How libertarianism started, a look back in its history

[TurtleDude]

The OP is a wonderful example of revisionist history.

I'd call it baiting myself but I won't disagree with you

 

[waas]

I'd call it baiting myself but I won't disagree with you

I'd hardly call it baiting. Far right, or left, political ideologies are usually meant to serve the needs of someone. Socialism serves the middle class, libertarianism the rich. :shrug:

 

[TurtleDude]

I'd hardly call it baiting. Far right, or left, political ideologies are usually meant to serve the needs of someone. Socialism serves the middle class, libertarianism the rich. :shrug:

socialism serves those who seek to gain wealth and power through the votes of the lower classes

 

[waas]

socialism serves those who seek to gain wealth and power through the votes of the lower classes

You're talking about authoritarian strands of socialism and the misuse of Marxism. I've explained all this to you before.

 

[TurtleDude]

You're talking about authoritarian strands of socialism and the misuse of Marxism. I've explained all this to you before.

yeah you have given me your OPINION on it. that's a bit different than explaining it. explaining it presumes I was ignorant and your post conveyed knowledge. which of course is not quite accurate

 

[waas]

yeah you have given me your OPINION on it. that's a bit different than explaining it. explaining it presumes I was ignorant and your post conveyed knowledge. which of course is not quite accurate

Go look at Marx's beliefs, or at Kropotkin's. All you've done is go off on incoherent rants... A classless society based on the idea of moneyless economics "serves those who seek to gain wealth and power through the votes of the lower classes"? That's crap and you know it.

 

[TurtleDude]

Go look at Marx's beliefs, or at Kropotkin's. All you've done is go off on incoherent rants... A classless society based on the idea of moneyless economics "serves those who seek to gain wealth and power through the votes of the lower classes"? That's crap and you know it.

its called reality in practice

I see your lean is now other

once it was "communist" then "socialist"

seems you are more confused about what the terms mean than what you claim I am:mrgreen:

 

[waas]

its called reality in practice

That's why I said "the authoritarian strands and the misuse of Marxism". We're talking about the principal.

Further, look at Argentina and Spain. Socialism worked rather well in these places.

America is also a good example of how capitalism can fall flat.

I see your lean is now other

It is. Now that we've established that you are indeed literate, let's stop dodging around the issue at hand.

once it was "communist" then "socialist"

Very good. I didn't know I meant so much to you. :lol:

The problem is that this site doesn't have my actual leaning. I subsequently end up changing it a lot.

It was "libertarian-left", but I changed it to "communist" when people became convinced that was a contradiction of terms - it's not.

It was "communist", but you all became convinced I was an authoritarian, so I changed it to "socialist".

It was "socialist", as I thought folks would take that word for it's actual meaning, but that wasn't the case, so I ended up changing it.

Now it's "other".

seems you are more confused about what the terms mean than what you claim I am:mrgreen:

(above)

Now that this is all sorted out, address the points I made in my last post. You'll do it this time(you've pulled this all before) if I say please, right? :mrgreen:

 

[Bigfoot 88]

Now JP can collaberate with Cardinal Fang's revisionist history of Austrian economics and the truth will be known!

/sarcasm

 

[JP Hochbaum]

No, I think if you read my post you would see I didnt say that.

Im just puzzling over your weird questions, why you would think they were all dead and why you'd want me to name random old men that youve never heard of, & who, if I named them, because you dont know them, would mean no more to you than a made up name like kermit the frog.

It seems a most odd line of questioning, & really a bit weird, especially the request to "out" elderly people.

I mean Im sure most libertarians would be happy to stand by their beliefs, but its really just polite to ask first before putting their names online, alongside their political affiliation, without first asking if they minded.

Especially under these sort of circumstances where their seems no rhyme or reason in doing so.

Is there any particular reason why you would want to know an old mans name?

What benefit do you think it will bring you?

It is pretty simple, you said this:

"Im sure all the pre-WWII libertarians will be shocked to read this..."


I said those libertarians don't exist anymore. Which is exactly what my article is about. Post WW2 libertarianism changed and evolved into a grotesque pro-business think tank.

It no longer is the libertarianism of the pre WW2 ERA. So bringing them up is pointless.

Just how liberals today are much different from Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, John Hancock, and the numerous other liberals of that time.

 

[Henrin]

I'd hardly call it baiting. Far right, or left, political ideologies are usually meant to serve the needs of someone. Socialism serves the middle class, libertarianism the rich. :shrug:

Since when has socialism served the middle class? This entire thread is nothing but seeing illusions and thinking they are the truth. Your post is a great example of that in fact.

 

[Paul Austin]

It is pretty simple, you said this:

"Im sure all the pre-WWII libertarians will be shocked to read this..."

Yes, Im aware of what I said, a fairly commonsense observation that Im sure most would see & agree with, in fact thats why I was perplexed by your strange reaction.

I said those libertarians don't exist anymore.

Yes, a most strange statement that you havent bothered to explain yet.

Which is exactly what my article is about.

Actually if you read your own post thats not what its about at all.

Post WW2 libertarianism changed and evolved into a grotesque pro-business think tank.

It no longer is the libertarianism of the pre WW2 ERA. So bringing them up is pointless.

Except, as pointed out to you by multiple people your OP was deeply flawed & bore no resemblance to the truth, & still doesnt explain your strange request for the names of old men.

I may be wrong but it does appear that you are going to increasingly desperate and ridiculous measures to avoid admitting you posted some pretty pathetic hackery, that you in no way can back up, but are not man enough to admit to.

However, as I say, I could be wrong, although when asking for elderly peoples data the alternatives appear perhaps even more bizzare, & disturbing.

 

[JP Hochbaum]

Yes, Im aware of what I said, a fairly commonsense observation that Im sure most would see & agree with, in fact thats why I was perplexed by your strange reaction.



Yes, a most strange statement that you havent bothered to explain yet.



Actually if you read your own post thats not what its about at all.



Except, as pointed out to you by multiple people your OP was deeply flawed & bore no resemblance to the truth, & still doesnt explain your strange request for the names of old men.

I may be wrong but it does appear that you are going to increasingly desperate and ridiculous measures to avoid admitting you posted some pretty pathetic hackery, that you in no way can back up, but are not man enough to admit to.

However, as I say, I could be wrong, although when asking for elderly peoples data the alternatives appear perhaps even more bizzare, & disturbing.

All I ask is for you to back up your claim. I posted plenty of proof that libertarianism has morphed from libertarianism to a pro business think tank.

Yet you call me desperate for asking you to back up what you say.

 

[Paul Austin]

All I ask is for you to back up your claim.

What claim? That libertarians dont have a shorter lifespan than everyone else?

I posted plenty of proof that libertarianism has morphed from libertarianism to a pro business think tank.

Thats not what you posted at all.

Yet you call me desperate for asking you to back up what you say.

No, I call you desperate for repeatedly comming back to ask inane and frankly weird questions that you yourself know the answers to, but deploy in order to deflect from the fact yiu posted a blatantly deceptive OP.

I ask again, a question you have repeatedly dodged, do you believe that the lifespan of all libertarians is shorter than that of the average for everyone else?

If you answer yes then Id suggest you need medical assistance, if you answer no, then by logical deduction, & without the need to invade of the private lives of people not here, you know some will be alive today & are therefore perfectly capable of answering your own question, & seeing my statements are simple commonsense & that your OP was flawed & deceptive.

Id stop digging if I was you as you really are making yourself look... odd.

 

[JP Hochbaum]

What claim? That libertarians dont have a shorter lifespan than everyone else?



Thats not what you posted at all.




No, I call you desperate for repeatedly comming back to ask inane and frankly weird questions that you yourself know the answers to, but deploy in order to deflect from the fact yiu posted a blatantly deceptive OP.

I ask again, a question you have repeatedly dodged, do you believe that the lifespan of all libertarians is shorter than that of the average for everyone else?

If you answer yes then Id suggest you need medical assistance, if you answer no, then by logical deduction, & without the need to invade of the private lives of people not here, you know some will be alive today & are therefore perfectly capable of answering your own question, & seeing my statements are simple commonsense & that your OP was flawed & deceptive.

Id stop digging if I was you as you really are making yourself look... odd.

No I don't think libertarians have a shorter life span. Pre WW2 libertarians would be between 90-110 years old right now, lol.

 

[Gipper]

I don't give the French much credit for doing anything positive, but libertarianism is one of them. Oh, and by the way, French libertarianism predates loooooooooooooong before WW2.

 

[Paul Austin]

No I don't think libertarians have a shorter life span. Pre WW2 libertarians would be between 90-110 years old right now, lol.

Yes, & as mentioned many posts ago, many folk live into their 90's these days, two of my four grandparents did for example.

So there we go, through commonsense & logical reasoning we have determined that in all probability there are a number of pre-WWII libertarians alive today.

It wasnt that hard, was it?

& I didnt even have to "out" my uncle Jack.

 

[JP Hochbaum]

I don't give the French much credit for doing anything positive, but libertarianism is one of them. Oh, and by the way, French libertarianism predates loooooooooooooong before WW2.

People are missing the point here. Those libertarians aren't today's libertarians.

 

[Gipper]

People are missing the point here. Those libertarians aren't today's libertarians.

You think laissez-faire is German?

Now, French libertarianism isn't identical to libertarianism of today, but it's close enough to give them credit.

 

[Guy Incognito]

And now it is more of a debatable subject.

Well sure, but that's not what he said, is it?

 

[Henrin]

People are missing the point here. Those libertarians aren't today's libertarians.

You realize you are arguing against libertarians, right? I see no evidence of a shift towards being pro-business and to be perfectly honest I think you are just seeing what you want to see.

 

[JP Hochbaum]

You realize you are arguing against libertarians, right? I see no evidence of a shift towards being pro-business and to be perfectly honest I think you are just seeing what you want to see.

Well if you are for Citizens United, anti-unions, against the fed, assume that man is always rational, assume that all humans are good and state control is not necessary, believe that every person knows his own interests best. Then congratulations you are today's version of a libertarian. These are the Ron Pauls, Gary Johnsons that represent the libertarian party, and a majority of their followers agree with the principals I just listed.

If you don't follow the principals I listed then you are a pre-WW2 libertarian.

 

[Henrin]

Well if you are for Citizens United, anti-unions, against the fed, assume that man is always rational, assume that all humans are good and state control is not necessary, believe that every person knows his own interests best. Then congratulations you are today's version of a libertarian. These are the Ron Pauls, Gary Johnsons that represent the libertarian party, and a majority of their followers agree with the principals I just listed.

And none of that is pro-business.

And no libertarian that I'm aware of assumes all humans are good. Would I even want the existence of the government if I thought people were all good little boys and girls?

 

[JP Hochbaum]

And none of that is pro-business.

And no libertarian that I'm aware of assumes all humans are good. Would I even want the existence of the government if I thought people were all good little boys and girls?

Citizens united isn't pro-business?

Anti-union isn't pro-business?

Being against the fed isn't pro-business?

 

[Guy Incognito]

Citizens united isn't pro-business?

Anti-union isn't pro-business?

Being against the fed isn't pro-business?

What exactly are you arguing? Your point seems incoherent.