Great little essay. "I'm Still Not a Libertarian (so I guess that means I'm opposed to personal freedom)"

http://world.std.com/~mhuben/pk-is-against-liberty.html

He says:

"The first fallacy is one I call the Fallacy of Revolution. It can be found in any movement that seeks to radically revise the underpinnings of society, whether by abolishing money, imposing a theocracy, eliminating undesirable ethnic groups, repealing all law, organizing everyone's diet according to principles of macrobiotics, or whatever other secret of a perfect society any group comes up with. In particular, it comes up in exactly equal form among communists seeking to eliminate private property and anarcho-libertarians trying to do the opposite. The fallacy can be expressed more or less as follows:

By making these radical changes, we are removing the root cause of all the failures and evils of society as it presently stands. This will eliminate all of the existing problems, and since we have no knowledge of what new problems might arise, we can assume there will be none. Everything will work right, because there are no foreseeable things that can go wrong."

Further, he says:

Well worth reading the whole thing. Even better will be watching the contortions of the Libertarians trying to argue against it.

__________________
When you see the words "Mises" or "Hayek" in someone's post, just ask yourself: do I really want to ban paper money and go back to gold?

You have to pity the kind of people who buy into conspiracy theories. I find the following to be the saddest words on the internet: "Re: connection between Bilderberg puppet lady gaga and viral outbreak in ukraine "

With regards to Communism, this joker is setting up a strawman. Communists doent say that abolishing private landed property will get rid of all social problems - but that it will get rid of the source of the great bulk of them.

__________________
If voting could change anything - it would be banned.

"The transition from Capitalism to Communism is certainly bound to yield a tremendous abundance and variety of political forms, but the essence will inevitably be the same: the Dictatorship of the Proletariat." V.I. Lenin. The State and Revolution.

abolishing money, socialism anyone!

__________________
Google Reader great for following blogs

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It will wreck feargachs head when he discovers that neither Mises nor Hayek were Anarchist or Libertarian

__________________
.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
: :
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Ron Paul !

Who? Oh yes, some minor US Congressman humiliated in the primaries for the GOP primaries.

__________________
Economic Left/Right: -4.16
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.28

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I wasn't going to say anything.

It might take some time to sink in, but the tired cliche of being "free to starve" rests on a confusion between "freedom" and "infinte abundance".

I wonder if Mr. Kienitz thinks that slaves were better off in slavery than as free men?*

(See, I can misprepresent the arguments of my opponents too)

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
¦
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

at last proof Libertas was a scam

Walter Lippman once wrote:

In a free society the state does not administer the affairs of men. It administers justice among men who conduct their own affairs.

Is that a better approximation of what we are arguing about?