W00T! ANARCHY! *light a car on fire then pees on a old lady*
Yeah, even if we DO manage to get a unified government, chances are there will be a huge rebellion shortly after. And then ....ANARCHY! *lights a old lady on fire and pees on a car*
United Canucks Of Mexico? :O
- Zarxrax
- Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2001 6:37 pm
- Contact:
You obviously have a different view of libertarianism than I do (and as there are many different types of libertarianism, that is valid). Jefferson said "No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him." A man should not be free to do things that cause harm or detriment to their neighbor, or to future generations.Otohiko wrote:What I think you're ignoring, and what my problem with libertarianism is - it's not that it's bad for people to be able to choose whether to smoke marijuana or have abortions. Those aren't hurting anyone other than the people directly involved and possibly Jesus. Those are all fine and dandy. I don't think those are even issues - I dislike election politics largely because they're so focused on getting a rise out of people on social issues which should matter fairly little. The problem is when people are free to do things that someone else has to pay for, whether it's someone down the street, across the border, or up a generation in the future. All is fine and happy - CHOICE! VARIETY! EVERYTHING IS DIFFERENT!
I see no reason why you must be rich to move. In fact, I would think that the poorer you are, the easier it is to move. You have fewer possessions, so there is less to try to drag along with you. If you have a low end job, you can find one of those just about anywhere. And if you spray pesticides that are causing harm to someone, then they have every right to sue you. No man has the right to bring harm to someone else. Regarding the oil supply, oil is protected and subsidized by big government. In a libertarian society, we likely would have moved on to other fuels by now.Otohiko wrote:Who pays for it? Are you naive enough to imagine that anyone but the richest people (in world terms) can really (quite literally) AFFORD to be sitting around choosing whether to move somewhere they can smoke marijuana or have an abortion? And then at whose expense are they rich enough in the first place? What if it's not marijuana - what if it's pesticides that are giving their neighbour's kid cancer? What if it's shoes that are exploiting slave labour? What if they're burning tons of oil in the fucking batmobile that someone decided to take to work? What if it that oil supply is kept safe at the cost of thousands of lives? But who cares - CHOICE! VARIETY! EVERYTHING IS DIFFERENT!
I would say that probably 90% of the people I am aware of who are libertarian are poor or middle class. The rich don't really like the idea of it. They prefer control over others.Otohiko wrote:There are massive socioeconomic and geopolitical problems in the world to solve. People can't hide from responsibility for them - both responsibility for cause and responsibility for solution. I scoff at libertarians for this one reason only: it's not that I dislike freedom, happiness and diversity. It's that someone has to pay for it. And I think it takes a naive person born into money to assume that they owe the world - be it down the street, across the border or up a generation - nothing, while the world owes them their CHOICE! VARIETY! EVERYTHING IS DIFFERENT! and marijuana too.
You know, I've never met a libertarian from the poor. That tells me something already. And I wouldn't hesitate to suggest that merely a tiny minority in the West has even so much as earned the money that gives them the CHOICE! VARIETY! EVERYTHING IS DIFFERENT! It's a naive charade to justify your own and your culture's unjustifiable excesses that others pay in blood and sweat for. Now, I'm not saying this in any self-righteous way - I'm hardly better than that in a lot of ways. In many ways I don't have choice, because I either conform to local standards or move out. Move out where? Perhaps the "Free West" should try to consider for a second just what is "Free" in it. So on my part, I'm doing the cowardly thing - I'm hiding in academia. Someone, somewhere, I'm sure, pays for my escapism. The least I can do is give no quarter to naive, irresponsible agendas of the world's overfed elites so that the future generations, if we make it that far, know better.
/end rant
- Otohiko
- Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 8:32 pm
Right, I suppose I'm just highly skeptical of the idea that everyone in society will just naturally do the right things. This is why communism (in its pure form) is something I don't believe. Thus I am a little bit concerned with a perspective where rights come before responsibilities. And the latter often have to be enforced in some way or other.
I won't make a secret of the fact I'm socialist.
And oh, sorry for the tone of the post. It was monday morning and I was cranky
That's why I haven't gone into further rant mode since.
I won't make a secret of the fact I'm socialist.
And oh, sorry for the tone of the post. It was monday morning and I was cranky

That's why I haven't gone into further rant mode since.
The Birds are using humanity in order to throw something terrifying at this green pig. And then what happens to us all later, that’s simply not important to them…
- Zarxrax
- Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2001 6:37 pm
- Contact: