179 replies to this topic

[Lysistrata]

Denial is a primitive, but common defense. You use denial and condescension a LOT. We took the house. We’ll take the senate. And if Don runs for re-election, we’ll take the White House.

The power of hate is strong in Progressives. It drives the fake news, unruly behavior, and truckloads of mysteriously appearing ballots. It all works out in the end. It really comes down to a war between Capitalists and Socialists. You don't have to be a Sherlock to look at history and see the wreckage of Socialism for yourself. You will never get the guns. You will win some battles, but you will never win the war.

[Sister Midnight]

It looks like Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, Canada, and the majority of first world socialist countries are doing pretty well. (The list was too long for me to name them all.)

This isn’t a war. We are a society. We are all in this together. I don’t know why you fail to grasp this.

[Lysistrata]

It looks like Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, Canada, and the majority of first world socialist countries are doing pretty well. (The list was too long for me to name them all.)

This isn’t a war. We are a society. We are all in this together. I don’t know why you fail to grasp this.

What you fail to grasp is we don't want to be Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, or Canada. We like being number one. We like being the wealthiest and most powerful country in history. The combined GDP of all those countries equals about 25% of the US GDP. Our GDP will continue to grow as a Capitalist country. Their GDP will continue to erode as Socialist. Without the US economy, all those countries would collapse. Progressives love to say "wouldn't it be nice?", but they never think about the consequences of their desires.

[Rhizoctonia]

 

Won't happen so long as the libertarians continue to caucus with the evangelical and raw capatlist blocs. Both of them are perfectly willing to throw core libertarian ideals right under the bus, especially as far as independence from state and pesudo state powers go. Liberatinism requires independence from all coercive institutions, not some.

Not to mention the hard evangelicals and wana be robber barons who think being pro pot makes them libertarians aren't doing anyone any favors. Oh and the general stank of objectivism needs to be sorted

You make an excellent point. A lot of “libertarians“ object to gay marriage, a woman’s right to control her body, decriminalization of drugs, freedom of religion or atheism, free speech, free press, etc.- not very consistent with the tenants of libertarianism. I don’t know what proportion of libertarians these people represent, but they sure are loud.

It would have been a really sad state of affairs if the Dems couldn't even take the House back from Donald fucking Trump, lol.

I was sincerely afraid we wouldn’t. Like I said, I was starting to feel discouraged. We have a long way to go still, but I’m much more hopeful.

 

 

 

What Libertarians are you speaking about?  Because I'd say you're completely wrong with what you seem to be suggesting.  

[Sister Midnight]

 

Won't happen so long as the libertarians continue to caucus with the evangelical and raw capatlist blocs. Both of them are perfectly willing to throw core libertarian ideals right under the bus, especially as far as independence from state and pesudo state powers go. Liberatinism requires independence from all coercive institutions, not some.

Not to mention the hard evangelicals and wana be robber barons who think being pro pot makes them libertarians aren't doing anyone any favors. Oh and the general stank of objectivism needs to be sorted

You make an excellent point. A lot of “libertarians“ object to gay marriage, a woman’s right to control her body, decriminalization of drugs, freedom of religion or atheism, free speech, free press, etc.- not very consistent with the tenants of libertarianism. I don’t know what proportion of libertarians these people represent, but they sure are loud.

It would have been a really sad state of affairs if the Dems couldn't even take the House back from Donald fucking Trump, lol.

I was sincerely afraid we wouldn’t. Like I said, I was starting to feel discouraged. We have a long way to go still, but I’m much more hopeful.
 

 
 
What Libertarians are you speaking about?  Because I'd say you're completely wrong with what you seem to be suggesting.  

Christopher Cantwell, Richard Spencer, Ron Paul (to a degree), my husband’s uncle


https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/libertarians-sometimes-become-fascists-heres-why/

https://medium.com/@elliotgulliverneedham/why-libertarians-are-embracing-fascism-5a9747a44db9

https://thinkprogress.org/ron-paul-on-abortion-a-libertarian-as-long-as-you-dont-think-women-count-as-people-b7a8c5080290/

[Rhizoctonia]

 

 

 

Won't happen so long as the libertarians continue to caucus with the evangelical and raw capatlist blocs. Both of them are perfectly willing to throw core libertarian ideals right under the bus, especially as far as independence from state and pesudo state powers go. Liberatinism requires independence from all coercive institutions, not some.

Not to mention the hard evangelicals and wana be robber barons who think being pro pot makes them libertarians aren't doing anyone any favors. Oh and the general stank of objectivism needs to be sorted

You make an excellent point. A lot of “libertarians“ object to gay marriage, a woman’s right to control her body, decriminalization of drugs, freedom of religion or atheism, free speech, free press, etc.- not very consistent with the tenants of libertarianism. I don’t know what proportion of libertarians these people represent, but they sure are loud.

It would have been a really sad state of affairs if the Dems couldn't even take the House back from Donald fucking Trump, lol.

I was sincerely afraid we wouldn’t. Like I said, I was starting to feel discouraged. We have a long way to go still, but I’m much more hopeful.
 
 

 
 
What Libertarians are you speaking about?  Because I'd say you're completely wrong with what you seem to be suggesting.  

Christopher Cantwell, Richard Spencer, Ron Paul (to a degree), my husband’s uncle


https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/libertarians-sometimes-become-fascists-heres-why/

https://medium.com/@elliotgulliverneedham/why-libertarians-are-embracing-fascism-5a9747a44db9

https://thinkprogress.org/ron-paul-on-abortion-a-libertarian-as-long-as-you-dont-think-women-count-as-people-b7a8c5080290/

 

 

Did you pick 2 of the worst guys you can find to somehow try to paint Libertarian in the worst way as you could?  

 

Spencer, and Cantwell are far from the emblems or image of Libertarianism.  I don't know why you pick two people from Alt Right or white supremacist to somehow suggest that's what we're about.  Spencer has already said the Libertarian is incompatible with White Nationalism and disavowed.  Cantwell is a anarchist douche that I know many Libertarians cannot stand, me as well.  But I will admit that there are people who label themselves as Libertarian that do listen to some of what he says, as well as there's plenty of Anarchists in the Libertarian party.  There's constant debates and heated arguments between Anarchist and not within the party and Libertarian groups.  I would classify myself closest to a minarchist.  

 

You make an excellent point. A lot of “libertarians“ object to gay marriage, a woman’s right to control her body, decriminalization of drugs, freedom of religion or atheism, free speech, free press, etc.- not very consistent with the tenants of libertarianism. I don’t know what proportion of libertarians these people represent, but they sure are loud.

 

Now to counter your statement as you seem to have a wildly wrong view of individuals who make up and/or call themselves Libertarians for which I've very much apart of in many faucets.  

 

Gay Marriage -  Do not take issue with.  The way you word it, you make it sound like Libertarians have something against the idea of gay people.  That's not even close, as majority do not care what one wants to do, who they decide to be with, and think Government should stay out of it.  What Lysis talked about, how Marriage in itself has has been tied to law is the issue most have with it.  Sure there's Christians in the party that may not condone it upon their beliefs, but most want Government to stay out of it completely and that's the issue

 

Controlling a woman's right to her body - I assume you're speaking about Abortion.  Well you'd be right there as many Libertarians do not agree or approve of abortions or taking ones life.  It goes against the NAP.  There are some in the party that feel differently, but I'd agree most have that view, and me personally do as well.  I don't care to get into a heated topic over it, as it never goes anywhere and most individuals are set on their belief, but I agree with the majority in the party of being opposed to it.  I do have a grey area, in situations of rape/incest/medical complications to the mother which many would call me a "statist" for in the party.

decriminalization of drugs - You're kidding right?  I'd say Libertarians are probably the most outspoken when it comes to this and legalizing it.  Libertarians probably go further then most, as many talk about the legalization of weed as a hot topic, most Libertarians would be fine with the legalization of any.  The Government shouldn't have the right to tell someone to put in their body as long as it's not hurting or effecting another being.

 

freedom of religion or atheism - Again you're kidding right?  Many many Libertarians are atheists and other religions.  

 

free speech/free press - Support it completely.  Much more then either Republicans or Democrats want to say they do.  The other two parties want to shut down or limit it to things they don't agree with.  

 

I really just don't get where you're coming from.  Being apart of the party, helping with campaigning for certain individuals, and being part of many large groups of Libertarians, I do not see how any of what you say is even close to what the Majority believe that are part of the party.  The only one you had right in my opinion is on abortion.  Sure there are people within the Party I do not like or agree with, but that's literally every party.  Sure there are individuals who support them that I don't agree with, but again same goes for any party.  Most Libertarians want Government out of everyone's everyday lives, far more then any other party, and we're called "crazies" for doing so.  We are for more freedom.

[Lysistrata]

If anyone really wants to find a model Libertarian, look no further than Gary Johnson.

I have always liked Gary, and I wish we had more just like him.

[Sister Midnight]

 

 

 

Won't happen so long as the libertarians continue to caucus with the evangelical and raw capatlist blocs. Both of them are perfectly willing to throw core libertarian ideals right under the bus, especially as far as independence from state and pesudo state powers go. Liberatinism requires independence from all coercive institutions, not some.

Not to mention the hard evangelicals and wana be robber barons who think being pro pot makes them libertarians aren't doing anyone any favors. Oh and the general stank of objectivism needs to be sorted

You make an excellent point. A lot of “libertarians“ object to gay marriage, a woman’s right to control her body, decriminalization of drugs, freedom of religion or atheism, free speech, free press, etc.- not very consistent with the tenants of libertarianism. I don’t know what proportion of libertarians these people represent, but they sure are loud.

It would have been a really sad state of affairs if the Dems couldn't even take the House back from Donald fucking Trump, lol.

I was sincerely afraid we wouldn’t. Like I said, I was starting to feel discouraged. We have a long way to go still, but I’m much more hopeful.
 
 

 
 
What Libertarians are you speaking about?  Because I'd say you're completely wrong with what you seem to be suggesting.  

Christopher Cantwell, Richard Spencer, Ron Paul (to a degree), my husband’s uncle


https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/libertarians-sometimes-become-fascists-heres-why/

https://medium.com/@elliotgulliverneedham/why-libertarians-are-embracing-fascism-5a9747a44db9

https://thinkprogress.org/ron-paul-on-abortion-a-libertarian-as-long-as-you-dont-think-women-count-as-people-b7a8c5080290/
 

 
Did you pick 2 of the worst guys you can find to somehow try to paint Libertarian in the worst way as you could?  
 
Spencer, and Cantwell are far from the emblems or image of Libertarianism.  I don't know why you pick two people from Alt Right or white supremacist to somehow suggest that's what we're about.  Spencer has already said the Libertarian is incompatible with White Nationalism and disavowed.  Cantwell is a anarchist douche that I know many Libertarians cannot stand, me as well.  But I will admit that there are people who label themselves as Libertarian that do listen to some of what he says, as well as there's plenty of Anarchists in the Libertarian party.  There's constant debates and heated arguments between Anarchist and not within the party and Libertarian groups.  I would classify myself closest to a minarchist.  
 

You make an excellent point. A lot of “libertarians“ object to gay marriage, a woman’s right to control her body, decriminalization of drugs, freedom of religion or atheism, free speech, free press, etc.- not very consistent with the tenants of libertarianism. I don’t know what proportion of libertarians these people represent, but they sure are loud.

 
Now to counter your statement as you seem to have a wildly wrong view of individuals who make up and/or call themselves Libertarians for which I've very much apart of in many faucets.  
 
Gay Marriage -  Do not take issue with.  The way you word it, you make it sound like Libertarians have something against the idea of gay people.  That's not even close, as majority do not care what one wants to do, who they decide to be with, and think Government should stay out of it.  What Lysis talked about, how Marriage in itself has has been tied to law is the issue most have with it.  Sure there's Christians in the party that may not condone it upon their beliefs, but most want Government to stay out of it completely and that's the issue
 
Controlling a woman's right to her body - I assume you're speaking about Abortion.  Well you'd be right there as many Libertarians do not agree or approve of abortions or taking ones life.  It goes against the NAP.  There are some in the party that feel differently, but I'd agree most have that view, and me personally do as well.  I don't care to get into a heated topic over it, as it never goes anywhere and most individuals are set on their belief, but I agree with the majority in the party of being opposed to it.  I do have a grey area, in situations of rape/incest/medical complications to the mother which many would call me a "statist" for in the party.

decriminalization of drugs - You're kidding right?  I'd say Libertarians are probably the most outspoken when it comes to this and legalizing it.  Libertarians probably go further then most, as many talk about the legalization of weed as a hot topic, most Libertarians would be fine with the legalization of any.  The Government shouldn't have the right to tell someone to put in their body as long as it's not hurting or effecting another being.
 
freedom of religion or atheism - Again you're kidding right?  Many many Libertarians are atheists and other religions.  
 
free speech/free press - Support it completely.  Much more then either Republicans or Democrats want to say they do.  The other two parties want to shut down or limit it to things they don't agree with.  
 
I really just don't get where you're coming from.  Being apart of the party, helping with campaigning for certain individuals, and being part of many large groups of Libertarians, I do not see how any of what you say is even close to what the Majority believe that are part of the party.  The only one you had right in my opinion is on abortion.  Sure there are people within the Party I do not like or agree with, but that's literally every party.  Sure there are individuals who support them that I don't agree with, but again same goes for any party.  Most Libertarians want Government out of everyone's everyday lives, far more then any other party, and we're called "crazies" for doing so.  We are for more freedom.

You seem to have missed the part where I said it was SOME Libertarians do not support those liberties. I specifically said I do not know how many feel that way and I put the word libertarian in quotes because they are calling themselves libertarians, but are not trul6 libertarian. I also clearly said these beliefs go against the tenants of libertarian beliefs. You asked for examples of what I was referring to, I gave you the most blatant, high profile examples I know of. You seem to be personally affronted by my comments, but I did not condemn the philosophy and I hope you have not misunderstood what I was saying. The issues I mentioned are all personal freedoms a true libertarian should support. I suppose I could have said alt-right wing nuts who call themselves libertarian, but I did not think of it.

[Rand0m her0]

 

 

Won't happen so long as the libertarians continue to caucus with the evangelical and raw capatlist blocs. Both of them are perfectly willing to throw core libertarian ideals right under the bus, especially as far as independence from state and pesudo state powers go. Liberatinism requires independence from all coercive institutions, not some.

Not to mention the hard evangelicals and wana be robber barons who think being pro pot makes them libertarians aren't doing anyone any favors. Oh and the general stank of objectivism needs to be sorted

You make an excellent point. A lot of “libertarians“ object to gay marriage, a woman’s right to control her body, decriminalization of drugs, freedom of religion or atheism, free speech, free press, etc.- not very consistent with the tenants of libertarianism. I don’t know what proportion of libertarians these people represent, but they sure are loud.

It would have been a really sad state of affairs if the Dems couldn't even take the House back from Donald fucking Trump, lol.

I was sincerely afraid we wouldn’t. Like I said, I was starting to feel discouraged. We have a long way to go still, but I’m much more hopeful.

 

 

 

What Libertarians are you speaking about?  Because I'd say you're completely wrong with what you seem to be suggesting.  

 

 

 

What libertarians *should* be and what people who claim to be them are very different. Gary Johnson is the closest to a non terrible libertarian figure (at least one with enough public support to be worth mentioning), and even he is far far to willing to acquiesce on things like  corporate power.

 

The fact of the matter is that in much of America, "libertarian" is just another synonym for social conservative, and the libertarian movement has pretty much been entirely co-opted by the Republican party. You don't need to like that, but it's the truth of the matter. Many self described libertarians want a government small enough to fit in your bedroom, support the war on drugs, support the expansion of police powers, advocate for military interventionism and similar. They're libertarian in nothing but name, but that's enough for America. the libertarians ran one of the best candidates they have in a generation, the GOP ran on a platform that's as opposed to libertarian as you can possibly get, and the 15% of self described libertarians in america....pretty much lined up and voted R.

 

 

Right now, the average american moderate is pretty skeptical of libertarians for that reason. They see people stand up and go "I'm a libertarian" and then sit down and vote in favor of the war on drugs, vote to extend the military industrial complex, vote for military interventionism etc. The American moderate leans to the left on social issue...and they see libertarians vote with the evangelical righ while spouting of objectivist BS. The American moderate is untrusting of corporate power and they see libertarians cheerfully vote to give corporations more power over their lives.

 

 

It's never going to happen. All those Libertarians in name only aren't going to break from the republican party, but most libertarian candidates seem to think that they will. And until the libertarians are willing to sit down and flip the GOPs big tent every bird in existence and stop compromising with the GOP out of convenience, the party will just be viewed as little more than Pro-Pot Republicans. They can't caucus with the GOP and claim to be a third party.

[Lysistrata]

The American moderate is untrusting of corporate power and they see libertarians cheerfully vote to give corporations more power over their lives.

Very curious RH. What do you have against corporations? Since just about everything you see, touch, hear, smell, or taste is brought to you by a corporation, it's hard for me to understand why you have such disdain for everything that makes your life much easier, cheaper, and enjoyable. Even my very own business is an LLC. Why do you hate corporations so much?

[Rand0m her0]

 

The American moderate is untrusting of corporate power and they see libertarians cheerfully vote to give corporations more power over their lives.

Very curious RH. What do you have against corporations? Since just about everything you see, touch, hear, smell, or taste is brought to you by a corporation, it's hard for me to understand why you have such disdain for everything that makes your life much easier, cheaper, and enjoyable. Even my very own business is an LLC. Why do you hate corporations so much?

 

 

 

Corporations are fine. They're a tool. The problem isn't corporations, but how corporate power is just an unchecked extension of the state. As a simple example, consider how many tech corporations have been used to conduct a run around of the 4th and 5th amendment. Or consider how Boeing has the US government by the balls. The largest planned economy in the world is the US military industrial complex.

 

 

You can't achieve "smaller government" by giving corporations more power. When you do, you just transfer the power of the state out of public hands and into the hands of those who can buy it. And the more you do that, the harder it is to take back. Something like Walmart isn't a individual. It isn't a citizen. It's basically just an autonomous machine that seeks to exploit every avenue of profit that it can. It doesn't work for your benefit, and if it can make more profit by directly working against you, it will do so, and you have no way to hold it accountable. There are examples of the danger of corporate power all through history. Just within the context of the USA, Adam Smith wrote on it extensively, there's a long history of corporations dictating American foreign policy, and the end of the 19th century saw corporations use the US military to enforce their will on the American citizen.

 

Coercive power isn't removed by giving it to someone else.

[Colonel Medved]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a dead man won a Nevada state election lol

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/07/us/politics/dennis-hof-dead-pimp-nevada.html

[Rand0m her0]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a dead man won a Nevada state election lol

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/07/us/politics/dennis-hof-dead-pimp-nevada.html

 

I was aware, but it's not really that interesting, and figured i'd leave the "dead dog voters" jokes for someone else

[Lysistrata]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a dead man won a Nevada state election lol

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/07/us/politics/dennis-hof-dead-pimp-nevada.html

LOL! Funny you should say that. My wife and I went out to Pahrump Winery for a couple days when this guy died. She was concerned about a Democrat winning his seat. I told her not to worry... this is Pahrump Nevada, it's so Republican they will vote for a dead man before electing a Democrat. I was right!

[Lysistrata]

Something like Walmart isn't a individual. It isn't a citizen.

It's a store where we just bought "The Incredibles 2" for my grandson before he comes for Thanksgiving. Best price in town. I have no fear of Walmart, they sell us what we want and employ thousands of people. Can they have a say in how our country operates? Yes they can.

[Sister Midnight]

Something like Walmart isn't a individual. It isn't a citizen.

It's a store where we just bought "The Incredibles 2" for my grandson before he comes for Thanksgiving. Best price in town. I have no fear of Walmart, they sell us what we want and employ thousands of people. Can they have a say in how our country operates? Yes they can.

So Walmart, a corporation that employs thousands of people, many of whom may have the right to vote, should have more influence than the actual voting human beings?

[Lysistrata]

So Walmart, a corporation that employs thousands of people, many of whom may have the right to vote, should have more influence than the actual voting human beings?

Can representatives from Walmart petition the government for a redress of grievances? Yes they can. They have just as much right, and just as much influence as everyone else. Trust me... George Soros has more influence than Walmart.

[Sister Midnight]

So Walmart, a corporation that employs thousands of people, many of whom may have the right to vote, should have more influence than the actual voting human beings?

Can representatives from Walmart petition the government for a redress of grievances? Yes they can. They have just as much right, and just as much influence as everyone else. Trust me... George Soros has more influence than Walmart.

You did not answer my question.

[Lysistrata]

You did not answer my question.

Yes I did. Can they?... Yes. Should they?... that's entirely up to them. Do they have more influence than us?... No. If anything, the 2016 election should have taught us is that money can only go so far. Hillary Clinton spent a billion dollars to beat Donald Trump... and lost. Robert O'Rourke spent 70 million dollars to beat Ted Cruz... and lost. No amount of money can force the people to vote for anyone.

[onbekende]

 

Something like Walmart isn't a individual. It isn't a citizen.

It's a store where we just bought "The Incredibles 2" for my grandson before he comes for Thanksgiving. Best price in town. I have no fear of Walmart, they sell us what we want and employ thousands of people. Can they have a say in how our country operates? Yes they can.

 

Wait, I thought China was bad?

 

Which kinda pokes at the biggest issue of your biggest GDP economy, it is rather heavily reliant on (foreign) credit. I don't think you want another Great Depression.