Libertarians - The Great White Hope

[Odyssey]

You're just proving my point.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

You're just proving my point.

Which is.....?

 

[Odyssey]

Which is.....?

Complex racial societies do not work. You posting that Paul Mooney quote only reinforces my point. How are we supposed to create a stable country with high social trust and involvement when you have competing racial groups?

Do you think they have these problems in Japan?

Do you think Japanese students go to university and have posters that say "Japan was set up for us, and thats not fair!"

 

[Mr. Pink]

I think isolationism is an idea worth exploring. If not full isolationsism, at least exploring the idea of scaling back our foreign operations.

My big beef with libertarians (and ideological extremists of any bend) is the inconistency/hypocrisy, which largely stems from 2 things. 1, the inability of someone who buys into a philosophy 100% to think for themselves, and 2 the unrealistic prospect of ideological extremism applied practically. Lefties are anti-war but were quiet as fukk when it turned out Obama was turning up the drone campaign. Conservatives literally don't stand for anything. They talk about fiscal conservatism and personal freedoms but support the party whose grandfather is Reagan (the godfather of modern deficit spending), and whose representatives literally go against everything they stand for. Seriously, name a conservative cornerstone and I will point you to a loudmouthed conservative who reversed on it. Libertarians want small government and big personal freedoms... except for women and gays. ANYBODY who buys into these ideologies and their supporting parties 100% (i.e. @DEAD7 ) is a fukking IDIOT.

People don't understand the fact that politics have long been divorced from ideology. You can sum up the current political apparatus with these words: "who gets what". That's it.
fukking politicians manufacture false dichotomies, social issues, and moral issues for the people to argue among themselves about. It's all a dog and pony show. Arguing political ideology is the same as arguing over football teams. It has the exact same effects for your life. What's more, once you pigeonhole yourself with a label you start suffering from confirmation bias.

If I meet anyone who isn't a politician yet labels himself a libertarian or a democrat or a republican or a leftist or a conservative or whatever, I automatically brand them an idiot. All due respect to everyone here.

 

[DEAD7]

People don't understand the fact that politics have long been divorced from ideology. You can sum up the current political apparatus with these words: "who gets what". That's it.
fukking politicians manufacture false dichotomies, social issues, and moral issues for the people to argue among themselves about. It's all a dog and pony show. Arguing political ideology is the same as arguing over football teams. It has the exact same effects for your life. What's more, once you pigeonhole yourself with a label you start suffering from confirmation bias.

If I meet anyone who isn't a politician yet labels himself a libertarian or a democrat or a republican or a leftist or a conservative or whatever, I automatically brand them an idiot. All due respect to everyone here.

Agreed.

But what exactly is idiotic about the non aggression axiom? or belief in voluntary interaction? or what about making morality paramount would make you brand some one an idiot?


I dont see parties, I see people who want to mandate their beliefs and people who don't.

 

[Mr. Pink]

I dont see parties, I see people who want to mandate their beliefs and people who don't.

Well don't you think, given how different people are from each other, that the idea that we can find one optimal model for human behaviour, one shoe that fits all sizes, is unrealistic?

I won't go into a long ideological/philosophical discussion, but other than guaranteeing a "lowest common denominator" if you will(i.e: the usual inalienable rights, property rights etc.) there's not much a "system" can do to "fix things". Was there ever a time in human history when things were running truly smooth and everyone was content? fukk no.

I'm an individualist(call me selfish if you will) and I value self-determinism and self-reliance, maybe above anything else. I believe people should spend their time bettering and mastering themselves as individuals, not struggling to enact "social change" and impose their will or belief systems over anyone else. Short of humans becoming a hivemind, nothing will ever be "solved".

In a nutshell, focus on empowering yourself, the world will take care of itself, same is it always has.

 

[DEAD7]

Well don't you think, given how different people are from each other, that the idea that we can find one optimal model for human behaviour, one shoe that fits all sizes, is unrealistic?

I won't go into a long ideological/philosophical discussion, but other than guaranteeing a "lowest common denominator" if you will(i.e: the usual inalienable rights, property rights etc.) there's not much a "system" can do to "fix things". Was there ever a time in human history when things were running truly smooth and everyone was content? fukk no.

I'm an individualist(call me selfish if you will) and I value self-determinism and self-reliance, maybe above anything else. I believe people should spend their time bettering and mastering themselves as individuals, not struggling to enact "social change" and impose their will or belief systems over anyone else. Short of humans becoming a hivemind, nothing will ever be "solved".

In a nutshell, focus on empowering yourself, the world will take care of itself, same is it always has.

Absolutely, which is why I reject surrogate decision making.

Outside of laws,which outline universally preferred human behavior, people should be permitted to live free from force.

As far you being selfish...selfishness(imho) is not living as one wishes to live, it is asking others to live as one wishes to live. And unselfishness is letting other people's lives alone, not interfering with them. Selfishness always aims at creating around it an absolute uniformity of type. Unselfishness recognizes infinite variety of type as a delightful thing, accepts it, acquiesces in it, enjoys it. It is not selfish to think for oneself. A man who does not think for himself does not think at all. It is grossly selfish to require of one's neighbor that he should think in the same way, and hold the same opinions.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Complex racial societies do not work. You posting that Paul Mooney quote only reinforces my point. How are we supposed to create a stable country with high social trust and involvement when you have competing racial groups?

Do you think they have these problems in Japan?

Do you think Japanese students go to university and have posters that say "Japan was set up for us, and thats not fair!"

Every country has problems. Humans are combative by nature. There's no proof that heterogeneous societies are any more or less "problematic" than homogeneous ones overall. Unless you have something more concrete than circular conjecture?

Funny you bring up Japan though. Their biggest problem now is demographics, fueled largely in part by their homogeneity and nearly non-existant immigration. I would bet that in ~100 years, Japan will either not exist, or not exist as we know it. They stopped replacing their old in 1975 and have been slowing down in births ever since.

Well don't you think, given how different people are from each other, that the idea that we can find one optimal model for human behaviour, one shoe that fits all sizes, is unrealistic?

I won't go into a long ideological/philosophical discussion, but other than guaranteeing a "lowest common denominator" if you will(i.e: the usual inalienable rights, property rights etc.) there's not much a "system" can do to "fix things". Was there ever a time in human history when things were running truly smooth and everyone was content? fukk no.

I'm an individualist(call me selfish if you will) and I value self-determinism and self-reliance, maybe above anything else. I believe people should spend their time bettering and mastering themselves as individuals, not struggling to enact "social change" and impose their will or belief systems over anyone else. Short of humans becoming a hivemind, nothing will ever be "solved".

In a nutshell, focus on empowering yourself, the world will take care of itself, same is it always has.

 

[No_bammer_weed]

Complex racial societies do not work. You posting that Paul Mooney quote only reinforces my point. How are we supposed to create a stable country with high social trust and involvement when you have competing racial groups?

Do you think they have these problems in Japan?

Do you think Japanese students go to university and have posters that say "Japan was set up for us, and thats not fair!"

Okay then...if complex racial societies dont work in your opinion, what are your solutions to this "problem" that in your view is an impossible fix? Funny to see white people ,who have claimed that America is the leader of the free world and capable of amazing things, now whine about Japan not having to deal with the "complexities" that oddly enough America created for itself thru exploitation and mistreatment of groups. America sure found a way to ship us over here, and create legislation and social and economic activity to malign people of color at every turn. America had no problem accomplishing that.

 

[brick james]

Is America the evidence that complex racial societies do not work? Really breh?

 

[Mr. Pink]

Absolutely, which is why I reject surrogate decision making.

Outside of laws,which outline universally preferred human behavior, people should be permitted to live free from force.

As far you being selfish...selfishness(imho) is not living as one wishes to live, it is asking others to live as one wishes to live. And unselfishness is letting other people's lives alone, not interfering with them. Selfishness always aims at creating around it an absolute uniformity of type. Unselfishness recognizes infinite variety of type as a delightful thing, accepts it, acquiesces in it, enjoys it. It is not selfish to think for oneself. A man who does not think for himself does not think at all. It is grossly selfish to require of one's neighbor that he should think in the same way, and hold the same opinions.

Pretty much.

Honestly I've thought long and hard about all of this. And I'm obviously not the only one. Much ink has been spilled over the centuries about the human condition.

In the end the conclusion I've arrived at is that the meaning of life/the universe/whatever, is the propagation of asymmetry. We humans try to impose our will on chaos but it's a losing game. No matter how far we climb, the distance always grows. Entropy(in the sense of chaos and decay) eventually wins out. Or to put it in more spiritual terms, Providence gives with one hand and takes with the other.

I won't condemn anyone for trying to better or "fix" the world, but in my mind it's a futile endeavor. Look at someone like Henry Ford for example, and his role in the industrial revolution, and how his work improved the lives of billions. And now we have global warming and all the other problems of modern civilization. One headache gets solved and another appears.

Better to just do your thing and live for yourself and the people close to you.

Anyway, I'm rambling. Thanks for the discussion. People mock HL but I think as long as we stay civil we can have some good discussions here.

 

[godkiller]

Complex racial societies do not work. You posting that Paul Mooney quote only reinforces my point. How are we supposed to create a stable country with high social trust and involvement when you have competing racial groups?

Do you think they have these problems in Japan?

Do you think Japanese students go to university and have posters that say "Japan was set up for us, and thats not fair!"

I basically think heterogeneous societies are more distrustful of each other than homogeneous. That's not to say heterogeneous countries don't have their own virtues. America is not a country founded on general homogeneity, and the heterogeneous model has worked to generally increase prosperity. After all the USA is a leader in technology, business, rights, etc and has been for centuries. I think that if one supports a homogeneous model they should look towards Europe not the USA.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

What metrics is America behind in because of its heterogeneity?

 

[Julius Skrrvin]

Hey @The Real can you post that big meta study about the success of racially/ethnically/culturally diverse societies? Thanks.

 

[Crakface]

Libertarians talking about a gold standard. What GOld nikka? Gold standard means yall bout to become peasents again. Last time they had a gold standard the pres confiscated all the gold, and nikkas were broke and crushed. Cacs made it illegal to hoard gold.