Heres a link to the video:
Maybe in the same way the term, use, & definition of anarcho-capitalism, is a nightmare [H]
Yeah, sure, because the state is just wonderful. Couldn’t care less. Reason should stick to conservative crap, it’s good at it.
-Jon
It’s certainly going to be a nightmare for politicians and lobbyists who are going to have to get real jobs.
It’s a statist magazine, not a conservative one. They’re into self-promotion, alternative lifestyles, drugs and increasingly, state worship.
If you want an example of a conservative mag, try AmCon. That’s a magazine that is honest about what it is.
Don’t forget all the half-baked pseudo-intellectuals who will find that neither reality nor their neighbour offer the slightest returns for their systematic gibberish. A lot of the state propaganda comes from delusional thinkers who want to enforce their fantasies on everyone else; rather than adjust their ideas to reality. The state, by externalizing the costs of this enforcement, makes the job of making up pretend rules for a pretend world (policy recommendations) a lot more attractive. Most universities are hives of people who have little business teaching anyone about anything. Who do you think most benefits from the nonsense that what is effectively State-approval (accredation by doctorates and such) somehow proves that what they say in favor of the State is true.
The fact that people can more or less spend their entire lives “learning” as an occupation (provided they can “pay” for it) doesn’t help, either; at least, in the example you speak of.
In other news, I’m going to make this pencil disappear…
:slams Reason’s face into the pencil:
Taa Daa! It’s gone!
There’s a sharp distinction between statism and conservatism? That’s news to me.
Yeah, conservatism is unique in being almost bereft of actual principles thus marrying itself to the status-quo fact of the state. The ‘practical’ doctrine of fascism, with its ‘special meaning to each nation’ is the revolutionary equivalent of conservatism, saying, “Whatever we want to edo is right” rather than “whatever has been done is right”. This is why radicals like libertarians and communists have more contact with reality than conservatives or fascists.
Sounds alot like statism if you ask me.
Yes, it is news to you. It’s the root of my disagreement with you. I’m not arguing that conservatives are not statists. I’d just like you to point out that communists, socialists and liberals are as well.
Reason is not conservative, or as you would like to paint it, all statism is conservative.
I don’t even think Reason is minarchist. It’s a political style and lifestyle magazine.
I don’t recall BP denying that communists, socialists, & liberals are statists :\
It’s not unreasonable to see Statism as conservative (“Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.”), in the sense that Stasis (which is what Statism encourages) is conservative, as opposed to Dynamism (opposite of Stasis), which is what Anarchism would encourage.
The most that can be said of communists, socialists & liberals, is that while obviously Statist, they can vary in degrees compared with the absolute Authoritarian Statist, or the direct opposite of Anarchism. I hardly see how observing that out would make one an apologetic and/or denier by default for said assorted flavors of Statism.
Reason are merely cheerleaders for apologists, trying to be the mainstream of ‘something’; the best comparison I can give is the “Wired” of politics, supposedly.
Their site design gives me headaches, too [:^)]
I know. But he points out conservatives daily. Double standard?
In the case of America, conservative could mean back to the time of the Constitution, which yes is a flawed document but was significantly more liberty oriented than what we have today. Which is why I resent constantly painting conservatives exclusively in a negative light, when many people on this forum have mentioned they came to Mises and libertarianism, through Ron Paul and/or conservatism. I haven’t spotted many greens, democrats, communists etc here.
I really think BP plays games with this, just as Nicky does when they try to redefine capitalism. They say, well, a lot of people think capitalism means something else. To which I say, SO WHAT?
In case people haven’t noticed, anarchism and libertarianism are fringe philosophies. Those same people who have misinterpreted the meaning of capitalism are the same people who endorse the state! How can their mass belief in something that we know to be false, then be turned around to instruct us on what to believe, and how to use words! Our OWN words!
As mentioned this morning, it’s trying to make rational something which is irrational.