Comparing Liberal, Conservative and Libertarian answers...

[brien]

Osborn wrote of Cephus:

Would you care to give us your own answers to the questions, so we can compare your grand omniscience?

I write: Don't hold your breath. He falls silent when he is proved wrong as he did in the Spanking thread.

[brien]

Libertarians have workable ideas and answers to the current problems of today's society. The Republicrats merely recycle rhetoric every 2 years and the voters fall for it. Libertarians would dismantle this government Diplodicus and too many people are scared to death to think they wouldn't have the protection of their nanny state government. Most people are cowards and therefore distrust the Libertarians because they can't think and act for and by themselves. Like I said, cowards.

[Fonceai]

Wow.

Here's the rub, though.

We're all sick of the same old answers from the Dems and Reps, so the Libertarian answers look fresh and new.

But really they have just as much potential for problems as any others. We just think they might be better because they haven't been tried yet.

[Autolykos]

Quote by: Athena Considering I have participated in governing decisions on all levels, I know exactly what I am talking about.

You've been President of the United States? Really?

I am very aware of the faults and merits, and will gladly discuss them with you if give me a clue about what you know.

This misses the point completely.

I am guessing you are niether educated on the subject, nor experienced. If you were either, you would speak of subject instead attacking me.

How was this:

Quote by: Athena How many city counsel meetings do you attend? How many county meetings do you attend? How many state legislature meetings do you attend? Explain what you are doing to participate in the process of self government?

... not an attack of your own?

My question to you, was your opportunity to prove me wrong, and tell me what experience or education you have. Tell us what you know. Don't attack people as a substitute for providing information.

What information do you want?

I have not attended any city council meetings, county meetings, or state legislature meetings.

Your implied point is that, were I not attending any such meetings, I am not practicing what I'm preaching. I decided to sidestep this point by directly challenging your idea of "self-government". If you can't take that, well, that's your problem.

- Rob

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Autolykos You seem to believe that government is the only human institution capable of providing "rules" and "orderly ways of doing things". Am I correct, here? If so, have you even entertained the possibility that this belief is incorrect? Why must everyone join in? Is this an all-or-nothing proposition? I fail to see how it is so. Now you put forth the notion that warfare is man's "natural state". Can you please expound on that with supporting evidence? - Rob

I believe that anythoing that provides rules and order over people is by defenition a government. You don't have to join in, but you will not be allowed to own property in any country nor will you have anuy rights recognized by a government. I think that war is man's natural state because it's my opinion, but also because you cannot show me a period where warfare was not widespread. Except maybe the pax romana (which doesn't really count because it was only in the empire) In where peace was forced upon the subjects of the empire through war.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Autolykos Remember that violence is a two-way street. One could also kill the citizen who's trying to take his stuff. Ironically enough, you bring forth the brutal logic of violence, particularly killing. Murder is the ultimate form of control over a person. It prevents him from ever doing anything else. The flipside to this fact is that no human action occurs in a vacuum, and no one can control how someone else will react to something. - Rob

And then that person's government will take you out as a threat to its citizens, that's what the person who attacked you is paying taxes for, protection.

[Cephus]

Quote by: brien I write: Don't hold your breath. He falls silent when he is proved wrong as he did in the Spanking thread.

No, only when it becomes painfully obvious that it's not worth the keystrokes to respond to, especially when it's a matter of debating someone with a very tenuous grip on reality.

[Osborn F Enready]

Cephus said: No, only when it becomes painfully obvious that it's not worth the keystrokes to respond to, especially when it's a matter of debating someone with a very tenuous grip on reality.

Ditto.

[Athena]

Quote by: Fonceai Wow. Here's the rub, though. We're all sick of the same old answers from the Dems and Reps, so the Libertarian answers look fresh and new. But really they have just as much potential for problems as any others. We just think they might be better because they haven't been tried yet.

Libertarian answers are as new as 1800 medicine. They seem to have a pat of answer of do nothing.

[Athena]

Quote by: Autolykos You've been President of the United States? Really? This misses the point completely. How was this: ... not an attack of your own? What information do you want? I have not attended any city council meetings, county meetings, or state legislature meetings. Your implied point is that, were I not attending any such meetings, I am not practicing what I'm preaching. I decided to sidestep this point by directly challenging your idea of "self-government". If you can't take that, well, that's your problem. - Rob

I think you said people want self government, or something like that, and it is my observation, extremely few people participate in government at all, except maybe to vote.

If people want self government, what should they do?

[brien]

Quote by: Cephus No, only when it becomes painfully obvious that it's not worth the keystrokes to respond to, especially when it's a matter of debating someone with a very tenuous grip on reality.

Cephus. You were the one who wrote in the Spanking thread that I was against choice, but when I proved you WRONG you weren't even man enough to admit it. You didn't respond because you CAN'T respond to the truth with more lies. So who now has a tenuous grip on reality? You can accuse me all day long but I have PROVED you wrong. You live in a dreamworld there, my friend. Cephus, you are a liar, and I have proved you are a liar. So who wants to debate a liar?

[brien]

Libertarian answers are as new as 1800 medicine. They seem to have a pat of answer of do nothing.

Sure to an Ostrich. All one has to do is explore the LP and one will find sensible answers and alternatives to the current government Diplodicus that the Republicrats have delivered to us.

[Keith Hamburger]

Quote by: Athena Libertarian answers are as new as 1800 medicine. They seem to have a pat of answer of do nothing.

Well, I would suppose that's better than the authoritarian, command/control system currently in place that in many ways is far more reminiscent of 1500 feudalism than 1800 medicine.

I'm certain that Machiavelli would have been proud of George W. (And Bill, and George H.W. and ...)

Keith

[Gods_Mercenary]

No, Machiavelli preached competence, which none of these leaders has exuded. I consider myself somewhat machiavellian, at least in his assessment of human nature, and I can assure you that none of these would be Machiavelli's candidate for a good leader.

[Keith Hamburger]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary No, Machiavelli preached competence, which none of these leaders has exuded. I consider myself somewhat machiavellian, at least in his assessment of human nature, and I can assure you that none of these would be Machiavelli's candidate for a good leader.

OK. So, maybe he wouldn't have been proud of them. I'll concede the point. However, it seems they may be striving in their own incompetent way to acquire his adoration. Their policies and attitudes are quite reminiscent of midieval ruling values.

Keith

[Gods_Mercenary]

Their subjects niether loved nor feared them, they allowed themselves to be limited by meaningless governmental structures, and they weren't single minded nor extremely manipulative in their foreign policy. If you want to see Machiavellian rulers turn to Cardinal Richelieu, Louis XIV, and Otto von Bismarck.

[Keith Hamburger]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary Their subjects niether loved nor feared them, they allowed themselves to be limited by meaningless governmental structures, and they weren't single minded nor extremely manipulative in their foreign policy. If you want to see Machiavellian rulers turn to Cardinal Richelieu, Louis XIV, and Otto von Bismarck.

Sounds an awful lot like George W. to me. Neither loved nor feared. And, he would have to have a mind to be single-minded.

Keith

[Gods_Mercenary]

That was an example of how not to be a machiavellian. I thought my examples from history demonstrated that. You might want to learn what machiavelli actually thought before you throw around his philosophy.

[peacepinkie]

If they legalized heroin next week, I have much faith that no one who reads this would make it their lifes ambition to become addicted. I think people are fully capable of making good decisions without law. I guess this way of thinking would make me a libertarian.

[Osborn F Enready]

Welcome peacepinkie.