• 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!

Do you enjoy bull**** ?

Do You Enjoy being fed Bull**** ?

  • yes i love it

    Votes: 10 52.6%

  • no

    Votes: 9 47.4%
  • Total voters
    19
Harshaw said:
Those are generally the libertarians who come into it with a single issues or a few issues in mind and haven't embraced its gestalt.
Click to expand...

I don't even know who they're referring to, really.

Some "libertarian-leaning" posters on this board:

You
Me
Solidus
Asparagus
Goldenboy
Tucker
Psychoclown
Goshin
Harry Guerrilla
WI Crippler
Alex
Vauge
Dana
GySgt
Galen

Are these the "ideologues" to which they're referring? The shallow teenagers?

Perhaps we should start a social group...
 
Harshaw said:
Those are generally the libertarians who come into it with a single issues or a few issues in mind and haven't embraced its gestalt.
Click to expand...

I think it's just the opposite, actually. Single-issue libertarians don't really concern me. As I said, libertarians have some good ideas on a few specific issues. I'm much more concerned about the people who *do* embrace it wholesale. Their arguments frequently seem to be almost religious in nature.
 
Kandahar said:
I think it's just the opposite, actually. Single-issue libertarians don't really concern me. As I said, libertarians have some good ideas on a few specific issues. I'm much more concerned about the people who *do* embrace it wholesale. Their arguments frequently seem to be almost religious in nature.
Click to expand...

I have the same concern about partisan, party-loyalists, the vast majority of which are conservative or liberal, but you don't see me going around making rude and baseless blanket statements about either ideology…
 
Ethereal said:
I don't even know who they're referring to, really.

Some "libertarian-leaning" posters on this board:

You
Me
Solidus
Asparagus
Goldenboy
Tucker
Psychoclown
Goshin
Harry Guerrilla
WI Crippler
Alex
Vauge
Dana
GySgt
Galen

Are these the "ideologues" to which they're referring? The shallow teenagers?

Perhaps we should start a social group...
Click to expand...

We should do that
 
Ethereal said:
I don't even know who they're referring to, really.

Some "libertarian-leaning" posters on this board:

You
Me
Solidus
Asparagus
Goldenboy
Tucker
Psychoclown
Goshin
Harry Guerrilla
WI Crippler
Alex
Vauge
Dana
GySgt
Galen

Are these the "ideologues" to which they're referring? The shallow teenagers?

Perhaps we should start a social group...
Click to expand...

I can't speak for everyone, but the ones to whom I'm referring (who comprise a fairly large chunk of libertarians) are the ones who do some or all of the following:

1. Complain that every policy violates an originalist interpretation of the Constitution, without bothering to explain why such an interpretation is the best. (That's one of those articles of faith.)

2. Shriek about the immorality of taxation for the purposes of government spending, without bothering to explain why such a view is less moral than their own. (That's another article of faith.)

3. Respond to every government-related solution to any problem by saying that government can't do anything right and/or that the free market is always inefficient, with no evidence to support these hypotheses, and in some cases with evidence to the contrary. (That's another article of faith.)

4. The belief that every problem facing society is best solved by applying a few cliches from Atlas Shrugged.


These are the people to whom I'm referring. If you don't fall into any of these categories, then I'm not referring to you. But most libertarians do. Maybe there are a few libertarians who have decided that they are opposed to universal health care, social security, income taxes, the Federal Reserve, an interventionist foreign policy, drug laws, gun control, corporate bailouts, and public education by honestly assessing the merits and drawbacks of each of those policies on a case-by-case basis. But they are in the very small minority. Most of them reflexively decided they were opposed to those policies because they don't like government, and then went looking for "evidence" to support their view. Really no different than religious fundamentalism.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
I can't speak for everyone, but the ones to whom I'm referring (who comprise a fairly large chunk of libertarians are the ones who do some or all of the following:

1. Complain that every policy violates an originalist interpretation of the Constitution, without bothering to explain why such an interpretation is the best. (That's one of those articles of faith.)

2. Shriek about the immorality of taxation for the purposes of government spending, without bothering to explain why such a view is less moral than their own. (That's another article of faith.)

3. Respond to every government-related solution to any problem by saying that government can't do anything right and/or that the free market is always inefficient, with no evidence to support these hypotheses, and in some cases with evidence to the contrary. (That's another article of faith.)

4. The belief that every problem facing society is best solved by applying a few cliches from Atlas Shrugged.


These are the people to whom I'm referring. If you don't fall into any of these categories, then I'm not referring to you. But most libertarians do. Maybe there are a few libertarians who have decided that they are opposed to universal health care, social security, income taxes, the Federal Reserve, an interventionist foreign policy, drug laws, gun control, corporate bailouts, and public education by honestly assessing the merits and drawbacks of each of those policies on a case-by-case basis. But they are in the very small minority. Most of them reflexively decided they were opposed to those policies because they don't like government, and then went looking for "evidence" to support their view. Really no different than religious fundamentalism.
Click to expand...

Whatever. I'm going to get drunk...

:2wave:
 
Ethereal said:
I have the same concern about partisan, party-loyalists, the vast majority of which are conservative or liberal, but you don't see me going around making rude and baseless blanket statements about either ideology…
Click to expand...

My statement was not really a critique of libertarian ideas themselves. It was a critique of the intellectual emptiness that surrounds many of its adherents, who recite their dogma without bothering to examine why it is superior to any other.
 
Kandahar said:
I can't speak for everyone, but the ones to whom I'm referring (who comprise a fairly large chunk of libertarians are the ones who do some or all of the following:

1. Complain that every policy violates an originalist interpretation of the Constitution, without bothering to explain why such an interpretation is the best. (That's one of those articles of faith.)

2. Shriek about the immorality of taxation for the purposes of government spending, without bothering to explain why such a view is less moral than their own. (That's another article of faith.)

3. Respond to every government-related solution to any problem by saying that government can't do anything right and/or that the free market is always inefficient, with no evidence to support these hypotheses, and in some cases with evidence to the contrary. (That's another article of faith.)

4. The belief that every problem facing society is best solved by applying a few cliches from Atlas Shrugged.


These are the people to whom I'm referring. If you don't fall into any of these categories, then I'm not referring to you. But most libertarians do. Maybe there are a few libertarians who have decided that they are opposed to universal health care, social security, income taxes, the Federal Reserve, an interventionist foreign policy, drug laws, gun control, corporate bailouts, and public education by honestly assessing the merits and drawbacks of each of those policies on a case-by-case basis. But they are in the very small minority. Most of them reflexively decided they were opposed to those policies because they don't like government, and then went looking for "evidence" to support their view. Really no different than religious fundamentalism.
Click to expand...

There's a large chunk of Liberals, Conservatives, and even Independents who shriek without evidence too. You're making hasty generalizations and applying a double standard to us and more "mainstream" folks
 
Kandahar said:
My statement was not really a critique of libertarian ideas themselves. It was a critique of the intellectual emptiness that surrounds many of its adherents, who recite their dogma without bothering to examine why it is superior to any other.
Click to expand...

And etheral was pointing out that just as large a percentage of Conservatives, Independents, and Liberals do the exact same crap. You're applying a double standard
 
DrunkenAsparagus said:
There's a large chunk of Liberals, Conservatives, and even Independents who shriek without evidence too.
Click to expand...

This is true. I have the same problem with anti-abortion conservatives who recite the "baby-killing" dogma as though everyone already agreed with them. I have the same problem with liberals who have a knee-jerk opposition to any muscular foreign policy, whether it makes the world safer or not.

DrunkenAsparagus said:
You're making hasty generalizations and applying a double standard to us and more "mainstream" folks
Click to expand...

I have just noticed that this applies much moreso to libertarians than the others. On any given issue, you can expect some liberals and some conservatives to argue rationally, and others to argue irrationally. But it is very rare that I debate a libertarian on ANY issue who doesn't resort to either cliches ("Let the free market decide"), insults ("You hate freedom if you disagree with me"), or unproven dogma ("The government can't do anything right").
 
Yes, I love bull****.

NEUROSPORT said:
so **** lovers - do you think everything is always true ?

that TV is a truth machine ? that god speaks to you directly through your ****ing wretched tube ?
Click to expand...

and you think everything is false.

Some of the things you wrote are debatable, but others are just downright loony.


NEUROSPORT said:
do you enjoy being told things which are obviously bull**** such as:

1 - we went to iraq for national security
Click to expand...

This is a point worth arguing in my opinion. Many people take umbrage with the Iraq war, and this is the general argument they use to criticize it - that it is a war of lies, and a quagmire at that.

2 - black people are the same as white except for color

3 - women are the same as men except for vagina
Click to expand...

How is this bull****? Aren't we all humans after all? Your assumptions will alienate many people.

4 - that jews are the victims in the palestinian conflict
Click to expand...

This is also debatable. Both sides are slaughtering each other, so I suppose you could take the "Israelis took the Palestinians land" argument.

5 - that our leaders are guided by religious principles
Click to expand...

For the most part, this is bull****, actually.

6 - that we *had to* bomb all those 50 or something countries that we bombed because each and every one of the tiny ****s where people can't even afford to eat threatened the greatest superpower in history of mankind with our existence
Click to expand...

Give me a list. I want to see which countries we bombed you are counting. If you are counting Nazi Germany occupied countries, or Imperialist Japan occupied countries, your list is skewed.

7 - that global warming is caused by cow farts and not sun activity
Click to expand...

Arguing with you would be like arguing with a dining room table.

8 - that that the only 3 concrete and steel buildings in history to collapse due to a fire all happened to collapse on the same day ( 9-11 ) by coincidence ( as opposed to from having steel columns cut by thermite ) including the building which was barely touched by fires and had basically zero damage ( WTC 7 )
Click to expand...

:aliens3:

9 - that aspartame and gentically modified foods are safe. ( both were developed by Monsanto under Donald Rumsfeld as CEO who also sold Bubonic Plague and Anthrax to Saddam Hussein ). surely the man didn't abuse his position of power to get FDA to approve Aspartame and GMO despite hundreds of studies showing that the stuff is poison.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, actually, that aspartame isn't a safe chemical to ingest.

and others ...

do you enjoy being fed bull**** like that ?

if no then why do you keep taking it ?
Click to expand...

But...yeah....

If you want to be taken seriously, I recommend ditching your list for a well-formulated paragraph or something. Also, use spell check.



Just a suggestion!:mrgreen:
 
Kandahar said:
This is true. I have the same problem with anti-abortion conservatives who recite the "baby-killing" dogma as though everyone already agreed with them. I have the same problem with liberals who have a knee-jerk opposition to any muscular foreign policy, whether it makes the world safer or not.



I have just noticed that this applies much moreso to libertarians than the others. On any given issue, you can expect some liberals and some conservatives to argue rationally, and others to argue irrationally. But it is very rare that I debate a libertarian on ANY issue who doesn't resort to either cliches ("Let the free market decide"), insults ("You hate freedom if you disagree with me"), or unproven dogma ("The government can't do anything right").
Click to expand...

Do you have a shred of proff of this? Most Libertarians, Conservatives, Independents, and Liberals that I talk to are rational. They make an attempt to back up their arguments. The things that you cite aren't dogma, they tend to be true in the educated opinion of many Libertarians. Dogma is present in all parties. Ignorance has almost no correlation to political affiliation.
 
Ethereal said:
Just because you find comfort in the status quo doesn’t mean you’re right or more mature than “libertarians”. If anyone is a damned teenager its you and the other “liberals” who are so deadly afraid of individual freedom and responsibility that you’ll perpetuate the failed and unjust statist policies of the past.

You have no substance, as usual, just inane blathering and ranting about “libertarians” being teenagers.
Click to expand...

I find it interesting how you launch into the de rigueur catch phrases about "individual freedom and responsibiliy" and "statist policies" in order to assault another poster's supposed lack of substance.

Good old Lew Rockwell.com.
 
bhkad said:
Wow! You make a good point.

I supported the war for different reasons but your point is a really good one.
Click to expand...

I initially opposed the war, but as my overall views have become more left-wing my feelings about the Iraq war have become more mixed. Is that strange?
 
DrunkenAsparagus said:
Do you have a shred of proff of this? Most Libertarians, Conservatives, Independents, and Liberals that I talk to are rational. They make an attempt to back up their arguments. The things that you cite aren't dogma, they tend to be true in the educated opinion of many Libertarians. Dogma is present in all parties. Ignorance has almost no correlation to political affiliation.
Click to expand...

Well, let's make a list of dogmatic principles:

LIBERTARIANS:
- The government can't do anything right.
- The free market is always efficient.
- It is fundamentally immoral to tax people to pay for government spending.
- An originalist interpretation of the Constitution is the only legitimate one.
- The government has no business telling people what to do, as long as they aren't harming others.

LIBERALS:
- ?

CONSERVATIVES:
- ?


I can't think of ANY ideological dogmas that would apply to the vast majority of liberals or conservatives, for the vast majority of political issues. But I would be hard-pressed to find a libertarian who disagreed with any of those dogmas I listed above, let alone all of them.

It is much wiser to examine each political issue on a case by case basis IMO. The world is too complex for simple solutions (e.g. "Let the market decide!") for every problem.
 
Kandahar said:
I agree with this. Libertarianism just seems like a very shallow ideology. If I can deduce a person's position on any given issue without them saying a word, or if they shriek "Let the market decide" as the solution to any problem in society, that usually does not reflect well on their critical thinking abilities. Maybe there are a few exceptions to this, but they are few and far between.

That's not to say that libertarians are always wrong - I completely agree with them on drug laws, for example - but their reasoning is usually just supported by a few cliches (e.g. "government can't do anything right," "we need an originalist interpretation of the Constitution," "the free market always produces the most efficient result") which are nothing more than articles of faith.
Click to expand...



Yeah. Instead of critical thinking, it's usually the process of litmus tests.

"How should a libertarian react", instaed of "Does this make sense, intuitive or otherwise?".
 
Kandahar said:
Well, let's make a list of dogmatic principles:

LIBERTARIANS:
- The government can't do anything right.
- The free market is always efficient.
- It is fundamentally immoral to tax people to pay for government spending.
- An originalist interpretation of the Constitution is the only legitimate one.
- The government has no business telling people what to do.
Click to expand...

This is a gross misrepresentation of libertarian thought.

Besides, it's a set of principles, which means it's not an ad hoc, case-by-case decision-making process. It's a belief in a consistent set of philosophical rules and various issues are viewed through it, not decided upon de novo each time.
 
GMO foods overall are not particularly harmful. The main problem with GMOs is the threat to biodiversity should they be introduced into the wild. GMOs are often modified such that they are able to better grow in a climate, grow faster, grow larger, etc. This results in a competition for resources that may ultimately result in the GMO out-competing the wild-type and other plants/animals. Should an epidemic occur that selectively affects a GMO food, it could be like potatoes in Ireland. In a world of GMOs, maintaining biodiversity is important.

Furthermore, it is the free-market that limits choice between unaltered or selectively breed foods and GMOs because of how cheap GMOs are to produce. If anything, the FDA makes unaltered and selectively breed foods more competitive by limiting the GMOs.

P.S. This may be a late post but it relates to something said earlier in the thread.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
Well, let's make a list of dogmatic principles:

LIBERTARIANS:
- The government can't do anything right.
- The free market is always efficient.
- It is fundamentally immoral to tax people to pay for government spending.
- An originalist interpretation of the Constitution is the only legitimate one.
- The government has no business telling people what to do, as long as they aren't harming others.
Click to expand...

Not by any means absolute for the vast majority of Libertarians

Kandahar said:
LIBERALS:
- ?
Click to expand...

The Democrats can do no wrong, f*ck that orgrish, te*bagging GOP

Kandahar said:
CONSERVATIVES:
- ?
Click to expand...
The GOP can do no wrong. F*ck those hippie, Bolshevik Democrats

Kandahar said:
I can't think of ANY ideological dogmas that would apply to the vast majority of liberals or conservatives, for the vast majority of political issues. But I would be hard-pressed to find a libertarian who disagreed with any of those dogmas I listed above, let alone all of them.
Click to expand...

I can

Kandahar said:
It is much wiser to examine each political issue on a case by case basis IMO. The world is too complex for simple solutions (e.g. "Let the market decide!") for every problem.
Click to expand...

How about you actually listen to our arguments before saying that we're all dogmatic
 
Harshaw said:
This is a gross misrepresentation of libertarian thought.
Click to expand...

How so? I tried to present those precepts honestly. Do most libertarians not believe those things? :confused:

Harshaw said:
Besides, it's a set of principles, which means it's not an ad hoc, case-by-case decision-making process. It's a belief in a consistent set of philosophical rules and various issues are viewed through it, not decided upon de novo each time.
Click to expand...

If those dogmas are not the starting and ending point of your arguments, then you are not one of the people to whom I am referring.
 
Kandahar said:
How so? I tried to present those precepts honestly. Do most libertarians not believe those things? :confused:
Click to expand...

Libertarians can show evidence of these things. You don't have to agree with them, but the arguments are there and often used by Libertarians. Also, for virtually all Libertarians, none of what you stated is absolute.

Kandahar said:
If those dogmas are not the starting and ending point of your arguments, then you are not one of the people to whom I am referring.
Click to expand...

For some, it is. For some, their parties talking points are all that they have. The problems that you accuse Libertarians of are by no means at all restricted to just Libertarians and a few "political adults"
 
DrunkenAsparagus said:
Not by any means absolute for the vast majority of Libertarians
Click to expand...

They are much more absolute than any comparable principle for liberals or conservatives. I tried to think of something analogous for liberals/conservatives...but the closest analogy I could come up with was "Government can help build a good society by helping the poor" for liberals, and "Government can help build a good society by helping families" for conservatives.

Neither of those are as comprehensive or universal as the things I listed for libertarians, and on any given issue I think you'd find a lot of liberals/conservatives who thought those respective beliefs did not apply. I don't think the same is true of libertarians.

DrunkenAsparagus said:
The Democrats can do no wrong, f*ck that orgrish, te*bagging GOP


The GOP can do no wrong. F*ck those hippie, Bolshevik Democrats
Click to expand...

That's more ordinary partisanship than ideological dogma. I was referring more to principles that would govern a person's policy opinions.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
Well, let's make a list of dogmatic principles:

LIBERTARIANS:
- The government can't do anything right.
Click to expand...

No. If that were true, libertarians would favor NO government. (Sorry, anarchists, we're not discussing you here.)

- The free market is always efficient.
Click to expand...

No.

- It is fundamentally immoral to tax people to pay for government spending.
Click to expand...

Not for the legitimate purposes of government.

- An originalist interpretation of the Constitution is the only legitimate one.
Click to expand...

Libertarian thought transcends any one constitution. But the original intent behind the Constitution is most consistent with libertarian principles.

- The government has no business telling people what to do, as long as they aren't harming others.
Click to expand...

That, I'll buy.
 
DrunkenAsparagus said:
Libertarians can show evidence of these things. You don't have to agree with them, but the arguments are there and often used by Libertarians. Also, for virtually all Libertarians, none of what you stated is absolute.



For some, it is. For some, their parties talking points are all that they have. The problems that you accuse Libertarians of are by no means at all restricted to just Libertarians and a few "political adults"
Click to expand...

Careful, remember that true libertarianism was a left-wing anarchist movement that has now become libertarian socialism and these people we call 'libertarians' are merely right-wingers that abandon any concept of freedom for capitalism as a an authority. This is why I find right-wing 'libertarianism' to be a bit incoherent due to their lack of a critique of capitalism with respect to individual liberty. A large assumption is made early on in ideological development that compromises the integrity of 'libertarianism'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom