Quite entertaining. How they're mocking libertarians.

Economics Political Theory
21

What is all this “we” stuff? There is no “we”. Methodological individualism please.

Your arrogance is not only misdirected, it may end up being very counterproductive. The Ron Paul 2008 campaign doesn’t happen without Alex Jones. We aren’t where we are today without Alex Jones. You can disagree with his positions, and I might agree with you, but he has done significantly more to help promote classical liberalism than you have. Likewise with Ayn Rand.

Please try to remember that you are an amateur social critic on an internet discussion forum. These people have reached an audience of millions.

22

LS, while the ‘we’ does make it sound like I am trying to speak collectively for everybody else, here’s a better way of putting the same point.

“You don’t need rubbish like…,.etc”.

As individuals, there is no need for us to be movement defenders, especially when such characters (including Stormfront members) constitute the movement. Should the people of this site feel offended that a comic criticises conspiracists and racist characters? That’s largely the kind of people the comic criticises, so there is no need to feel collective offense at it, just because the word used for them is libertarian.

That’s what my initial point was, but to address the mass movements of Jones, Paul, and Rand…

Truth is that our own integrity to moral ideals matter, and not whether we can make coalitions with different groups to reach out to larger audience.

The problem is that one can generally accept that inward change is feasible, while large outward ones are less so. The democratic process is not and never was built on high civilization, morality, and least of all liberty. And fully accepting those values requires a lot of effort on one’s own part that can’t be achieved by radio or TV, but by patiently reading the right books. I don’t think this is an arrogant perspective.

Yet, the various kinds of political coalitions made by libertarians within the political process, my god. Coalitions with the New Left, coalitions with neoconservatives, coalitions with true conservatives, coalitions with all the wrong kinds of people. Henry Hazlitt wrote for the National Review, a supposedly “classical liberal” outlet, which worried more about banning smoking, drinking, and pornography.

Anyway, just because I haven’t reached an audience of millions does not mean that I am less of a person than a radio show host Alex Jones, and thus can not criticise him. I am not a political person - tending my own gardens, I have built a large knowledge on the stock market and worked with my parents on trading; I worked to make my life better. But somehow, reducing oneself to being a mediocrity who is capable of preaching on a mass level is a much better thing? Should we congratulate the likes of mass media (like Glenn Beck) who make a name on namecalling and ad hominem as people who push for good causes?

Libertystudent, you yourself believe what you believe, without having to be a cheerleader for the other kinds of libertarians with whom you don’t agree. If we were a political party, some of us would have to shut up, and go by the party line to be disciplined team players. But since we are not, we don’t. We stand each for our own ideals, because we believe it is right.

23

Wow, someone had time to draw that about us? We must be more famous than I thought. Way to go folks!

24

It’s kind of astounding to me how you talk down to forum members. I’m still curious why it is you think that you are livin’ la vida libertariana and we/I are unworthy.

25

You couldn’t be more wrong.

26

You have a point. Most of these stereotypes are accurate.

The misconceptions are what I assume the average reader will infer from such stereotypes. This only makes the cartoon even more brilliant as anti-libertarian propaganda.

27

Read the title. It doesn’t say “24 types”. It says “the 24 types”.

28

That’s a value statement. You can’t expect it to be meaningful to anyone but yourself. It may be, but you can’t offer it as a blanket truth.

It was not my point that you were less of a person. You might be a better person in the aggregate (or by whatever means we could measure such a thing). But just because you might be a better person in some regards, doesn’t mean you automatically qualify as an expert critic in areas outside your domains of competency. Remember Rothbard’s admonition about people criticizing economics from a position of ignorance? You can apply that to any critic coming from a position of ignorance, and I am sorry to say, that while you and I both may not agree with Rand and Jones absolutely, they have made massive positive contributions to human liberty. There would not be a modern libertarian movement if not for their work. You might not have the understanding and opportunities you do without them.

What you believe is right, is not so just because you believe it.

I’m not appealing to you to be a cheerleader or join a party. I am appealing to you to apply reason over emotion as an individual, and not judge Alex Jones on aesthetics any more than you like the Stormfront crowd judging blacks and jews on aesthetics. I am asking you to be intellectually consistent.

29

YOU MUST READ THIS!!! - Ayn Rand

haha, classic :slight_smile: Anyway, it’s good mockery (strawman), but that doesn’t meant it has debunked anything.

If you want something similar from different perspective, go there http://anarchyinyourhead.com/

30

How so? Who did I specifically talk down to? Am I not a member of this forum? I would argue that with my post count, I am definitely a top 20 member of this forum, and so any critiques of this forum, including my own, could very well include myself.

Learn to laugh. Even at yourself and where you came from. No one enjoys a wound up serioso.

I’m not sure that is what I believe. It seems to me that is what you believe.

31

Thank you. Without stereotypes, Walter Block could not have written Defending the Undefendable. They provide us with the opportunity to (1) laugh at ourselves, (2) explain our positions better and (3) see ourselves as others may see us, and adjust our actions as needed.

People who only see attacks and not opportunities are missing out IMO.

I don’t think this cartoon is going to do much damage to libertarianism, and in my opinion, it is unrealistic to expect that there won’t be petty critics of any position, on any day. This is life. It is not perfect. The freedom to be intellectually sound is the freedom to be intellectually slothful and dishonest. I’d like to point out that the LRC blog is usually quite reactionary, and they didn’t get as worked up as the grassroots reactions I have seen.

But then, if the people at the top were fanatics like some people in the grassroots, this would be a cult, and I would want nothing to do with it.

32

I’ve bee thinking these last few days… I can understand someone attacking Republicans, Democrats, some vague political stances, but to mock (and so harshly) something like libertarianism - you should really be annoyed with people thinking differntly than you. Seriosly, how many libertarians does Barry Deutsch know? And why does he feel threatened?

33

Fear is a good sign. There has been more talk about libertarianism on mainstream media then ever before, although most of it negative.

I mentioned previously the Bill Maher show from a few weeks ago, where one of the guests described herself as a libertarian, but not of the type that “want to abolish the government completely”. I thought that was amazing. She would not had felt the need to make that distinction if Ancap had not already infiltrated the philosophy of liberty.

34

During the Ron Paul campaign on the RPF forums, everyone kept repeating this quote from Gandhi.

“First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.”

With Ron Paul, he’s won now. He has made it past the fighting and ridicule.

Radical libertarianism hasn’t had to fight yet. But progress is definitely being made.

35

That was pure win, man. :slight_smile:

36

I meant the “anti-libertarian” parody of the picture in the first post.

37

Thanks, it cracked me up too while making it.

38

.

39

Chuckled at the ‘too smart for science’ one. I always laugh when modern ‘liberals’ claim ownership of science and believe themselves to be arbiters of scientific truth, divorced from any biases.

Anyone can look at nonsense like Boasian Anthropology, blank slate theory, the belief in racial equality and so on to see the kinds of absurd myths leftists wholeheartedly subscribe to (they’re basically human creationists of a sort). Not to mention the fact they routinely bully scientists who investigate matters such as heritability and race (most recently Dr. Bruce Lahn, who was pioneering some brilliant research on the evolution of the human brain). Leftists are modern day Lysenkoists when it comes to genetics, neuroscience and behavioral psychology.

The word ‘racist’ is a form of ideological disarmament, it is newsspeak plain and simple designed to halt debate on matters of race.

Of course this is disregarding the fact that even by your own culturally leftist standards, your native India is far more ‘racist’ than the US or any Western Nation is.

And a fine position that is, why should they allow miscreants onto their own private property? Or are you just so full of anti-white vitriol that you despise anywhere Whites congregate to enjoy themselves? Not a Winter Olympics fan I take it then?

40

Germanicus, a few points.

  1. You seem to assume me an Indian patriot who must defend Indian traditions. Of course, India has many racist people.

  2. I acknowledge differences in race, and yes, high IQ of Koreans, Japanese, Chinese,.etc can not be disregarded.

  3. I am amused you think me to be anti-white, because I just came back from another forum refuting somebody’s highly incorrect claims that whitey is responsible for African problems.

  4. I am completely for private property. Except the country club character also goes on, attacks immigration, demands restrictions on sale of property to foreigners,.etc. Is the person really libertarian, or just adopted the label for defending foregone conclusions?

Point 4. was the important part.

Now, let’s play this game again.