Yes Juan, you’ve already expressed your position, namely, all governments are fascist, and everyone is a fascist, with the exception of Rothbardians.
So according to your logic, because I’m Croatian, I should support the enslavement and mass murder of the Serbian people? I don’t understand your point. America should never place any country on a pedestal, and defend them no matter what.
actually my heart inclines upon the peaks of the Adirondack Mountains and the lakes in Sylvania Wilderness are wonderful. I think of stories about the mountains in Italy. I love mountains. I also think of Hickery Creek Wilderness trail too.
Mountains are cool, I like mountains too.
i was walking up Mt. Marcy in the Adirondacks and sat down to rest. I watched these ravens fly up to the peek and then turn around and dive into the valley near disappearing from my eyesight to only see them return back up to the peek and do it all over again numerous times. amazing.
That does sound pretty cool.
Well, it’s not my fault you don’t want to support the welfare system.
Mark Levine’s philosophy, and apparently yours, is nothing but social democracy disguised by clever euphemistic and clever political demagoguery, which Levine is so talented at. The last thing we need is more social democrats who are too ignorant to know what they are, so they listen to Mark Levine and think they are for free markets, or worst, individualism.
I never said it was your fault. I’m saying that I oppose the welfare system and I will vote to have it removed. If you win, however, I’ll probably have to pay the bill for it which is why i vote against it. As I’m sure you vote against the party who supports Israel.
You can call me any name you want. Doesn’t really matter to me that much. As long as it makes you happy.
Thinking you are helping Israel by means of welfare is like thinking you are helping the poor by welfare. So do you support welfare for the poor or don’t you? Perhaps you are the enemy of Israel, just as Obama is the real enemy of the poor.
OK, I get it, I vote against the party that supports Israel and you vote against the part y that supports the poor.
Is that right?
I don’t really think of it that way. I vote for the party who supports Israel and doesn’t try to redistribute my money. You vote for the party who doesn’t support Israel and if you want to vote for the party who says they support the poor, vote for them too I say.
Your thinking doesn’t change the obvious implication of your statement; That since I don’t support the party that claims to support Israel, I don’t support Israel. Well then, since you don’t vote for the party that claims to help the poor, you don’t support the poor.
“I don’t really think of it that way” is just evading your own contradictions and inconsistencies.
The almost poetic irony in all this is of course, just like in the case of the welfare system, you are actually supporting the inevitable destruction of the State of Israel.
Well now, this is a different thing, does the welfare system actually help the poor? Does foreign aid and military support for Israel actually help Israel? That’s a different discussion.
But yeah, you’re right, I don’t want to support the poor, I want to support Israel.
But what gives you the right to support Israel with my money? If you want to support Israel, by all means go ahead; but don’t take 40% of my income and send it overseas to a nation (a) I don’t agree with, and (b) I’m not affiliated with. I don’t want to give money to my own government, why should I give it to Israel?
It’s not in my power to let you opt out. If it were, I’d let you. But it’s not.
It also wasn’t in the power of all those who supported the NAZIS to let all those who didn’t opt out either. But they still supported the extermination of 6 million jews as oppose to those that didn’t support the NAZIS.
I
Oh, I get it, I’m a nazi now.
OMG thisis so awesome. hahaha Dude is my flippin hero.
Go ahead and evade the issue every time your logical contradictions and absurd inconsistencies are exposed.
Politics isn’t about being philosophically consistent, it’s about who gets what. I’m not going to take myself out of the game because I object to the game on principle. I’m going to play the game and try to get what I want.
The only way to be 100 percent consistent with Rothbardian libertarianism in politics would be to say that politics is, in principle, illegitimate and shouldn’t even be dealt with. That the only way to participate and be consistent along Rothbard’s lines would be simply to be totally radical and support the immediate dissolution of the state. But see that’s not going to happen. There will always be governments. And there will always be people willing to abuse them.
So, I’ll be ‘inconsistent’ on certain issues if it means I get what I want. It’s more valuable to me to get what I want than to object to everything on principle.