I love your sig. It’s awesome.
Are you joking?
-Jon
Haha, thanks. [:)]
Acutally, now that I think about it, I should have given marx red stars and mises gold ones. heh. I’ll edit it later.
This is a misnomer. Noone ever claimed that corporations and the state are one and the same. Even Carson has never claimed such. So you’ve ended up erecting a strawman with regaurd to those who use the term.
Incidentally, Liberty Student has no idea what he’s talking about and is once again on a rampage by which he makes a bunch of inflammatory posts that straw man people and entirely evade the question at hand. It’s sickening.
Actually, considering that JC has continually argued for what amounts to Geoism at this site, and considering that he was actually defending the Macy’s window smashers in another thread (which I don’t defend, btw) he is indeed a left-libertarian. More left than me even, considering that I still adhere to non-provisio Lockean property theory.
That link is irrelevant to the people in question. We’re not marxists or anarcho-syndicalists or anarcho-communists. Stop strawmanning people.
Be specific now…
Rampage? Oh that’s rich considering how much cover you provided to Nicky.
If you’re inflamed, I suggest you stop wrapping yourself in combustible arguments and ideologies
While I don’t agree that is what I have done, you continually provided cover to your friend Nicky for doing those very things.
What’s sickening is the trolling. And that you are a moderator here. You maintain double standards and you engage in flame baiting and personal attacks as bad as anyone else. It’s shameful.
I’d like to point out that I wasn’t saying what they were doing was a good idea, just that it doesn’t violate anyone’s rights for them to do so. If those points make a left libertarian, I guess I am.
Oh, I’m sorry. I thought Carson’s site advertised he was an anti-capitalist.
Hmmm, http://mutualist.blogspot.com/
HTML TITLE:Mutualist Blog: Free Market Anti-Capitalism
From the top of the site:
Sure looks like anti-capitalism is relevant to a discussion of “vulgar libertarians” considering that Carson coined the term, and he claims capitalists are vulgar libertarians.
If anyone is trolling it is you, since you repeatedly make posts that make reference to me out of nowhere (that mischaracterize my position). I’m only responding for the purposes of clarity, to avoid being misrepresented by you. It’s not my fault that you start making wild claims about people in a thread about ideas, distracting from the actual discussion or debate about ideas. Also, I wasn’t aware that I’m a moderator here.
Nonsense. I have asked you to cease communication numerous times, it is you who maintains you have a right to follow me around and attack both me and my posts.
Nonsense. Several of your last posts to me were completely out of the blue, as you continue to stalk and troll me around the forum.
Hey, in a free market, people are going to discuss and go offtopic. Stop being anal, and lighten up. It happens. The world doesn’t conform to your narrow ideals or authoritarian expectations.
Well, if you aren’t that’s good news. I’m going to push the fact that you continue to harass me on this forum then. I was under the impression you were beyond reproach and that is why you were able to continue stalking me.
Actually, now that I think of it, true Geoism alway seems to involve a taxation aspect. Single tax and all that, right? Well, I am not for any taxes. So there.
The lefties want to co-opt you and you’re having nothing of it. Good for you, be your own man.
Hip Hip Hooray.
I don’t know what Brainpolice wants that’s considered “Left”. As he points out, really, I’m less of an Austrian than almost anyone else here, pretty much a Mutualist with Geoist tendencies (non-durable land ownership), I think. I got 120 pages into Carson’s book on Anarchist Production and liked what I saw, anyway. As he implied, he sees corporate assets as being more legitimately owned than I do, anyway.
What bothers me is that it seems like, with this statement, you’re trying to establish me as on “your” side. I disagree with Brainpolice on some things, I disagree with you on some things. As a matter of fact, I suspect that a lot of places where I disagree with Brainpolice are places where you two actually agree.
Case point. What you did here was say “yes and yes”, and yet proceed to deny that the criticism has any validity, to deny that free market libertarians ever engage in the error in question. And I’m not entirely sure if you fully undertstand what the error is. Vulgar libertarianism is not “defending state interferance in buisiness” so much as “defending the effects of state interferance in buisiness as if it came about through a free market process” or “predicting that the outcome of a free market process would be more or less identical to the current dominant buisiness model”. This criticism in and of itself is not a straw man. It can be used as one, but not necessarily.
You indiscriminately use the term “the leftists”, drawing no distinctions. You go on to simply make personal attacks on Kevin Carson, with no actual rebuttal of the content of his ideas or statements. You accuse him of on tearing other people’s ideas down (as if this is a bad thing per se? bad ideas deserve to be critisized) while acting as if he has no idas himself? Perhaps you should read his material and make some constructive criticism. I most certainly don’t entirely agree with the man about everything. You proceed to make a random swipe t Brad Spangler. You repeatedly act as if these people don’t have clearly defined ideas. Perhaps you simply are out of touch with this, LS.
You proceed to make a rank argumentum ad populum with respect to “right” and “left”, which is ultimately irrelevant to the validity or invalidity of ideas. You then proceed to essentially accuse left-libertarians if hijacking the “rightist’s” materials to suite their own causes. You’re essentially painting left-libertarians altogether as state-socialists hijacking libertarianism, which is outright misrepresentative and ridiculous, especially considering that left-libertarians are dominantly anarchist while right-libertarians are dominantly minarchist.
Notice that throughout all of this there is no actual criticism of the content of any ideas. A common theme with you.
Do you realize how absurdly rhetorical you’re sounding? The lefties want to co-opt him? Could you please stop confusing left-libertarians with political “lefties” and making highly rhetoric statements that make no sense?
If you agree with the NAP, then you’re on my side. BP claims to believe in the NAP, maybe he’s on my side too.
I’m not interested in forming teams or cliques. I don’t have a catchy adjective to tack onto the term anarchist. I won’t be speaking at your local Ramada Inn or writing a book on political philosophy anytime soon.
I might be interested in your participatory labour for projects we both feel are beneficial, like the pamphlet scheme or some other idea that comes down the road.
But no, I’m not concerned with you being on my side, and I think the idea that you’re doing your own thing, is how I like to think I am doing it.
Yes, actually JS has some views that are to “the left” of mine, since he sounds a lot like a mutualist. I’m hardly “co-opting” him by pointing this out. I think LS has too much of a vested interest in simply being antagonistic towards the factions in question.
If I did, should shame be driving me to self-censor, since you cannot?
Well you did call him a lefty did you not?
Since you said please… No. If my statements make no sense, stop reading them. Someone smarter is bound to come along and “get it”. And you started this game (that I can remember) of labeling vulgar libertarians conservatives and “the right”.
As I’ve said, the so-called vulgar libertarian right doesn’t exist, it’s a strawman. Yet the self-proclaimed left, and you guys proudly promote yourselves as left libertarians who have more in common with left liberals than you do vulgar libertarians, is constantly pointing out some right movement or organization that apparently only you guys can see.