|
On November 06 2020 02:45 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 02:36 Wegandi wrote:On November 06 2020 02:26 Neneu wrote:
Lets not forget that the libertarian ideology were founded and spread by marxists. There are a lot of people who are libertarian and lean left (although they are less known in US). Lol what? Libertarianism predates Marxists by 2 centuries and originated in Britain (a case could be made for Lao Tsu as well). What does John Locke, british Levelers, Laozi, spanish Scholastics who originated self-propriety, etc. have anything to do with marxists? Its always hilarious to hear people who have no idea what theyre talking about re: libertarianism spew their ignorance. A brief good history is actually from brittanica: https://www.britannica.com/topic/libertarianism-politics/Historical-origins What really is hilarious that you claim to be knowledgeable when you're clearly not. What you're linking has nothing to do with what libertarians in the US are. You either don't know that, which makes it funny to see you talk about people that don't know what they're talking about - or you do, and you're just being disingenuous. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism_in_the_United_States
What? We get our ideas of self-ownership from Spanish Scholastics our economics from French and British traditions (Cantillon, Say, Turgot, Bastiat, Constant, etc.) and ideas about Government from British Levellers, John Locke, etc. We've evolved to take those liberal roots to their conclusions from Hayek to Rothbard and the Friedman family (Miltons son is a huge AnCap theorist). Dont be so daft.
|
On November 06 2020 02:49 FlaShFTW wrote:
Georgia lead now down to 13k.
I hear theres about 50k votes left or something around there. Very doable. Chatam county (Savannah) has at least 12k of that number, 70/30 split would be about 8.4-3.6k, thats another 5k to Biden.
Biden basically just needs Clinton numbers to win GA at this point (assuming the outstanding ballots skew a bit bluer than the general counties do). Nuts.
|
On November 06 2020 02:50 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 02:37 Nevuk wrote:On November 06 2020 02:26 Neneu wrote:
Lets not forget that the libertarian ideology were founded and spread by marxists. There are a lot of people who are libertarian and lean left (although they are less known in US). Leftist libertarians, ie, Libertarian Socialists, are also called anarchists. Libertarian in the US always means a very different thing than in Europe. I mean, you're technically correct, but more than anything, 'libertarianism' hardly even exists as a description of anything in Europe, aside from as a description of american libertarians. I've literally never heard it used to describe a leftist. (While anarchist here squarely means the leftist kind, ancap isn't a phrase used in europe either. ) The word 'liberal' is definitely an origin of transatlantic confusion (in europe liberals are normally right-of-center overall, being socially liberal while wanting an economy significantly less regulated than social democrats do), but libertarian is a term that essentially only exists on your side of the pond.
This
User was warned for this post
|
On November 06 2020 02:50 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 02:43 Nebuchad wrote:On November 06 2020 02:37 Nevuk wrote:On November 06 2020 02:26 Neneu wrote:
Lets not forget that the libertarian ideology were founded and spread by marxists. There are a lot of people who are libertarian and lean left (although they are less known in US). Leftist libertarians, ie, Libertarian Socialists, are also called anarchists. Libertarian in the US always means a very different thing than in Europe. Based on the principles that the libertarians claim to hold, there is no rational reason for them to not be market socialists. I forget who it was but one of the main people that we have to thank for rightwing libertarianism has a quote where he celebrates taking a term from the left and making it their own. Basically libertarianism used to be pretty cool and based, so the right made an incoherent ideology and called it libertarianism so that less people would become leftwing libertarian. That last part is my interpretation but the rest is facts as far as I know edit: and small nitpick, you can be a libsoc and not an anarchist, it's the same dynamic as libertarian and ancap. Libertarianism is the logical extension of Classical liberalism. It has nothing to do with socialism (Proudhon style). If anything US liberals stole the term (liberal) from us. Guys like Albert Jay Nock, Calvin Coolidge, Buffett, etc. Compare Turgot, Benjamin Constant, Bastiat, Anti-Corn League folks, etc. to Proudhon, Kropotkin, etc. and there is not much overlap then compare those groups of folks to libertarians and its crystal clear where the lineage comes from. (Constant > Bastiat > Spencer > Mises > Hayek > Rothbard/Nozick/Friedman)
Using libertarian principles and ideology, describe why you dislike market socialism.
|
On November 06 2020 02:54 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 02:50 Wegandi wrote:On November 06 2020 02:43 Nebuchad wrote:On November 06 2020 02:37 Nevuk wrote:On November 06 2020 02:26 Neneu wrote:
Lets not forget that the libertarian ideology were founded and spread by marxists. There are a lot of people who are libertarian and lean left (although they are less known in US). Leftist libertarians, ie, Libertarian Socialists, are also called anarchists. Libertarian in the US always means a very different thing than in Europe. Based on the principles that the libertarians claim to hold, there is no rational reason for them to not be market socialists. I forget who it was but one of the main people that we have to thank for rightwing libertarianism has a quote where he celebrates taking a term from the left and making it their own. Basically libertarianism used to be pretty cool and based, so the right made an incoherent ideology and called it libertarianism so that less people would become leftwing libertarian. That last part is my interpretation but the rest is facts as far as I know edit: and small nitpick, you can be a libsoc and not an anarchist, it's the same dynamic as libertarian and ancap. Libertarianism is the logical extension of Classical liberalism. It has nothing to do with socialism (Proudhon style). If anything US liberals stole the term (liberal) from us. Guys like Albert Jay Nock, Calvin Coolidge, Buffett, etc. This conforms to my understanding of the term. That said, I don’t agree with Libertarianism, despite my basic agreement with the tenets of Classical Liberalism. It’s a very clean philosophical model that attempts to explain human behaviour in terms of informed rational actors who, when given maximum freedom, will act in predictable and ethical ways. It makes everything simple and easy until you put real humans into the model and then it all goes to shit. Libertarianism resolves those issues by turning Classical Liberalism into a religion where the flawed assumptions become acts of faith. When reality fails to conform to those assumptions reality is viewed, by Libertarians, as incorrect.
Where do you get this idea of rational actors? Our economics explicitly deny such a thing and our moral and logical statements on our liberties and freedoms have nothing to do with "doing the right thing". Read Thomas Paine.
Youre critiquing Neoclassicals, not liberals/libertarians.
|
United States10534 Posts
Lyon County (red rural) in Nevada only managed to close the gap by a couple hundred votes.
Anticipate an AP call before noon PST.
|
BTW is anyone here watching FOX news and can tell us, how they picture whats going on atm?
I m a bit worried about violence outbreakt, if Trump isn t aknowlading his defeat.
|
United States44216 Posts
On November 06 2020 02:59 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 02:50 Wegandi wrote:On November 06 2020 02:43 Nebuchad wrote:On November 06 2020 02:37 Nevuk wrote:On November 06 2020 02:26 Neneu wrote:
Lets not forget that the libertarian ideology were founded and spread by marxists. There are a lot of people who are libertarian and lean left (although they are less known in US). Leftist libertarians, ie, Libertarian Socialists, are also called anarchists. Libertarian in the US always means a very different thing than in Europe. Based on the principles that the libertarians claim to hold, there is no rational reason for them to not be market socialists. I forget who it was but one of the main people that we have to thank for rightwing libertarianism has a quote where he celebrates taking a term from the left and making it their own. Basically libertarianism used to be pretty cool and based, so the right made an incoherent ideology and called it libertarianism so that less people would become leftwing libertarian. That last part is my interpretation but the rest is facts as far as I know edit: and small nitpick, you can be a libsoc and not an anarchist, it's the same dynamic as libertarian and ancap. Libertarianism is the logical extension of Classical liberalism. It has nothing to do with socialism (Proudhon style). If anything US liberals stole the term (liberal) from us. Guys like Albert Jay Nock, Calvin Coolidge, Buffett, etc. Compare Turgot, Benjamin Constant, Bastiat, Anti-Corn League folks, etc. to Proudhon, Kropotkin, etc. and there is not much overlap then compare those groups of folks to libertarians and its crystal clear where the lineage comes from. (Constant > Bastiat > Spencer > Mises > Hayek > Rothbard/Nozick/Friedman) Using libertarian principles and ideology, describe why you dislike market socialism.
That doesn’t make sense as a question. Libertarians believe, as an article of faith, that the only free way for a human society to function is obtained by removing impositions upon human interactions (beyond those necessary to retain individual freedoms). Market socialism is an imposition upon the free bartering of individuals and therefore precludes the core mechanism of libertarianism. Libertarians believe that, with no government intervention, the market will provide answers. If you intervene in the market, as market socialism does, then the mechanism ceases to work.
The question might as well be “using religious ideology explain the problem with there not being a god”.
|
On November 06 2020 03:05 dbRic1203 wrote:
BTW is anyone here watching FOX news and can tell us, how they picture whats going on atm?
I m a bit worried about violence outbreakt, if Trump isn t aknowlading his defeat.
I watched Fox basically all election night and yesterday evening (noon in the US), they were already saying that Biden was very favored to win, and the election desk kept insisting that they thought Arizona was going to Biden.
I don't know about today.
|
On November 06 2020 03:06 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 02:59 Nebuchad wrote:On November 06 2020 02:50 Wegandi wrote:On November 06 2020 02:43 Nebuchad wrote:On November 06 2020 02:37 Nevuk wrote:On November 06 2020 02:26 Neneu wrote:
Lets not forget that the libertarian ideology were founded and spread by marxists. There are a lot of people who are libertarian and lean left (although they are less known in US). Leftist libertarians, ie, Libertarian Socialists, are also called anarchists. Libertarian in the US always means a very different thing than in Europe. Based on the principles that the libertarians claim to hold, there is no rational reason for them to not be market socialists. I forget who it was but one of the main people that we have to thank for rightwing libertarianism has a quote where he celebrates taking a term from the left and making it their own. Basically libertarianism used to be pretty cool and based, so the right made an incoherent ideology and called it libertarianism so that less people would become leftwing libertarian. That last part is my interpretation but the rest is facts as far as I know edit: and small nitpick, you can be a libsoc and not an anarchist, it's the same dynamic as libertarian and ancap. Libertarianism is the logical extension of Classical liberalism. It has nothing to do with socialism (Proudhon style). If anything US liberals stole the term (liberal) from us. Guys like Albert Jay Nock, Calvin Coolidge, Buffett, etc. Compare Turgot, Benjamin Constant, Bastiat, Anti-Corn League folks, etc. to Proudhon, Kropotkin, etc. and there is not much overlap then compare those groups of folks to libertarians and its crystal clear where the lineage comes from. (Constant > Bastiat > Spencer > Mises > Hayek > Rothbard/Nozick/Friedman) Using libertarian principles and ideology, describe why you dislike market socialism. That doesn’t make sense as a question. Libertarians believe, as an article of faith, that the only free way for a human society to function is obtained by removing impositions upon human interactions (beyond those necessary to retain individual freedoms). Market socialism is an imposition upon the free bartering of individuals and therefore precludes the core mechanism of libertarianism. Libertarians believe that, with no government intervention, the market will provide answers. If you intervene in the market, as market socialism does, then the mechanism ceases to work. The question might as well be “using religious ideology explain the problem with there not being a god”.
The existence of bosses and workers is an imposition upon human interactions (and there is no reason why it would be necessary to retain individual freedom; quite the opposite, really). There's just some naturalism going on in that description.
|
United States44216 Posts
On November 06 2020 03:01 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 02:54 KwarK wrote:On November 06 2020 02:50 Wegandi wrote:On November 06 2020 02:43 Nebuchad wrote:On November 06 2020 02:37 Nevuk wrote:On November 06 2020 02:26 Neneu wrote:
Lets not forget that the libertarian ideology were founded and spread by marxists. There are a lot of people who are libertarian and lean left (although they are less known in US). Leftist libertarians, ie, Libertarian Socialists, are also called anarchists. Libertarian in the US always means a very different thing than in Europe. Based on the principles that the libertarians claim to hold, there is no rational reason for them to not be market socialists. I forget who it was but one of the main people that we have to thank for rightwing libertarianism has a quote where he celebrates taking a term from the left and making it their own. Basically libertarianism used to be pretty cool and based, so the right made an incoherent ideology and called it libertarianism so that less people would become leftwing libertarian. That last part is my interpretation but the rest is facts as far as I know edit: and small nitpick, you can be a libsoc and not an anarchist, it's the same dynamic as libertarian and ancap. Libertarianism is the logical extension of Classical liberalism. It has nothing to do with socialism (Proudhon style). If anything US liberals stole the term (liberal) from us. Guys like Albert Jay Nock, Calvin Coolidge, Buffett, etc. This conforms to my understanding of the term. That said, I don’t agree with Libertarianism, despite my basic agreement with the tenets of Classical Liberalism. It’s a very clean philosophical model that attempts to explain human behaviour in terms of informed rational actors who, when given maximum freedom, will act in predictable and ethical ways. It makes everything simple and easy until you put real humans into the model and then it all goes to shit. Libertarianism resolves those issues by turning Classical Liberalism into a religion where the flawed assumptions become acts of faith. When reality fails to conform to those assumptions reality is viewed, by Libertarians, as incorrect. Where do you get this idea of rational actors? Our economics explicitly deny such a thing and our moral and logical statements on our liberties and freedoms have nothing to do with "doing the right thing". Read Thomas Paine. Youre critiquing Neoclassicals, not liberals/libertarians.
Could you define the libertarian issue with anti discrimination in the workplace laws without referencing morality and rational actors? My understanding is that it goes “if qualified individuals are overlooked due to prejudice then they will accept lower paid positions in rival businesses which will then be able to outcompete the prejudiced businesses through their lower costs”. This ultimately comes down to rational informed actors. A rational business would not discriminate against capable workers and therefore there isn’t a problem.
Is my understanding incorrect?
|
On November 06 2020 03:05 dbRic1203 wrote:
BTW is anyone here watching FOX news and can tell us, how they picture whats going on atm?
I m a bit worried about violence outbreakt, if Trump isn t aknowlading his defeat.
They are distancing themselves from Trump. As seen by this morning'S WH press release attacking Fox News.
|
On November 06 2020 03:05 dbRic1203 wrote:
BTW is anyone here watching FOX news and can tell us, how they picture whats going on atm?
I m a bit worried about violence outbreakt, if Trump isn t aknowlading his defeat.
I guess it depends on the time, but earlier today, they were litteraly saying that the election was stolen and they almost called trump supporters to riot.
But atm, it seems they're more realistic, and they even reacted to the trump tweet, saying that they have no proof of fraud atm.
Well, they also keep saying that the stock marcket is doing good because the senate will remain republican.
But i'm listening to ABC, CNN and FOX at the same time so it's still pretty confusing in my head now !
|
On November 06 2020 03:12 Yosheekee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 03:05 dbRic1203 wrote:
BTW is anyone here watching FOX news and can tell us, how they picture whats going on atm?
I m a bit worried about violence outbreakt, if Trump isn t aknowlading his defeat. I guess it depends on the time, but earlier today, they were litteraly saying that the election was stolen and they almost called trump supporters to riot. But atm, it seems they're more realistic, and they even reacted to the trump tweet, saying that they have no proof of fraud atm. Well, they also keep saying that the stock marcket is doing good because the senate will remain republican. But i'm listening to ABC, CNN and FOX at the same time so it's still pretty confusing in my head now !
I m listening to ABC and reading TL.net.
THX for the update. Lets hope the US is going to stay peacefull
|
Just chipping in to say that you guys are doing a phenomenal job posting coherent and fact checking updates.
|
On November 06 2020 03:18 lowdice wrote:Just chipping in to say that you guys are doing a phenomenal job posting coherent and fact checking updates.
Yes! Thanks guys! I'm basically following this election from TL. :-)
|
Seems to be what I said yesterday being discussed by the Trump people. Lay the foundation for a modern day Grover Cleveland.
edit: Seems NV is about to be wrapped up.
|
On November 06 2020 03:10 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 03:01 Wegandi wrote:On November 06 2020 02:54 KwarK wrote:On November 06 2020 02:50 Wegandi wrote:On November 06 2020 02:43 Nebuchad wrote:On November 06 2020 02:37 Nevuk wrote:On November 06 2020 02:26 Neneu wrote:
Lets not forget that the libertarian ideology were founded and spread by marxists. There are a lot of people who are libertarian and lean left (although they are less known in US). Leftist libertarians, ie, Libertarian Socialists, are also called anarchists. Libertarian in the US always means a very different thing than in Europe. Based on the principles that the libertarians claim to hold, there is no rational reason for them to not be market socialists. I forget who it was but one of the main people that we have to thank for rightwing libertarianism has a quote where he celebrates taking a term from the left and making it their own. Basically libertarianism used to be pretty cool and based, so the right made an incoherent ideology and called it libertarianism so that less people would become leftwing libertarian. That last part is my interpretation but the rest is facts as far as I know edit: and small nitpick, you can be a libsoc and not an anarchist, it's the same dynamic as libertarian and ancap. Libertarianism is the logical extension of Classical liberalism. It has nothing to do with socialism (Proudhon style). If anything US liberals stole the term (liberal) from us. Guys like Albert Jay Nock, Calvin Coolidge, Buffett, etc. This conforms to my understanding of the term. That said, I don’t agree with Libertarianism, despite my basic agreement with the tenets of Classical Liberalism. It’s a very clean philosophical model that attempts to explain human behaviour in terms of informed rational actors who, when given maximum freedom, will act in predictable and ethical ways. It makes everything simple and easy until you put real humans into the model and then it all goes to shit. Libertarianism resolves those issues by turning Classical Liberalism into a religion where the flawed assumptions become acts of faith. When reality fails to conform to those assumptions reality is viewed, by Libertarians, as incorrect. Where do you get this idea of rational actors? Our economics explicitly deny such a thing and our moral and logical statements on our liberties and freedoms have nothing to do with "doing the right thing". Read Thomas Paine. Youre critiquing Neoclassicals, not liberals/libertarians. Could you define the libertarian issue with anti discrimination in the workplace laws without referencing morality and rational actors? My understanding is that it goes “if qualified individuals are overlooked due to prejudice then they will accept lower paid positions in rival businesses which will then be able to outcompete the prejudiced businesses through their lower costs”. This ultimately comes down to rational informed actors. A rational business would not discriminate against capable workers and therefore there isn’t a problem. Is my understanding incorrect?
Yes thats incorrect as were aware that people have different preferences and sometimes people choose to pay more for insert discriminatory preference. Were also aware thats a cultural issue and not an economics one and yeah I've heard that before, but I think its a lazy response (from some libertarians). I will say though its not as bad as its made out to be. A lot of places in the South did want to hire and have blacks patronize their establishments and didnt care where they sat but Jim Crow (government again) precluded them in many ways from doing so.
Its also true that in the macro sense capitalism busts down xenophobic doors. It incentivizes disparate peoples to cooperate with each other something that socialist economies do not do.
|
I really hope they go that route, a '24 Trump run is favorable for Dems I would wager.
|
I guess he's going to campaign from jail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
