Why not just define your terms and let those too lazy to investigate your substantive opinions wallow in their ignorance?
A private language is fairly useless.
A private language is fairly useless.
Really? Tell that to physicists.
Catering to idiots is what’s useless.
Really? Tell that to physicists.
The language of physicists is definitely public.
Catering to idiots is what’s useless.
Nonsense. Idiots control the world. Not turning them off by an unpopular or off-putting label is a good first step.
A friend of mine – the only other ancap person I know personally – uses the term austro-libertarian, which I like but most people would have no idea what that means.
Not turning them off by an unpopular or off-putting label is a good first step.
Pearls to swine.
Exactly. If you want to spread ideas (pearls) don’t call the people swine.
I believe in calling a spade a spade.
I believe in calling a spade a spade.
Fine. Don’t expect much in return.
Fine. Don’t expect much in return.
Trying to convince people who don’t care is a waste of time. I’d rather spend the energy and time making myself free, and dealing with those willing to learn. The typical anti-intellectual person is going to be of little use for liberal ideas.
Trying to convince people who don’t care is a waste of time. I’d rather spend the energy and time making myself free, and dealing with those willing to learn. The typical anti-intellectual person is going to be of little use for liberal ideas.
Who said anything about “people who don’t care” or typical “anti-intellectuals?” I distinctly said “idiots.” Which is, of course, the general population. You really aren’t going to make yourself free without their becoming educated as well.
You really aren’t going to make yourself free without their becoming educated as well.
I doubt they’re educable to begin with. Freedom in the political sense occurs when the elite become anti-state, the masses follow suit with the same blind religiosity that they worshiped Mithra and Leviathan. Freedom in the personal sense occurs when I take command of the things I can control, instead of obsessing with things that are completely outside of it.
Then we are totally screwed!
Fortunately I don’t agree with you.
We will see the destruction of everything that the government does happen like this. We don’t need to win the approval of inert people beforehand. No dullness and clumsiness on the part of the masses can stop the pioneers of improvement.
I agree totally with this. The populist orientation of many libertarians is, I think, a fallacy derived from democratic theory.
Fortunately I don’t agree with you.
Yeah, that post just skips the underlying How? How do you repair the split. How do you transition from government to the market. You definitely won’t by just ignoring (or alienating) the public, as Mises correctly said.
No, the split is just in our theory.
I wasn’t saying that there is an actual split in the real world, but just that there is a split in our theory.
I’m not prescribing anything, but just describing the fact that, if you repair this flaw in your theory - which I already have - you will realize that, for the state to collapse, it won’t really matter what the masses think.
I doubt they’re educable to begin with. Freedom in the political sense occurs when the elite become anti-state, the masses follow suit with the same blind religiosity that they worshiped Mithra and Leviathan.
And the elite just exist in a vacuum?
Freedom in the personal sense occurs when I take command of the things I can control, instead of obsessing with things that are completely outside of it.
Since you could easily do both, would you be both free and un-free?
Since you could easily do both, would you be both free and un-free?
Have you ever heard of scarcity?
I’m not prescribing anything, but just describing the fact that, if you repair this flaw in your theory - which I already have - you will realize that, for the state to collapse, it won’t really matter what the masses think.
You are correct that due to economic laws the state shall collapse regardless of what the masses think, however, that doesn’t mean that its falling apart in any fashion will yield positive results.
Have you ever heard of scarcity?
Sure. That doesn’t really seem to negate the question.
I think that you are still misunderstanding me.
(Did you read the other post that I linked to in the one that we are talking about right now?)
I’m not saying that the state will collapse because of “economic laws”, but that the state will collapse simply because entrepreneurs will create better tools. After all, whether you believe that the people running the state know what is going on or not, people accept the state as a tool. If some entrepreneurs come around who can build and market a better tool, it really doesn’t matter what the masses think before that happens. They might laugh at somebody talking about private defense agencies; but, when one comes around capable of protecting them from state taxation or something like that, those people will “scramble” for it. It doesn’t matter that the masses think that our theories are crazy, because they will accept them once a new generation of anti-statist entrepreneurs start putting it into practice.
We need to convince somebody, but we don’t really need to convince the masses. If all of the geniuses in our society are trapped in the statist paradigm, nothing is going to come of this. But, if the geniuses start realizing this stuff, and start escaping from the statist paradigm - and I’m sure that this is happening right now, then we could expect something to happen. In other words, if everybody - including the geniuses - are still trapped in the statist paradigm, those “economic laws” might still make states collapse, but they might just end up being replaced by other states; but, if the movers - the geniuses - are able to escape from the statist paradigm, things will start happening - and they have.