support democracy?
Instead of debunking, you should invest some time reading FANL. Maybe when you can speak in the vernacular of Austro-libertarians, you will be able to communicate effectively here. Those dictionaries are about as useful as Wikipedia or Paul Krugman’s blog.
He is on NBC because the liberal network wants what they consider to be a conservative punching bag (Buchanan) this does not make him mainstream as no one in the conservative movement listens to him but liberals and others who watch NBC stations don’t know any better.
Well you sure are repeating public school anti-U.S. propaganda maybe it is just your country’s bias, I’ve seen it before. I am the farthest thing from a “joe-sixpack” and I am the last person to parrot anything I have not researched myself. You seem confused on who you are talking to.
Figure I should nail this one too. All government is socialism. It’s just a matter of degrees. The opposite of socialism, and its sub tenets, fascism, communism etc, is libertarianism. It’s decentralization and individual sovereignty.
So, he’s not a conservative, not a liberal, not a libertarian. What is he ? Maybe he’s just a heretic who doesn’t believe in the ‘good war’ ? …
Anyways how come Buchanan doesn’t think WWII was justified ? Maybe he was raised and attended school in a ‘third world country’ ?
I’m just stating facts I learnt by myself. You on the other hand parrot what all amerikan children parrot - WWII was a the ‘good war’. Again, it was because of pearl harbor, n’est ce pas ?
Of course. And it just happens that your original research™ is no different from war propaganda taught to all american schoolkids.
LOL.
That is not true. Government can be laissez faire or socialist. Our current government is partly socialist but it doesn’t have to be.
He is not a mainstream conservative.
Because he doesn’t understand what he is talking about.
I don’t believe any war is good but some are necessary.
American public school kids are actually taught progressive propaganda.
We agree. Government is not laissez-faire or socialist. Government can be more or less socialist, but it is still socialist.
The US government is increasingly socialist, and in the economic sense, more socialist than China now. Thanks to Bush and his prescription medicine program, which laid the way for Obamacare, and his NCLB which is much worse than the President giving a speech to some students nationwide. But of course, you supported Bush socialism, right? There is nothing about Obama, which is any more socialistic than Bush. Not one bit. Bush was every much a big government socialist as Obama hopes to be, the difference is, Bush got the 9/11 crisis, so he spent trillions on foreign adventurism against boogeymen, and Obama is going to spend trillions on domestic kickbacks and graft for environmental and healthcare expansion.
Bush couldn’t help Katrina, and Obama can’t save the economy, but they are both are going to make sure YOU pay for it.
This is why I left RPF. Because there are these republicans who think if they say they are for lower taxes and march around in a tri-corner hat, they are libertarian. That is not libertarianism. That’s not even beltway libertarianism for crissakes.
If you’re going to be a libertarian, then take the time to learn about it. It is a political philosophy based on a moral code of non-aggression. It is not a subdivision of conservatism or progressive liberalism. It is not compatible with political parties or candidates. It is not compatible with democracy. If you want to work from a dictionary definition that isn’t the definition as understood here, then find a website like RPF where people think fiscal conservatism is libertarianism, and enjoy yourself.
If you would like to find our what libertarianism is, I recommend you start reading the daily articles here each day, and perhaps start following the articles at LRC, and the LRC blog.
In order to maintain property rights you need a third party arbitrator (government) or the power to keep them yourself.
Why would they have to violate property rights? That doesn’t make any sense.
No I support a Constitutional Republic.
I speak English and will continue to use English dictionaries to define my words and continue to point out the misuse of my language. I have had no problem communicating effectively here as I understand the definition of words.
LOL. So let me translate from your newspeak to English “doesn’t know what’s he’s talking about” actually means “buchanan is not parroting jingoist propaganda so he must be an idiot”.
Indeed. And progressive propaganda is, for instance, that the ‘good’ anglo-american democracies had to fight against the evil anti-democratic nazis.
Just the very same propaganda that neocons like you repeat.
OT: I consider myself an ancap after doing a lot of thinking about it, but I still support the Free State Project. What are your views on how it helps or hampers anarcho-capitalism (due to being an endeavor in minarchism)?
Of course government can be laissez-faire, just because it is not currently does not mean it is an impossibility.
Yes I agree the government is becoming more and more socialist. Bush was a disaster in many ways with the prescription drug program and tarp but it pales in comparison to Obamacare, Obama Stimulus and upcoming Cap and Trade legislation. He is rolling back reforms that Bush enacted to push back the welfare state. No I don’t support Bush socialism.
I disagree Obama is ten times worse. Obama is already advocating for tariffs and new taxes to support his big government, big spending progressive ideology.
That is supply-side economics. That is not what I am talking about. I am talking about not only lowering taxes, but reducing government spending, repealing the welfare state and repealing regulations and laws.
I am aware of Rothbardian Anarcho-Capitalism, which I do not advocate. Though I have enjoyed reading many of Rothbard’s books as well as the daily articles here for over two years and many of the archives none of it has changed my mind on minarchism. But I also read Cato, Reason, The Heartland Institute, FEE, The independent institute and The Heritage Foundation.
Progessives would be insulted your used the word “anglo-american” as it would hurt minorities “feelings” thus they would never say that. The Nazis were socialists whom you appear to support, irony.
Please define neo-con.
You only need the latter. The former is an agent. That agent doesn’t have to be a government. It could be a private security firm. It could be an insurance agency. It could be a volunteer local militia. But you’re on the right track now.
Sure it does. When you don’t pay taxes, they violate your rights. When they want to build a freeway through your property, they violate your rights. When they force your children to go to school, they violate your rights (and probably the child’s as well). When they go to war, they violate your property to pay for it.
If the state was voluntary, it would not be a state. It is by its very nature, involuntary. It uses compulsion to maintain consent and authority.
Same thing essentially. People can only change the Constitution by vote. An individual cannot withdraw from the Constitution as social contract. That is Lysander Spooner’s point. The Constitution has no authority as a legal document, because the people who agreed to it, have long since died, and it is impossible to contract the unborn. Nor is it a slave contract, that is, one that cannot be withdrawn from by the constituent.
That’s fine. But I suggest you start doing research on LvMI, as it is the richest site on libertarianism and AE on the web. It might be one of the richest non-governmental/educational websites on American history as well.
Stranger had a good post today or the last couple days, about how FSP is like an invading army, like illegal immigrants, moving into a community and seeking to overturn the culture and legal norms in place. And if you watch the roundtable discussion with Molyneux, Stephens, the guy from FTL and Sam Dodson (its on YT, I think on Molyneux’s channel - stefbot) its mentioned that the locals aren’t exactly crazy about the FSP in Keene.
I don’t see anything wrong with the FSP except they should be moving into a territory and buying up the property. When the community is mostly libertarians, not because they chased people off, but they bid for the value to own it, then they might have more success.
I see things very differently from that project though. I think we’ve got a lot of work to do, before we worry about seasteading or FSP. There is so much education that needs to be done. LvMI has really taken off in the last couple years, they need more funding, more resources, more labour. Even if a FSP works (and I am not sure it can, because even the people there are everything from Constitutionalists to Anarcho-Capitalists) the world is much bigger than Keene, let alone NH.
I’ve lamented that people don’t do more offline, but there is so much that can be done online because we can all network, even though we’re geographically scattered. And short of moving to NH, this method of organization seems to me to be a second best, and in fact with the ability to reach everywhere, it may even be the ideal option.
Keep learning, keep sharing, keep working. Ancap is an idea and a goal. Until the goal is in sight, we can develop the idea.
Poor poptech. What has your quibbling got to do with the fact that your right wing propaganda is no different than progressive propaganda (WWII good for democracy) ? By the way, the nazis were fascists…you know, like roosevelt and churchil…
Now, if you were a libertarian, you’d know that libertarians are always at odds with both left and right. You on the other hand, as a right winger, basically agree with the progressive views on war.
But okay, I admit you are pretty clever. You did a pretty good job unmasking my background. I am a marxist who got all his education from a third-world-country marxist-public-school. And this is what they taught me :
they taught what libertarianism is, and taught me about authors like Bastiat, Molinari, Spencer, Spooner, Paine, among others. Those authors were all included in my high-school marxist curriculum.
they also taught me the reason why WWII was not a defensive war. They taught me how wars are gross violations of individual rights and are directly linked to socialism (see Mises on war socialism) - see Herbert Spencer on militant vs. industrial social organization.
So, my position is the result of my marxist schooling. I can’t deny it.
But, what about Buchanan ? Did he also go to same school I went ? What’s wrong with poor Buchanan ? Why is he so unameriKKKAn ?
What if you do not have this power and cannot afford protection, does that mean your lose your property?
I mostly agree but this was not what I was referring to.
All states are voluntary unless they restrict you from leaving.
Absolutely not. Democracy is mob rule, where a Constitutional Republic is an elected government limited in power by the constitution and protected by checks and balances.
Of course you can, you can leave the state.
I have done extensive research on it and continue to, that does not mean I agree with everything or endorse Anarcho-capitalism. LvMI is an excellent resource.
NAZI - “Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei” - National Socialist German Workers’ Party
Roosevelt was another progressive socialist. Churchill was a classical liberal/conservative.
Define and source for me what the progressive views of way are.
Buchanan is clueless.
Laissez-faire as you use it, is just less socialism. It is not the absence of socialism.
No, Bush helped set the table for cap and trade too. He was out there chanting the AGW nonsense. They are just puppets. Obama is just a face. It shows how silly conservatives are when they mock Obama, but the real enemies are the Congress. The Congress write and vote on the legislation, Obama just signs it. But that’s what I mean, conservatives, like liberals, don’t get it. There is no left and right. That is a false paradigm.
Like I said, Obama is not worse, he’s just phase II, or phase 44, depending on how you look at it. Bush was able to inflate and double the debt because the economy was in a boom for most of his time. Obama is raising the debt, because he has to pay for the excesses of the Bush years. But again, there is no Obama or Bush. There is the Congress. If they don’t write and pass the bills, nothing would move. They are the ones raising the debt. They will pass cap and trade. They are the check on Obama. They failed to check Bush, so they will fail to check Obama, because the American government has been getting bigger since Day 1, which is entirely predictable because that is what states do. If you ever get into Hoppe or Higgs, you’ll hear some compelling analysis on the nature of leviathan.
But no tax is legitimate. They are all illegitimate. They are all extracted by force where consent is lacking. It’s no different than being mugged.
As Rothbard said, “government is a gang of thieves, writ large”. And now, I truly believe that after listening to Marc Stephens compelling argument about how there are no citizens, because there is no social contract (slight variation on Spooner).
What about Hoppean anarcho-capitalism? What about Rockwellian Libertarianism? What about Blockean plumbline libertarianism?
So you still advocate violence as a first resort to get your kind of government. Not much can be done about that.
If someone violates your rights? That’s possible. It is impossible to guarantee rights. Although it is more likely you would not acquire and retain property you could not defend. It would be like buying a house with no roof.
I know, but its a logical consequence of a state. Your rights will be violated if you do not comply with the rules laid out by others.
Oh, so the South had a right to secede? Texas could join Mexico? Hawaii can go back to being an independent nation? Alaskan sovereignty?
Yeah, that doesn’t work.
Which is why we are here. Studying economics, or the effect of incentives on human action. And as Hoppe demonstrates, the incentives for politicians, are to grab more power, and since they are the sole arbiters of law, they determine how much power they can take.
Oh really? You can secede?
You don’t have to endorse anything. But if you endorse the state, you’re endorsing violence instead of voluntary cooperation.
No it is the presence of government that does not interfere in the economy like we have today. Socialism is government control and planning of the economy.
No he was not, he delayed it for 8 years and would have vetoed any bill passed.
Without question I am more concerned about a Democratic congress than the President. But Obama clearly is the cheerleader for progressive socialist programs and has been using executive orders to circumvent congress (not that he really needs to). Obama can also veto it which is why having one party with complete power is more dangerous than anything.
He is raising the debt because he signed a trillion dollar stimulus package and wants to spend much more. He didn’t have to do anything but cut spending.
Actually this is stalled in the Senate (thankfully).
Different takes on the same theories popularized by Rothbard.
I advocate for a limited/minimal government as I always have.