Interesting Fight

[Nerditarian]

Hey guys,

I started this thread on another forum arguing in defense of the fundementals of libertarianism and arg. ethics. However, both tommorow and next week my time will be limited. If anyone is interested in a lively debate and refuting socialists the link is here: http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3284539.

[zefreak]

I can’t post there but you should bring up Oppenheimer’s definition of the state so you are both arguing the same concepts. I don’t think he truly understands the libertarian position, or apparantly the role of political science.

[hayekianxyz]

If you argue with someone about something, that does seem to presuppose that agreement is (in principle) possible, and this is turn may presuppose (at least in principle) a certain degree of shared meanings and values. But what then? Having argued with someone, I might then reach an agreement that the best kind of society would be a socialist one, and we might agree that a planned economy would be the most just. I don’t see what Hoppe could say against this, ultimately.

Lol, perhaps he might want to actually read up on Hoppe’s AE before dismissing it as “an amateurish rip-off of Jurgen Habermas’s discourse ethics”.But don’t waste your time with those idiots, what do you expect from somebody who is a proud vegan and “citizen of the earth”. The guy is your typical earth worshipping leftist liberal pseudo intellectual.

[Nerditarian]

@GilesStratton

If you argue with someone about something, that does seem to presuppose that agreement is (in principle) possible, and this is turn may presuppose (at least in principle) a certain degree of shared meanings and values. But what then? Having argued with someone, I might then reach an agreement that the best kind of society would be a socialist one, and we might agree that a planned economy would be the most just. I don’t see what Hoppe could say against this, ultimately.

Lol, perhaps he might want to actually read up on Hoppe’s AE before dismissing it as “an amateurish rip-off of Jurgen Habermas’s discourse ethics”.But don’t waste your time with those idiots, what do you expect from somebody who is a proud vegan and “citizen of the earth”. The guy is your typical earth worshipping leftist liberal pseudo intellectual.

LOL, I’m trying to refine my argument stlye and convince any relatively unbiased third parties who might read the argument.

[hayekianxyz]

@Nerditarian

LOL, I’m trying to refine my argument stlye and convince any relatively unbiased third parties who might read the argument

The thing about those sorts of forums are they’re all relatively the same. Leftists convinced that they are above and beyond the intellectual capacity of anybody they know seek new means to discuss how they would save the world. Consequently they search internet, which has the added advantage that they can remain anonymous, for a forum. The people that do this are almost always leftists, since one of the virtues of the political right is that at least they have no pretensions about being intellectual.

As such these forums come to be dominated by a self reinforcing left liberal mindset, eventually a few individuals will come on to the forum who have read some pseudo philosophy and seek to use the forum as a means to make themselves feel better by throwing in a few terms they’ve picked up from whatever nonsense they’re reading. Eventually they come to think of themselves as a regular Aristotle, hence the tone you’ll get from them if you challenge their left liberal dogma.

And what you end up with is a number of pseudo intellectuals discussing irrelevant issues, about a world of which they have no knowledge. See, people like the “citizen of the earth” probably haven’t left their parent’s basement in quite some time, and as much as they’ll proclaim capitalism to breed racism they’d more than likely cross the street upon seeing anybody with relatively dark skin.

[Nerditarian]

@GilesStratton

@Nerditarian

LOL, I’m trying to refine my argument stlye and convince any relatively unbiased third parties who might read the argument

The thing about those sorts of forums are they’re all relatively the same. Leftists convinced that they are above and beyond the intellectual capacity of anybody they know seek new means to discuss how they would save the world. Consequently they search internet, which has the added advantage that they can remain anonymous, for a forum. The people that do this are almost always leftists, since one of the virtues of the political right is that at least they have no pretensions about being intellectual.

As such these forums come to be dominated by a self reinforcing left liberal mindset, eventually a few individuals will come on to the forum who have read some pseudo philosophy and seek to use the forum as a means to make themselves feel better by throwing in a few terms they’ve picked up from whatever nonsense they’re reading. Eventually they come to think of themselves as a regular Aristotle, hence the tone you’ll get from them if you challenge their left liberal dogma.

And what you end up with is a number of pseudo intellectuals discussing irrelevant issues, about a world of which they have no knowledge. See, people like the “citizen of the earth” probably haven’t left their parent’s basement in quite some time, and as much as they’ll proclaim capitalism to breed racism they’d more than likely cross the street upon seeing anybody with relatively dark skin.

You certainly have a point about the kinds of people these fourms do attract a certain kind of person. I was hoping that presenting this argument they would admit their inability to contest it. At the very least, as Lew Rockwell says, doing intellectual battle is fun. However, if anyone wants to join that forum and take my place, I won’t be around between 11 and 5.

[krazy_kaju]

Pwnage complete (in the praxeology thread).

@GilesStratton

The thing about those sorts of forums are they’re all relatively the same. Leftists convinced that they are above and beyond the intellectual capacity of anybody they know seek new means to discuss how they would save the world. Consequently they search internet, which has the added advantage that they can remain anonymous, for a forum. The people that do this are almost always leftists, since one of the virtues of the political right is that at least they have no pretensions about being intellectual.

As such these forums come to be dominated by a self reinforcing left liberal mindset, eventually a few individuals will come on to the forum who have read some pseudo philosophy and seek to use the forum as a means to make themselves feel better by throwing in a few terms they’ve picked up from whatever nonsense they’re reading. Eventually they come to think of themselves as a regular Aristotle, hence the tone you’ll get from them if you challenge their left liberal dogma.

And what you end up with is a number of pseudo intellectuals discussing irrelevant issues, about a world of which they have no knowledge. See, people like the “citizen of the earth” probably haven’t left their parent’s basement in quite some time, and as much as they’ll proclaim capitalism to breed racism they’d more than likely cross the street upon seeing anybody with relatively dark skin.

That is by far the most apt description I’ve ever read.

[Jon_Irenicus]

If you argue with someone about something, that does seem to presuppose that agreement is (in principle) possible, and this is turn may presuppose (at least in principle) a certain degree of shared meanings and values. But what then? Having argued with someone, I might then reach an agreement that the best kind of society would be a socialist one, and we might agree that a planned economy would be the most just. I don’t see what Hoppe could say against this, ultimately.

So what? If they decided to impose it on non-consentors they’d run afoul of a contradiction. That is Hoppe’s point. It isn’t “agreement ethics”.

[hayekianxyz]

@Jon Irenicus

If you argue with someone about something, that does seem to presuppose that agreement is (in principle) possible, and this is turn may presuppose (at least in principle) a certain degree of shared meanings and values. But what then? Having argued with someone, I might then reach an agreement that the best kind of society would be a socialist one, and we might agree that a planned economy would be the most just. I don’t see what Hoppe could say against this, ultimately.

So what? If they decided to impose it on non-consentors they’d run afoul of a contradiction. That is Hoppe’s point. It isn’t “agreement ethics”.

I didn’t think you agreed with Hoppe’s AE?

[Jon_Irenicus]

I think it needs some revision and a broader context to be fit into. Regardless, his objection to it is purely based on fabrications of his own mind, so it is futile.

[hayekianxyz]

@Jon Irenicus

I think it needs some revision and a broader context to be fit into. Regardless, his objection to it is purely based on fabrications of his own mind, so it is futile.

Which revisions would those be?

[ladyattis]

Yo, Nerd, seriously, Nathyn use to troll the Free Talk Live forums until he was summarily banninated for being a sock puppet abuser. You’re not going to get anywhere with him, he’s more or less looking for you to explode and flame him. So, don’t bother even replying to anything he has to say.

[wombatron]

@ladyattis

Yo, Nerd, seriously, Nathyn use to troll the Free Talk Live forums until he was summarily banninated for being a sock puppet abuser. You’re not going to get anywhere with him, he’s more or less looking for you to explode and flame him. So, don’t bother even replying to anything he has to say.

Nathyn? Ha. He trolled here, too.

[krazy_kaju]

Dude, I’m pwning the crap out of him in the praxeology thread. It’s awesome.

[hayekianxyz]

Link?

[krazy_kaju]

@GilesStratton

Link?

Right here. I see some others replied, but I don’t have the time to emmerse myself in a debate right now.

[hayekianxyz]

@krazy kaju

@GilesStratton

Link?

Right here. I see some others replied, but I don’t have the time to emmerse myself in a debate right now.

I’m tempted to register, just so I can declare your victory.

[Bobt39]

I read that and actually felt embarrassed for him. Good job !

[ladyattis]

@GilesStratton

The thing about those sorts of forums are they’re all relatively the same. Leftists convinced that they are above and beyond the intellectual capacity of anybody they know seek new means to discuss how they would save the world.

And yet they cannot find the time to spell check. I know that my writing style is very fracked up, but at least I try my best to make sense of my own words. It seems at that forum it’s not a requirement to be clear.

[ladyattis]

@krazy kaju

Dude, I’m pwning the crap out of him in the praxeology thread. It’s awesome.

Sorry for derailing your debate with Nathyn, I thought I play the ‘impartial’ newbie. You know, to throw them off a bit, confuse the hell out of them.