Is it just me or are statists incapable of critical thinking?
It seems to me they cannot study differing views on a subject and reach their own conclcusion as to what is true. Oftentimes they are very well versed on the ‘side’ they favor, yet have not read or studied anything put forth by the opposing side.
I completely agree with you.
My own understanding is that nearly everyone is born with critical-thinking skills. It takes years upon years of authoritarian public schooling to hobble or even cripple the critical-thinking skills that they’re born with.
We are all biased by what we believe is true at any given moment.
As for being ignorant about opposing views, would you claim to have mastered Marx, Keynes or the Historical School?
Funny, I was just talking about this in another thread…
I cannot say I have mastered Marx, Keynes, Historical school, Austrian school, neo keynsianism, or any other schol of thought.
But I have read extensively in all of these areas and I have concluded that the Austians have come closest to the truth.
To me that is what ritical thinking means. Examine all the evidence and then reach a conclusion.
Unfortunately the same cannot be said for most people, especially “leftists” who oftentimes are familiar with marxism but have not even heard of mises or his criticisms.
As far as I can tell, this whole thread is just a self-congratulatory pat on the back. Most Ancaps are in the same boat as statists and know very little outside of their school of thought, which they also don’t know in depth. They are true believers. For them, their ideology is largly doctrine and dogma. They accept the propositions of their school on faith alone, and don’t bother to do heavy reading to develop proper understanding. The majority of Ancaps are just as dull and unthinking as the majority of statists.
I’m not saying you’re necessarily wrong on this point, but I’d be interested in some substantiation from you about it.
I find that generally the same is true of libertarians except that they are slightly more informed about the opposing side because almost every libertarian has been a statist, very few statists have been libertarians. Furthermore libertarians are more likely to be able to think critically because they don’t percieve of a deus ex machina, they don’t have infinite faith in the government and somehow believe that just because the government can use what means it likes that it can bring about any state of affairs an individual wants.
With this being said I know pleanty of libertarians, even on these forums, who lack critical thinking skills and have very basic reasoning even in thier political views.
No one’s perfect, but this is too cynical. Statism is indoctrinated. You have to be willing and able to learn for yourself and read a seminal tome or two on your own initiative before you’ll even know who Murray Rothbard was, or what ‘anarcho-capitalism’ really is.
I’m not saying you’re necessarily wrong on this point, but I’d be interested in some substantiation from you about it.
I don’t have any quotes or references. Its just a general trend I’ve noticed on the forums. People can quote Rothbard and Mises and Hoppe, but they can’t explain their arguments in detail. They don’t understand the systematic structure of their work.
There are whole threads asking how to respond to statist argument ‘X’? Their more interested in learning the correct libertarian oneliners than they are in actually understanding the structure of theorems leading up to an exact proof or refutation. They have no appreciation of the sciences they are debating. Libertarian/Anarcho-Capitalism/ect. are just labels to be worn on their sleaves.
I find that generally the same is true of libertarians except that they are slightly more informed about the opposing side because almost every libertarian has been a statist, very few statists have been libertarians. Furthermore libertarians are more likely to be able to think critically because they don’t percieve of a deus ex machina, they don’t have infinite faith in the government and somehow believe that just because the government can use what means it likes that it can bring about any state of affairs an individual wants.
With this being said I know pleanty of libertarians, even on these forums, who lack critical thinking skills and have very basic reasoning even in thier political views.
I, myself, have read a great deal of austrian and libertarian literature, but I have read very little mainstream or classical works. I have not read the great works of Smith, Riccardo, Samuelson, Marx. I have read works which refer to them, but this very different than reading originary works. I would never claim to be better informed than my opponent. It is hubris.
Many libertarians have the same faith in the market that statists have in the state. The market is their god. It can produce anything. It’s the alpha and omega. An example of this is libertarians arguing that law and property rights originate from the market. This is idiotic on its face since a market can never come into existance without these institutions already being in place. Many libertarians are in the same boat in this regard.
No one’s perfect, but this is too cynical. Statism is indoctrinated. You have to be willing and able to learn for yourself and read a seminal tome or two on your own initiative before you’ll even know who Murray Rothbard was, or what ‘anarcho-capitalism’ really is.
Or, you could just get the short version on youtube.
I can quote chapter and verse, if you like… 
“The flowering of human society depends on two factors: the intellectual power of outstanding men to conceive sound social and economic theories, and the ability of these or other men to make these ideologies palatable to the majority.” - Ludwig von Mises, Human Action
I don’t think we lack the former, really. You only need a handful of them.
I knew there was a statist and insincere agenda to your posts. I waited patiently for you to spell it out yourself because I knew you wouldn’t be able to hold it in. And there it is. Those Anarchist libertarians… they don’t know Marx and mainstream economics. They are blind believers!
Now let’s see you choke in endless circular arguments and other logical contradictions explaining how the institution of property rights originates in the State, the organization that requires the market in the first place so it can expropriate the funds it requires.
All I’m saying is that the majority of libertarians are a part of the masses, just like the majority of statists, and do not have any exceptional mental prowess. There is no real justification for the self-congratulatory, we’re superior thinkers theme presented in the OP.
I knew there was a statist and insincere agenda to your posts. I waited patiently for you to spell it out yourself because I knew you wouldn’t be able to hold it in. And there it is. Those Anarchist libertarians… they don’t know Marx and mainstream economics. They are blind believers!
Now let’s see you choke in endless circular arguments and other logical contradictions explaining how the institution of property rights originates in the State, the organization that requires the market in the first place so it can expropriate the funds it requires.
Lol. Wut?
The essence of Smith and Ricardo can be gleaned from descriptions, everyone who claims to have a knowledge of economics should have at least read the general theory. Marx is another economist who, at least in economic beliefs and basic methodology, can be generally understood through works about Marxism itself (I’m not talking about refutations I’m talking about primers). I do agree however that you should have a good understanding of your opponent’s arguments. It is very important not just to be a dogmatist, however most modern liberals & conservatives have no grasp of any economic school..
Having faith in the market is far more intelligible, especially because of the fact that they understand how the market process works. It makes sense the way that most libertarians have “faith” in the market in the same way that ecologists have faith in photosynthesis. You could say that photosynthesis is the ecologists’ god, but it’s irrelevant because that doesn’t make it any less true, but with most statists they have no idea how it works and it’s meaningless.
Yes DD5. I’m secretly a statist, infiltrating these forums, secretly spreading my sedition and undermining the movement. Hahahaha [evil cackle].
Btw. Just because property rights do not originate from the market, it does not follow that they originate from the state.
Having faith in the market is far more intelligible, especially because of the fact that they understand how the market process works. It makes sense the way that most libertarians have “faith” in the market in the same way that ecologists have faith in photosynthesis. You could say that photosynthesis is the ecologists’ god, but it’s irrelevant because that doesn’t make it any less true, but with most statists they have no idea how it works and it’s meaningless.
Most libertarians do not understand how the market works. They just have faith that it does work. Just as the majority of statists don’t understand how the state works, they just have faith that it does work. In both cases, from the pov of the believer, the institution is some black box with mystical, magical powers.
even if they did, it doesn’t mean that anything that originates from a state is a bad thing. That needs a proof too.