Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Radcliffe Emerson · 12-19-2002, 08:16 AM

I see no racism in Atlas Shrugged, completely disagree with all of the comments made about it.
I know women in their 40s who love the book, doesn't sound like 17 year old jerking off males to me.

[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: Radcliffe Emerson ]</p>

August Spies · 12-19-2002, 08:54 AM

99percent;

What do you mean by different "types" of property rights? There is only one property right, namely the right to individual property.

Property rights have been concieved of in many different ways in many different historical periods. Property rights in fuedalism are different than capitalism are different that socialism. The fact that this isn't readily apparent says something...

August Spies · 12-19-2002, 09:02 AM

Crow:
But the spectrum of beliefs as to how much government is necessary ranges from pure anarchists to those who realize that government is necessary but should be limited in its power.

WOW that IS a pretty radical range of views...

For example, Jefferson believed in a limited government and minimal government.

both?

well jerfferson would probable be aware that libertarian is a SOCIALIST term and wouldn't know what a couple whining capitlaits in america were talking about

Gurder: As has been pointed out time and time again, the number of people agreeing with you is a very small minority.

exactly 99percent, and even amongst those that agree over objective morality an even SMALLER percentage would agree with your idea of it.

August Spies · 12-19-2002, 09:04 AM

"and there are no easy answers to anything, "

if libertarianism is based on anything it is easy answers. For good or for bad. It is certainly one of the simplist political philosophies out there.

Gurdur · 12-19-2002, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radcliffe Emerson:

No it isn't. I hate that stuff and am against any slavery, or other racial hatred. ....

You missed my point.

My point was, the Founding Fathers were not all-wise, and a lot of amendments and Amendments needed to be made.
My second point was, you were making an appeal to authority using the Founding Fathers, as well as a myth of liberality.
Both now disproven, eh ?

Quote:

But, even if I despise the guy next door to me because he has horrible racist opinions, or hates the government, or whatever, I have no right to force him to shut up unless he acts on his opinions to do injury to anyone else.

This is only your subjective opinion.

For example, Nazi or other racist propaganda is simply not allowed to be disseminated in some countries - and rightfully so (IMHO

)

People can think what they want, but shouting "Fire!" for fun in a crowded cinema is not a defensible act, and is rightfully criminalized; ditto with hate-mongering propaganda.

Quote:

If I own my property, I should have the right to do whatever the hell I want with it, I shouldn't have to obey socialist neighborhood laws. Granted, people that live in communities that have rules know that going in, but those rules also get enforced on non-socialist neighborhoods.

You seem to contradict yourself here.

Please specify what you see as "socialist neighborhood laws".

Quote:

...make a general comment about the Founding Fathers on that one aspect belittles the other aspects to the liberty they envisioned, in my opinion.

I disproved your argument from authority.

Quote:

and I think the Libertarian party is the best alternative.

A very minority view.

Crow · 12-19-2002, 10:05 AM

Quote:

August Spies:
[QB]Crow:
But the spectrum of beliefs as to how much government is necessary ranges from pure anarchists to those who realize that government is necessary but should be limited in its power.

WOW that IS a pretty radical range of views...

No more so than the views regarding theism here.

Quote:

August Spies:
[QB]Crow:
For example, Jefferson believed in a limited government and minimal government.

both?

See the quotes...what conclusion would you draw?

Quote:

August Spies:
well jerfferson would probable be aware that libertarian is a SOCIALIST term and wouldn't know what a couple whining capitlaits in america were talking about

Not sure what you mean, but you are welcome to run with it if you like.

August Spies · 12-19-2002, 10:20 AM

libertarian is a socialist term. It was used to mean a type of anarchist-socialist thought. Sometimes anarchists referred to themselves as libertarian communists. Regardless, it was always known a socialist term until a couple decades ago in the United States. Around the world libertarian (or the italian, french, spanish equivelants) still refers to socialist thought.

we dont' need to get into a big argument about it. Its true, but its just a pet peeve of mine. Not something that really matters to this debate. (except maybe to prove "libertarians" aren't even creative enough to come up with their own term

"

Crow · 12-19-2002, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by August Spies:
<strong>libertarian is a socialist term. It was used to mean a type of anarchist-socialist thought. Sometimes anarchists referred to themselves as libertarian communists. Regardless, it was always known a socialist term until a couple decades ago in the United States. Around the world libertarian (or the italian, french, spanish equivelants) still refers to socialist thought.

we dont' need to get into a big argument about it. Its true, but its just a pet peeve of mine. Not something that really matters to this debate. (except maybe to prove "libertarians" aren't even creative enough to come up with their own term

"</strong>

No problem...except with the unnecessarily vitriolic bit there at the end. The GOP is still known as the Republican Party, but they sure don't resemble much of the Republicans of 150 years ago. But you are right it has little to do with the debate at hand.

August Spies · 12-19-2002, 10:52 AM

well to drag this out one more post, the Republican part is a brand name. It is thier label. The party may have changed but it has stayed the same organizatino. libertarian is a political term. Changing its meaning is the same as changing the meaning of capitalism or communism. it just obscures things.

Radcliffe Emerson · 12-19-2002, 01:05 PM

Well, first the government will round up Muslims, because they're a threat (they're already arresting some in California), then it will be Asians, then blacks, then Native Americans, etc, then will see what people think of the wonderful Republican and Democratic parties.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-19-2002, 08:16 AM	#91
Radcliffe Emerson Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: the dark side of Mars Posts: 1,309	I see no racism in Atlas Shrugged, completely disagree with all of the comments made about it. I know women in their 40s who love the book, doesn't sound like 17 year old jerking off males to me. [ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: Radcliffe Emerson ]</p>

12-19-2002, 08:54 AM	#92
August Spies Contributor Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: The Vine Posts: 12,950	99percent; What do you mean by different "types" of property rights? There is only one property right, namely the right to individual property. Property rights have been concieved of in many different ways in many different historical periods. Property rights in fuedalism are different than capitalism are different that socialism. The fact that this isn't readily apparent says something...

12-19-2002, 09:02 AM	#93
August Spies Contributor Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: The Vine Posts: 12,950	Crow: But the spectrum of beliefs as to how much government is necessary ranges from pure anarchists to those who realize that government is necessary but should be limited in its power. WOW that IS a pretty radical range of views... For example, Jefferson believed in a limited government and minimal government. both? well jerfferson would probable be aware that libertarian is a SOCIALIST term and wouldn't know what a couple whining capitlaits in america were talking about Gurder: As has been pointed out time and time again, the number of people agreeing with you is a very small minority. exactly 99percent, and even amongst those that agree over objective morality an even SMALLER percentage would agree with your idea of it.

12-19-2002, 09:04 AM	#94
August Spies Contributor Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: The Vine Posts: 12,950	"and there are no easy answers to anything, " if libertarianism is based on anything it is easy answers. For good or for bad. It is certainly one of the simplist political philosophies out there.

12-19-2002, 10:20 AM	#97
August Spies Contributor Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: The Vine Posts: 12,950	libertarian is a socialist term. It was used to mean a type of anarchist-socialist thought. Sometimes anarchists referred to themselves as libertarian communists. Regardless, it was always known a socialist term until a couple decades ago in the United States. Around the world libertarian (or the italian, french, spanish equivelants) still refers to socialist thought. we dont' need to get into a big argument about it. Its true, but its just a pet peeve of mine. Not something that really matters to this debate. (except maybe to prove "libertarians" aren't even creative enough to come up with their own term "

12-19-2002, 10:52 AM	#99
August Spies Contributor Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: The Vine Posts: 12,950	well to drag this out one more post, the Republican part is a brand name. It is thier label. The party may have changed but it has stayed the same organizatino. libertarian is a political term. Changing its meaning is the same as changing the meaning of capitalism or communism. it just obscures things.

12-19-2002, 01:05 PM	#100
Radcliffe Emerson Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: the dark side of Mars Posts: 1,309	Well, first the government will round up Muslims, because they're a threat (they're already arresting some in California), then it will be Asians, then blacks, then Native Americans, etc, then will see what people think of the wonderful Republican and Democratic parties.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.