• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Libertarians Are the New Communists

haymarket said:
I strongly suspect that particular theme is non a permanent not stop loop for libertarians.
Click to expand...

I hear it when you say that eliminating laws that intervene in people's lives would cause people to vote for a puppet government.
 
haymarket said:
Appeal to the fallacious Argumentum Ad Populum again.
Click to expand...

its funny how you are so enamored in the will of the majority when it suits the socialist perspective.
 
Fletch said:
The bolded section reflects you proving your own contention wrong; that being, that libertarianism = fascism. The basic structure of fascism is totalitarianism. To argue that those opposed to totalitarianism are fascists is contradictory and stupid.
Click to expand...

You have to take ALL the steps in order to see how it will happen. Of course right libertarians are not going to publicly advocate fascism. They might even be opposed to it and greatly surprised when it happens as a result of their own policies. That is why the term USEFUL IDIOTS applies perfectly.
 
Federalist said:
I hear it when you say that eliminating laws that intervene in people's lives would cause people to vote for a puppet government.
Click to expand...

Where did I say anything about people voting for a puppet government? that is not part of my list.
 
TurtleDude said:
its funny how you are so enamored in the will of the majority when it suits the socialist perspective.
Click to expand...

You confuse election results where the majority determines the winner with you invoking the opinion of some fellow true believers on a right leaning website to attempt to prove which argument is right. That is the essence of the fallacy of Argumentum Ad Populum
.
 
haymarket said:
187 ... among others

here is the brief version


It has been explained to you over and over and over in thread after thread after thread that the practical result of right libertariansim would be a new sort of fascism led by massively powerful corporations increasing their power in the absence of a powerful government to thwart them. The rise of the corporate powers would soon give way to what we now see with ALEC - The American legislative Council - where corporations then install a fascistic government to do their bidding for them and the result would be corporate authoritarianism.
Click to expand...

What part of authoritarian nationalism did you not understand? I would also love to know how corporations could take hold when they wouldn't exist. That is if you actually understand how they come into being.
 
haymarket said:
You confuse election results where the majority determines the winner with you invoking the opinion of some fellow true believers on a right leaning website to attempt to prove which argument is right. That is the essence of the fallacy of Argumentum Ad Populum
.
Click to expand...

you confuse this forum with some silly high school debate league
 
haymarket said:
You have to take ALL the steps in order to see how it will happen. Of course right libertarians are not going to publicly advocate fascism. They might even be opposed to it and greatly surprised when it happens as a result of their own policies. That is why the term USEFUL IDIOTS applies perfectly.
Click to expand...

Did anyone else hear the theme of the Twilight Zone intensify with that post?
 
sangha said:
and how you are so enamored of it when it suits your foolish perspective
Click to expand...

most thinking people could see my point was humorous and his was not. we constantly are served these silly HS debate claims
 
Henrin said:
What part of authoritarian nationalism did you not understand? I would also love to know how corporations could take hold when they wouldn't exist. That is if you actually understand how they come into being.
Click to expand...

Okay - now its you who win the funniest post of the day for saying that corporations would not exist. Thats a really good one even funnier than the priest, minister and rabbi who walk into the bar.
 
TurtleDude said:
you confuse this forum with some silly high school debate league
Click to expand...

a fallacy in debate is a fallacy in debate is a fallacy in debate.

I think Billy Shakespeare said that.......... or something similar with the same point.
 
haymarket said:
You confuse election results where the majority determines the winner with you invoking the opinion of some fellow true believers on a right leaning website to attempt to prove which argument is right. That is the essence of the fallacy of Argumentum Ad Populum
.
Click to expand...

you confuse this board with some HS debating society-the rules of which have no relevance to those of us who don't participate in HS debates 35 years after we last were in HS
 
TurtleDude said:
you confuse this board with some HS debating society-the rules of which have no relevance to those of us who don't participate in HS debates 35 years after we last were in HS
Click to expand...

A fallacy is a fallacy is a fallacy regardless if it is here or in a formal debate situation.

this will help educate you on the subject so you can avoid using it again and being embarrassed by it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or most people believe it. In other words, the basic idea of the argument is: "If many believe so, it is so."
This type of argument is known by several names,[1] including appeal to the masses, appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to democracy, appeal to popularity, argument by consensus, consensus fallacy, authority of the many, and bandwagon fallacy, and in Latin as argumentum ad numerum ("appeal to the number"), and consensus gentium ("agreement of the clans"). It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including communal reinforcement and the bandwagon effect. The Chinese proverb "three men make a tiger" concerns the same idea.
Click to expand...

Notice that there is nothing in that article about high school debate and it applies to any fallacious argument using the technique.
 
haymarket said:
a fallacy in debate is a fallacy in debate is a fallacy in debate.

I think Billy Shakespeare said that.......... or something similar with the same point.
Click to expand...

yeah billy shakespeare is another reference that you have beaten unto mush with overuse. This isn't a debate here Haymarket, its all about pointing out the silliness of statists
 
sangha said:
and most thinking people could see that my point was even more humorous than yours
Click to expand...

shall we have a laugh off? and no rigging the results by the employment of mercenary hyenas or rented loons
 
TiredOfLife said:
Women, children, slaves, animals. Pretty much all Property under English Common Law. It's why you couldn't rape your wife even when you did. You owned her and she had consented.
Click to expand...

Yep, pretty sad, was it not? What horrors government can perpetuate when they ignore the concept of self-ownership.
 
TurtleDude said:
yeah billy shakespeare is another reference that you have beaten unto mush with overuse. This isn't a debate here Haymarket, its all about pointing out the silliness of statists
Click to expand...

You need to write a harsh PM to the owner of this site who calls it DEBATE POLITICS and correct their perceived ignorance.
 
haymarket said:
Like what? It fails to mention anything about the future - which is what we are talking about.
Click to expand...

You didn't notice how corporations come into being then? What makes them corporations? What wouldn't be supported? You aren't very good with these kind of things, are you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom