Volconvo Debate Forums - View Single Post

Kyran · Feb 28, 2004, 12:06 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,)
Why don't you all go there to make your utopist society, what stop you from doing so ??

You will never have a better one in USA ...<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

You am not even from USA! SHhhHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhh about libertarian!

What stop YOU from going Haiti? You no like anarchy either? Me thought so.

DEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeee. This guy's an admin? WTF he doesn't even speak english; how is he gonna look for rule violations?

Mathieu you can just STFU. No libertarians ever suggested what you are saying. Don't put words in their mouths. That's rude. That's TWICE rude for telling them to defend it.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,)
How libertarian can aspire to establish their idea if they can't even agree on the most crucial issues ?

You are very good to call people straw men, while you choose selectively the statement I do to do your own straw man attack . You see I am able to call people like that too.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

No one called you a straw man, Mister Obvious. Learn our language before trying to communicate. A straw man argument is that RUDE thing you do to people. It's when you setup someone's argument for them and then ask them to defend it.

Of course it LOOKS like "many different" libertarians have different views. You included NON-LIBERTARIANS with the original; just because they called themselves libertarian. Neo-cons think they're conservative; does that make it true? No.

So what's an original libertarian? Look at Bentodd. He gave you a basic specific example. Libertarians are generally against social programs, pro-capitalist, and pro-individual rights. They expect a justice system that respects the rights of a man; and a government that is not above the law. Anarchists, by definition, would oppose even a justice system on the grounds that it is a form of government.

You wanted a fight. Now you got one.

Gee? Why don't libertarians run into the middle of somebody else's revolution and tell them how to build their government? DEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeee. I don't know. Maybe they have some common sense! Yeah. Let's go tell some Americans today to leave their own country. It's FUUUUUUUNNNNNNNNN.

Libertarians believe in non-intervention. They do not believe in meddling with foreign affairs. If you had read the LP's website, you would have known this. You didn't. Why? Because you're not even seriously objective about the matter. You don't LIKE libertarianism. That's what you WANTED to show everybody. This topic is your way of lashing out at others.

Minarchy is not a word. Libertarianism is not "minarchy."

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,)
Continue in your diatribe against the system. The only arguments you have to offer is blind faith in your opinion. No one of you here is interrested in fact, they prefer to cultivate anger agianst the system . It is easier to stay out and whine than to get in and change it in a proactive way . Just attack me , it is easier than to try to demonstrate anything, continue to throw the party line<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Logical Fallacy #1: Libertarian ideals are based upon blind faith.

It is a historical fact that prohibition doesn't work, in any theocracy or government. Seeing is believing. Libertarians in my personal experience are a variety of people who, for the most part, reject any collectivist idealism or faith as nonsense.

Logical Fallacy #2: No one here is interested in fact.

Mat, you're one to talk. You don't even comprehend english let alone libertarianism; how can you possibly argue against it?

Logical Fallacy #3: Government can reduce in size without angry people.

Those Haitians sure aren't singing Dixie.

Logical Fallacy #4: Libertarians aren't trying to change the system proactively.

Spreading libertarian philosophy directly changes the system. These forum posts are a political action: conversion. Those who begin accepting libertarian values will support the LP.

For all you know, the libertarians on this forum could be 13 years old. You expect them to give you a friggin video of what they're doing? STFU jerk.

Logical Fallacy #5: Libertarians are taking the path of least resistance.

The fact that you have to make your arguments based upon assumptions, dirty straw man tactics, and poor English proves that you are wrong. It takes more brainpower to spot bad debate tricks than it does to pull them off.

Several people have told you what you are wrong on and yet the Communication Barrier between us (your ego) is preventing you from understanding. Don't tell us what libertarians are about, are doing, or are going to do. You didn't invent the concept and don't want to learn anything about it.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,)
False, Poverty is more flagrant in US than it is thanks to social security. As for personal charity, can you tell me how it enforce liberty when one choose to give to religious fundation ? So the poor is discriminated over is religion, or he have to listen to speech to get the care ? There is 9 million illegal workers n America, who do gain high salary, are those include in your equation or they are just not american ? I beleive in the right of every individual to have the same chances and opportunitys in life, ans social system help that<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Logical Fallacy #6: Poverty is flagrant in the US.

The average poor person in America owns two TVs, a cell-phone, and brand new Nikes; has electricity, air-conditioning, food and water. Don't believe me? Go to our public schools and ask the children yourself. I didn't come up with the concept that Poverty is in the US, so YOU are the one who has to back up your claim. Define POVERTY clearly first, then start backing it up with some actual PROOF.

After you've done that, take a look at Bill Gates' Foundation and see how much money he is spending on his own social program. Toussaint is correct; people DO choose to give money away without government coersion.

Logical Fallacy #7: Private charity enforces liberty.

You don't HAVE to get help from charities. You can go knock on everybody's door in a neighborhood asking for help if you want to. You can even panhandle unless the local government has a law against it.

Logical Fallacy #8: Religious charity discriminates against the poor.

Some poor people try to come to the homeless shelter drunk. Obviously, these people do not need help as badly as others who get crippled or maimed. If charity didn't turn it's back on deadbeats, there would be no money left for others. Show me one private charity that successfully gets away with being indiscriminate.

You cannot prove that the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. I, however, can prove that Government gets bigger and Freedom gets smaller.

You cannot prove that the women you know actually own their enterprise. At very best, you can prove in % of income how MUCH of their own businesses they own and how much the government owns. As long as governments use property tax, income tax, luxury tax, and social program taxes...nobody completely owns anything they possess.

Your beliefs put you into the Socialist bracket, Mathieu. As you should be able to tell by now, we are absolutely and directly opposed. You believe in the power of the Social System to provide equal opportunity to everybody.

48,000,000 Americans have decided NOT to buy that Insurance you're talking about. Maybe they needed other things that year. Maybe they're in college. Maybe they're going to start a business tomorrow. Maybe they don't give a crap. You do not know what their income or spending habits are today, tomorrow, or yesterday. I know that if I had a million bucks in the bank, I would not buy ANY medical insurance. So who's to say those Americans aren't extremely wealthy?

Everybody just SEEMS to be starving who isn't drinking the lifeblood of the taxpayer. Why are you silly Americans not drinking from the fountain of infinite wealth with us Canadians?! We have equality, and thou art lacking. Taketh, thou, from the rich and eat. And know the Lord Thy God Of Forces gave it to thee.

When someone gives you something, you're supposed to thank them. Do you thank Government, Mathieu? Do you thank those who died making Canada's Health Care System possible? Oh wait, nobody died pushing the government pen. Is that what we have to do to be your friend? If I go put a gun to someone's head, take their money, and give it to you...will you like me just as much? Oh Government doesn't DO THAT does it? No, everyone FREELY gives to the government, without fear of jailtime or being Janet Reno'd.

At this point, I'm going to give you a chance to respond or run away; the choice is yours. You do NOT, however, have the option of winning this argument. You're going to have to WORK and EARN that. Evading the points I've made is equivalent to admitting I'm right, btw. I WILL use that against you if you do not argue against EACH AND EVERY SINGLE point I brought up.

Good luck; and don't feel bad if you aren't up for the challenge. I wouldn't argue with me either.

Feb 28, 2004, 12:06 am	#68 (permalink) (top)
Kyran Igneous Magma Location: East Coast, USA Posts: 451	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,) Why don't you all go there to make your utopist society, what stop you from doing so ?? You will never have a better one in USA ...<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> You am not even from USA! SHhhHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhh about libertarian! What stop YOU from going Haiti? You no like anarchy either? Me thought so. DEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeee. This guy's an admin? WTF he doesn't even speak english; how is he gonna look for rule violations? Mathieu you can just STFU. No libertarians ever suggested what you are saying. Don't put words in their mouths. That's rude. That's TWICE rude for telling them to defend it. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,) How libertarian can aspire to establish their idea if they can't even agree on the most crucial issues ? You are very good to call people straw men, while you choose selectively the statement I do to do your own straw man attack . You see I am able to call people like that too.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> No one called you a straw man, Mister Obvious. Learn our language before trying to communicate. A straw man argument is that RUDE thing you do to people. It's when you setup someone's argument for them and then ask them to defend it. Of course it LOOKS like "many different" libertarians have different views. You included NON-LIBERTARIANS with the original; just because they called themselves libertarian. Neo-cons think they're conservative; does that make it true? No. So what's an original libertarian? Look at Bentodd. He gave you a basic specific example. Libertarians are generally against social programs, pro-capitalist, and pro-individual rights. They expect a justice system that respects the rights of a man; and a government that is not above the law. Anarchists, by definition, would oppose even a justice system on the grounds that it is a form of government. You wanted a fight. Now you got one. Gee? Why don't libertarians run into the middle of somebody else's revolution and tell them how to build their government? DEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeee. I don't know. Maybe they have some common sense! Yeah. Let's go tell some Americans today to leave their own country. It's FUUUUUUUNNNNNNNNN. Libertarians believe in non-intervention. They do not believe in meddling with foreign affairs. If you had read the LP's website, you would have known this. You didn't. Why? Because you're not even seriously objective about the matter. You don't LIKE libertarianism. That's what you WANTED to show everybody. This topic is your way of lashing out at others. Minarchy is not a word. Libertarianism is not "minarchy." </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,) Continue in your diatribe against the system. The only arguments you have to offer is blind faith in your opinion. No one of you here is interrested in fact, they prefer to cultivate anger agianst the system . It is easier to stay out and whine than to get in and change it in a proactive way . Just attack me , it is easier than to try to demonstrate anything, continue to throw the party line<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Logical Fallacy #1: Libertarian ideals are based upon blind faith. It is a historical fact that prohibition doesn't work, in any theocracy or government. Seeing is believing. Libertarians in my personal experience are a variety of people who, for the most part, reject any collectivist idealism or faith as nonsense. Logical Fallacy #2: No one here is interested in fact. Mat, you're one to talk. You don't even comprehend english let alone libertarianism; how can you possibly argue against it? Logical Fallacy #3: Government can reduce in size without angry people. Those Haitians sure aren't singing Dixie. Logical Fallacy #4: Libertarians aren't trying to change the system proactively. Spreading libertarian philosophy directly changes the system. These forum posts are a political action: conversion. Those who begin accepting libertarian values will support the LP. For all you know, the libertarians on this forum could be 13 years old. You expect them to give you a friggin video of what they're doing? STFU jerk. Logical Fallacy #5: Libertarians are taking the path of least resistance. The fact that you have to make your arguments based upon assumptions, dirty straw man tactics, and poor English proves that you are wrong. It takes more brainpower to spot bad debate tricks than it does to pull them off. Several people have told you what you are wrong on and yet the Communication Barrier between us (your ego) is preventing you from understanding. Don't tell us what libertarians are about, are doing, or are going to do. You didn't invent the concept and don't want to learn anything about it. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,) False, Poverty is more flagrant in US than it is thanks to social security. As for personal charity, can you tell me how it enforce liberty when one choose to give to religious fundation ? So the poor is discriminated over is religion, or he have to listen to speech to get the care ? There is 9 million illegal workers n America, who do gain high salary, are those include in your equation or they are just not american ? I beleive in the right of every individual to have the same chances and opportunitys in life, ans social system help that<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Logical Fallacy #6: Poverty is flagrant in the US. The average poor person in America owns two TVs, a cell-phone, and brand new Nikes; has electricity, air-conditioning, food and water. Don't believe me? Go to our public schools and ask the children yourself. I didn't come up with the concept that Poverty is in the US, so YOU are the one who has to back up your claim. Define POVERTY clearly first, then start backing it up with some actual PROOF. After you've done that, take a look at Bill Gates' Foundation and see how much money he is spending on his own social program. Toussaint is correct; people DO choose to give money away without government coersion. Logical Fallacy #7: Private charity enforces liberty. You don't HAVE to get help from charities. You can go knock on everybody's door in a neighborhood asking for help if you want to. You can even panhandle unless the local government has a law against it. Logical Fallacy #8: Religious charity discriminates against the poor. Some poor people try to come to the homeless shelter drunk. Obviously, these people do not need help as badly as others who get crippled or maimed. If charity didn't turn it's back on deadbeats, there would be no money left for others. Show me one private charity that successfully gets away with being indiscriminate. You cannot prove that the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. I, however, can prove that Government gets bigger and Freedom gets smaller. You cannot prove that the women you know actually own their enterprise. At very best, you can prove in % of income how MUCH of their own businesses they own and how much the government owns. As long as governments use property tax, income tax, luxury tax, and social program taxes...nobody completely owns anything they possess. Your beliefs put you into the Socialist bracket, Mathieu. As you should be able to tell by now, we are absolutely and directly opposed. You believe in the power of the Social System to provide equal opportunity to everybody. 48,000,000 Americans have decided NOT to buy that Insurance you're talking about. Maybe they needed other things that year. Maybe they're in college. Maybe they're going to start a business tomorrow. Maybe they don't give a crap. You do not know what their income or spending habits are today, tomorrow, or yesterday. I know that if I had a million bucks in the bank, I would not buy ANY medical insurance. So who's to say those Americans aren't extremely wealthy? Everybody just SEEMS to be starving who isn't drinking the lifeblood of the taxpayer. Why are you silly Americans not drinking from the fountain of infinite wealth with us Canadians?! We have equality, and thou art lacking. Taketh, thou, from the rich and eat. And know the Lord Thy God Of Forces gave it to thee. When someone gives you something, you're supposed to thank them. Do you thank Government, Mathieu? Do you thank those who died making Canada's Health Care System possible? Oh wait, nobody died pushing the government pen. Is that what we have to do to be your friend? If I go put a gun to someone's head, take their money, and give it to you...will you like me just as much? Oh Government doesn't DO THAT does it? No, everyone FREELY gives to the government, without fear of jailtime or being Janet Reno'd. At this point, I'm going to give you a chance to respond or run away; the choice is yours. You do NOT, however, have the option of winning this argument. You're going to have to WORK and EARN that. Evading the points I've made is equivalent to admitting I'm right, btw. I WILL use that against you if you do not argue against EACH AND EVERY SINGLE point I brought up. Good luck; and don't feel bad if you aren't up for the challenge. I wouldn't argue with me either.