How Evil is Libertarianism anyway?

[bripat9643]

Laws are enforced with the threat, and execution, of violence. How do you convince yourself otherwise?

Most people obey the law the vast majority of their lives because they know that obeying the law is the right moral thing to do.

Only jack asses and Libertarians have to have the threat of force to get them to obey the law.

It depends on the law. Obeying the law against armed robber is the right moral thing to do. Obeying the law that says you have to buy a certain kind of health insurance is nothing more than complying with the dictates of a criminal gang.

 

[bripat9643]

I disagree. It's the result of a failed totalitarian state. The same thing happened after the Roman Empire collapsed.

It's happened everywhere. Europe, Russia. Most people are followers. If everyone was like you and me, sure, it would work to have voluntary associations. But most people are like the majority of Americans who serve the parties and follow them. You take away one government, they'll find someone new to control them. And we'll have to joint to fight them back. You aren't getting little house on the prairie anarchy

The Idea of a Private Law Society

Still requires the world to be comprised of people like you and me. Tyrants will seek followers to conquer us and liberals seeking masters will follow them. Yeah, government deciding sucks, the key is to make it as weak as possible. But somehow judgments need to be universally recognized, and whatever you call that universal recognition, it's government

No, it actually doesn't require the world to be comprised of people like you and me. If there is no government, then it doesn't matter what kind of people populate the society. If there are no levers of power for them to push, then they can't accomplish their goal of imposing their aims on us.

I've said many times that the phrase "limited government" is an oxymoron. If you allow government to come into existence, it will grow until it consumes all of society. That's what history has shown over and over and over.

And if you eliminate it, tyrants will recruit liberals to be their armies, we'll join to defend ourselves, and bam, you have government again.

The only solution is to just flat out give government as little as possible. Whatever power they have they will abuse. So give them as little to abuse us with.

You didn't read the article about private law society, did you?

We will pay insurance companies to defend us from liberals.

 

[P@triot]

This is too retarded to respond to.

Do all libertarians believe you should be able to just walk into the White House?

You said that the government is the people. I'm one of the people, no? So I'm the government.

Boom! Down goes Synthaholic! Down goes Synthaholic!

Watching you own her is a pleasure Centinel!

^^^ Another dope who doesn't understand representative democracy.

Interesting that the libertarians are looking to own people...

First of all, we are not - nor have we ever been - a "representative democracy". The fact that you don't even know that much shows how completely and utterly unqualified you are to discuss government (or even hold the privilege of voting). We are a republic.

Second, I am not - nor have I ever been - a "libertarian". I am a die-hard constitutional conservative.

Third, considering that constitutional conservatives have no desire to "own people" and desire nothing more than freedom, and libertarians are further right than we are, it's very safe to say that libertarians have zero desire to "own people". Stop projecting Syn. You known damn well it's your side of the aisle that supported slavery and still wants to bring slavery back. Every day you people insist on laws and policies that force others to labor on your behalf.

It's astounding how much you are capable of getting wrong in any one post.

 

[P@triot]

You own a business, you conform with the regulations of your community

If you had really owned your own business you would realize that

As usual, the U.S. Constitution proves you wrong. You want to convince the American people that private business is nothing more than extension of government - public space created to serve the people. But that's simply not the case. My private business on my private property entitles me to decide who I enter into business with and who I don't. The Constitution says so. And that trumps any local "regulations of my community". Believe me, you of all people I do not expect to understand this. But the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution proves what I said to be true.

The Constitution, viewed in the light of existing case law, says that everything you do impacts interstate commerce and can thus be regulated and restricted by the federal government.

When you go to your local baker, explain how that's "interstate commerce"

It's not. At all. And they know it. Just like Obamacare is not a "tax" and they know it. It's legislation creating a new department of the federal government and new powers where none exists.

But when the Constitution prevents you from exerting power and control over others, you have to intentionally misinterpret what the Constitution says to justify your illegal activity.

Is MLB a sport or a business? You seem to think things can only be one or the other.

MLB is a business genius. It is not a sport. The sport is baseball. MLB is in the business of baseball.

Man....I never thought I would have to explain that to someone over the age of 4

 

[dblack]

Laws are enforced with the threat, and execution, of violence. How do you convince yourself otherwise?

Most people obey the law the vast majority of their lives because they know that obeying the law is the right moral thing to do.

To enforce the law requires force. The fact that most people voluntarily comply, even that fact that most people who don't voluntarily submit to authorities when apprehended, doesn't change that naked truth.

But your citation of morality raises the real distinction between libertarians and conservatives. Libertarians don't believe the purpose is to enforce morality. We recognize that morality is a matter of personal judgement. Instead, we seek a government that protects our freedom to live according to our own vision of a moral life.

 

[kaz]

As usual, the U.S. Constitution proves you wrong. You want to convince the American people that private business is nothing more than extension of government - public space created to serve the people. But that's simply not the case. My private business on my private property entitles me to decide who I enter into business with and who I don't. The Constitution says so. And that trumps any local "regulations of my community". Believe me, you of all people I do not expect to understand this. But the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution proves what I said to be true.

The Constitution, viewed in the light of existing case law, says that everything you do impacts interstate commerce and can thus be regulated and restricted by the federal government.

When you go to your local baker, explain how that's "interstate commerce"

It's not. At all. And they know it. Just like Obamacare is not a "tax" and they know it. It's legislation creating a new department of the federal government and new powers where none exists.

But when the Constitution prevents you from exerting power and control over others, you have to intentionally misinterpret what the Constitution says to justify your illegal activity.

Is MLB a sport or a business? You seem to think things can only be one or the other.

MLB is a business genius. It is not a sport. The sport is baseball. MLB is in the business of baseball.

Man....I never thought I would have to explain that to someone over the age of 4

Yes, that is the Syndi experience ...

 

[Synthaholic]

We're talking about libertarianism not conservatism, so who cares what conservatives want?

And what is dumb about allowing the owner of something to determine how that thing is used?

I live in North Carolina. That's exactly what that law does, it prevents local governments from forcing businesses to say how customers use their private bathrooms. It doesn't force them to not allow transgender access to the bathroom of their choice, it stops local governments from forcing local businesses how to provide access to the bathrooms. It's a correct law regardless of whether you think they should do

You're close to losing next year's NBA All-Star game.

Since you profess people doing what they want, I'm sure you have no objections to all the corporate and individual boycotts of your state, right?

OMG, not the all-star game!

Let's see, do I want:

Option A) Businesses to decide the rules for the use of their own restrooms

Option B) The "all star game"

Yes, you do live in an Entertainment Tonight world. I'll take Option A, please. But I don't crave slavery like you do

It's not only the NBA.

Here's the list of all the people and companies boycotting the state so far:

Ringo Starr

Bryan Adams

Deutsche Bank

PayPal

Bruce Springsteen

Michael Moore

xHamster

Joel McHale

General Electric

the Dow Chemical Company

Pepsi

Hyatt

Hewlett Packard

Choice Hotels International

Whole Foods

Levis Strauss & Co.

Lionsgate

Now, a lot of them won't make an economic difference by themselves but they have influence.

North Carolina has their huge "Research Triangle". I heard an interview yesterday on NPR with an executive of Monsanto, which is fighting this law in Missouri, not because they're a Liberal corporation but because they already have stiff competition recruiting top chemists, etc. to move to Missouri and this law is going to further hurt their efforts.

North Carolina doesn't have a lot going for it other than it's universities unless you live on the coast. Businesses aren't clamoring to relocate there. This is going to hurt that further, and without those business taxes who do you think will have to make up the difference? You.

Far more publicity than substance. But no threats justify the tyranny of government dictating to businesses who can use their restrooms. For me, that is the issue. If NC required businesses to not allow "transgenders" to use the other restroom I'd be just as opposed. It's none of your business, just like it's none of the business of anyone in your list

So you're willing to pay more in taxes to protect the "right" of Billy Bob's Ribs to discriminate?

Quite the dilemma for a libby, eh? We know you all hate contributing taxes, and paying your share to live in a free society.

 

[Synthaholic]

You think there's economic opportunity awaiting everyone, everywhere. It's just not so.

If one business discriminates, it opens up the opportunity for another business so swoop in and snatch up those who have been discriminated against.

In theory, yes. Go to a small Alabama town and search for the people in a position financially to open a competing business.

Good luck!

What particular business are you talking about?

Any mom and pop business. I'm not talking about corporations. They generally don't set up shop in one-traffic light towns, other than fast food or perhaps a convenience store.

 

[Synthaholic]

If a person buys out a company that has the patent on a life saving drug then runs the price up by a factor of 50, is that wrong by Libertarian values? - Unrealistic scenario. The drug would have to be still under patent, and if the profit maximizing price was 50 times lower, they'd be losing more sales than making new profits

You should actually consume some news sometime, instead of just inside your bubble:


Martin Shkreli (/ˈskrɛli/;[3] born in 1983)[4] is an American entrepreneur and pharmaceutical executive. He is co-founder of the hedge fund MSMB Capital Management, co-founder and former chief executive officer (CEO) of thebiotechnology firm Retrophin, and founder and former CEO of Turing Pharmaceuticals. In September 2015, Shkreli received widespread criticism when Turing obtained the manufacturing license for the antiparasitic drugDaraprim and raised its price by 5,556 percent (from US$13.5 to US$750 per tablet) leading him to be referred to by media as the "most hated man in America".[5]

My bubble is management, exactly what we're discussing. You should do some reading on pricing to maximize profits that you won't understand

So you're in Shkreli's corner?

 

[P@triot]

So you're willing to pay more in taxes to protect the "right" of Billy Bob's Ribs to discriminate?

Quite the dilemma for a libby, eh? We know you all hate contributing taxes, and paying your share to live in a free society.

For once you actually nailed it Syn (and I'm not being sarcastic here). That is America in a nut shell. And if you weren't such an authoritarian-driven, power-hungry Hitler, you too would be celebrating the fact that America is such a nation of true freedom, it includes the right/freedom to be hateful, bigoted, racists, etc.

The moment you strip someone of their abridged right to live their life how they want (including hateful or racist) on some self-perceived moral high-ground, you have set the precedence for another to strip you of the way you want to live your life. It's just a damn shame you're too stupid to see that and too power-hungry to celebrate true freedom.

 

[Synthaholic]

Second, I am not - nor have I ever been - a "libertarian". I am a die-hard constitutional conservative.

And the difference is?

 

[P@triot]

We know you all hate contributing taxes, and paying your share to live in a free society.

That is always funny coming from the side of the aisle comprised of the parasite class. The side the pays little to no taxes (which is exactly why they demand so many taxes and so high - because they are the beneficiaries of those taxes).

 

[P@triot]

Second, I am not - nor have I ever been - a "libertarian". I am a die-hard constitutional conservative.

And the difference is?

The funny thing is - that's not a snarky liberal response that. You really don't know. Says a lot.

 

[Synthaholic]

As usual, the U.S. Constitution proves you wrong. You want to convince the American people that private business is nothing more than extension of government - public space created to serve the people. But that's simply not the case. My private business on my private property entitles me to decide who I enter into business with and who I don't. The Constitution says so. And that trumps any local "regulations of my community". Believe me, you of all people I do not expect to understand this. But the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution proves what I said to be true.

The Constitution, viewed in the light of existing case law, says that everything you do impacts interstate commerce and can thus be regulated and restricted by the federal government.

When you go to your local baker, explain how that's "interstate commerce"

It's not. At all. And they know it. Just like Obamacare is not a "tax" and they know it. It's legislation creating a new department of the federal government and new powers where none exists.

But when the Constitution prevents you from exerting power and control over others, you have to intentionally misinterpret what the Constitution says to justify your illegal activity.

Is MLB a sport or a business? You seem to think things can only be one or the other.

MLB is a business genius. It is not a sport. The sport is baseball. MLB is in the business of baseball.

Man....I never thought I would have to explain that to someone over the age of 4

Fathers across the nation are asking their sons "Hey, do you want to go to a business game?"

 

[P@triot]

The Constitution, viewed in the light of existing case law, says that everything you do impacts interstate commerce and can thus be regulated and restricted by the federal government.

When you go to your local baker, explain how that's "interstate commerce"

It's not. At all. And they know it. Just like Obamacare is not a "tax" and they know it. It's legislation creating a new department of the federal government and new powers where none exists.

But when the Constitution prevents you from exerting power and control over others, you have to intentionally misinterpret what the Constitution says to justify your illegal activity.

Is MLB a sport or a business? You seem to think things can only be one or the other.

MLB is a business genius. It is not a sport. The sport is baseball. MLB is in the business of baseball.

Man....I never thought I would have to explain that to someone over the age of 4

Fathers across the nation are asking their sons "Hey, do you want to go to a business game?"

Except that when a father takes his son to a baseball game, it's not MLB vs. Cuba. The MLB is comprised of the business of baseball. The league office genius. There is no baseball team called the "MLB Sythoholics".

Again...never thought I would have to explain this to someone above the age of 4.

 

[Synthaholic]

So you're willing to pay more in taxes to protect the "right" of Billy Bob's Ribs to discriminate?

Quite the dilemma for a libby, eh? We know you all hate contributing taxes, and paying your share to live in a free society.

For once you actually nailed it Syn (and I'm not being sarcastic here). That is America in a nut shell. And if you weren't such an authoritarian-driven, power-hungry Hitler, you too would be celebrating the fact that America is such a nation of true freedom, it includes the right/freedom to be hateful, bigoted, racists, etc.

The moment you strip someone of their abridged right to live their life how they want (including hateful or racist) on some self-perceived moral high-ground, you have set the precedence for another to strip you of the way you want to live your life. It's just a damn shame you're too stupid to see that and too power-hungry to celebrate true freedom.

You just don't believe in majority rule, or that the whole of society can make rules by which we all must live. You think you should be exempt. Sounds like a libby to me.

 

[Synthaholic]

We know you all hate contributing taxes, and paying your share to live in a free society.

That is always funny coming from the side of the aisle comprised of the parasite class. The side the pays little to no taxes (which is exactly why they demand so many taxes and so high - because they are the beneficiaries of those taxes).

Your Right-Wing brainwashing has taken hold. Isn't there a "Best of Rush" or "Best of Hannity" on right now that you should be lapping up?

 

[Synthaholic]

Second, I am not - nor have I ever been - a "libertarian". I am a die-hard constitutional conservative.

And the difference is?

The funny thing is - that's not a snarky liberal response that. You really don't know. Says a lot.

Doesn't look like you know.

 

[P@triot]

So you're willing to pay more in taxes to protect the "right" of Billy Bob's Ribs to discriminate?

Quite the dilemma for a libby, eh? We know you all hate contributing taxes, and paying your share to live in a free society.

For once you actually nailed it Syn (and I'm not being sarcastic here). That is America in a nut shell. And if you weren't such an authoritarian-driven, power-hungry Hitler, you too would be celebrating the fact that America is such a nation of true freedom, it includes the right/freedom to be hateful, bigoted, racists, etc.

The moment you strip someone of their abridged right to live their life how they want (including hateful or racist) on some self-perceived moral high-ground, you have set the precedence for another to strip you of the way you want to live your life. It's just a damn shame you're too stupid to see that and too power-hungry to celebrate true freedom.

You just don't believe in majority rule, or that the whole of society can make rules by which we all must live. You think you should be exempt. Sounds like a libby to me.

As always, you are 100% wrong in everything you said. But then again, that's not surprising come from a woman who believes that the U.S. is (and I quote) "a democracy". You don't even know that we're a republic.

Would you like to know what I actually support? Constitutional government. Which means that I fully support the majority's right to choose the direction of the country so long as it does not violate the U.S. Constitution. Our founder built our system of government that way to prevent mob rule. Where people like you get that mob-mentality and decide it's ok for black people to be slaves and it's ok to hang them. See, the Constitution prevents people like you from voting that back. It doesn't matter if 99% of the people want that - the Constitution prevents it. The fact that you don't know that and never learned about the U.S. Constitution is why you spend your life pissed off. Maybe if you understood the law, you wouldn't be so pissed to learn that you were violating it.

And here's the knockout blow genius - all you people have to do in your "majority" (which you claim you have) is to legally amend the U.S. Constitution and then I wouldn't have a single leg to stand on in preventing your sick agenda. But you don't amend the U.S. Constitution. And do you know why? Because you don't have the votes. Because you don't have the "majority" like you claim. And that's another reason why you're so pissed off. Like small children, you can't accept the fact that the American people reject your radicalized ideology and won't let you have your way.

 

[Synthaholic]

When you go to your local baker, explain how that's "interstate commerce"

It's not. At all. And they know it. Just like Obamacare is not a "tax" and they know it. It's legislation creating a new department of the federal government and new powers where none exists.

But when the Constitution prevents you from exerting power and control over others, you have to intentionally misinterpret what the Constitution says to justify your illegal activity.

Is MLB a sport or a business? You seem to think things can only be one or the other.

MLB is a business genius. It is not a sport. The sport is baseball. MLB is in the business of baseball.

Man....I never thought I would have to explain that to someone over the age of 4

Fathers across the nation are asking their sons "Hey, do you want to go to a business game?"

Except that when a father takes his son to a baseball game, it's not MLB vs. Cuba. The MLB is comprised of the business of baseball. The league office genius. There is no baseball team called the "MLB Sythoholics".

Again...never thought I would have to explain this to someone above the age of 4.

Right. And the High School orchestra performance I went to the other night was really a business because they charged $5 to get in, correct?