Libertarianism, split from America is now in fascism's legal phase

[ZiprHead]

If you look, you will eventually find that words mean things.

Apparently not to libertarians.

Racist governor says minorities can't read​

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Describing Libertarianism is complex, but one Libertarian I know of said this, "The age of majority is an issue that divides libertarians and we have not reached any sort of consensus on it."

Actually, Libertarianism is much easier to describe when someone recognizes it is a tool in a set of tools. The trouble is when people mistake Libertarianism as the whole damn tool box!

I mean, a saw is a good tool to have... but it isn't very useful when it comes to screwing in screws. But some people are determined to insist their saw can do anything any other tool can.

 

[Swammerdami]

I will do for Jason more than he has done, or is able to do, for me. I read his posts and try to understand his thinking.

So, since you think that the only difference between Libertarians and Republicans is marijuana, you therefore think that the Republican Party supported gay right as early as 1971. You also think the Republican Party is pro-choice and anti-war.

... The word "Democrat" has three silent k's.

@ Jason — The only way i can make sense of this is that you are responding to my JOKE: "Libertarian - A fiscal conservative who likes to smoke dope." It is extremely hard for me to imagine that even a libertarian could miss that this was intended as a joke. But since no Infidel could possibly be so stupid as to stake his reputation on pretending that a joke was NOT a joke, I'm forced to conclude that your sense of humor is strangely lacking.

But even given this confusion, your response is bizarre. To start with, your conclusion is sensical only if you treat "fiscal conservative" and "Republican" as synonyms. Since the debt-to-GDP ratio increased from 31% to 63% under Reagan-Bush41, from 55% to 82% under Bush43, from 82% to 105% as a result of Bush43's financial panic. and from 105% to 129% under the Orange Buffoon, Jason apparently uses "fiscal conservative" to mean "politician who likes to increase the national debt." Peculiar.

I've already asked Jason, twice, to clarify his brand of Libertarianism by answering a simple question.

@Jason - You're a Libertarian? (Do you prefer the capital L, or lower-case?) What do you think of Cap'n'Trade?

Can you read this question, Jason? Your browser should have options to zoom in or out if that helps.

I gave some other examples of the diversity of opinion among those who call themselves libertarian. Should police be allowed to torture? Was smallpox eradication fascist over-reach? Should the Federal Reserve print new money as it thinks fit? Or should the federal reserve bank be abolished and the country put back on a gold standard?

With so much to choose from to help clarify libertarian "thought" you can do nothing better than misunderstand a joke about marijuana?

Wow!

If you look, you will eventually find that words mean things.
...
The word "Democrat" has three silent k's.

It tickles my "funny-bone" to hear YOU speak of meaning.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So, since you think that the only difference between Libertarians and Republicans is marijuana, you therefore think that the Republican Party supported gay right as early as 1971. You also think the Republican Party is pro-choice and anti-war.

Those are some interesting positions you hold.

THAT's the conclusion you reached from my posts? Literally astounding. For your sake, I hope you skipped or skimmed all my posts. Otherwise the conclusion one draws about your cognitive power is very dismal.

You say the difference is drug legalization. Therefore the Republicans have to agree with those Libertarian positions. Are you saying there more more differences than drug legalization?

 

[Swammerdami]

You say the difference is drug legalization. Therefore the Republicans have to agree with those Libertarian positions. Are you saying there more more differences than drug legalization?

The word "Democrat" has three silent k's.

Are we living in parallel universes? Show me, in THIS universe where I even mentioned drug legalization, let alone said or implied anything resembling your imputation. I sincerely hate to imagine that, with all the content under review here, you are hung-up on an obvious joke and are simply unable to move beyond it. If you were not an intelligent Infidel I might be tempted to guess you think my joke has given you a big Gotcha, and the topic of libertarianism is no longer of concern: Your sole contribution will be to prattle the Joke-Gotcha ad infinitum.

And why, since you deign to respond at all, do you refrain from answering even one of my question(s)? Did you email Rand Paul or Gary Johnson or who-the-f**k to learn how you should answer and are still waiting for their response?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Well, one Libertarian I know said Libertarians are torn on age of consent. So that seems to be another difference.

 

[Swammerdami]

Well, one Libertarian I know said Libertarians are torn on age of consent. So that seems to be another difference.

Interesting. Alan Dershowitz, who "Used To Be An Icon For Civil Libertarians" and whose famous libertine clients include Jeffrey Epstein, O.J. Simpson and D.J. Trump, once told us (on FoxNews?) that when a man pays a 15-year old girl for sex, it is only the girl who should be arrested! We can understand that the man should have the Liberty to fornicate with whoever or whatever he chooses, but does arresting the 15-year seem appropriate? In Dershowitz's defense, he claims that when he went to one of Epstein's parties all he got was an elderly (30-ish?) Russian masseuse.

Every single Libertarian who's moved past Jason's "We're teh Republicans who like to smoke dope" stage, value Property Rights far above Human Rights. ("That's MY fresh water and I have the LIBERTY to keep it for myself, YOU have the LIBERTY to quench your thirst elsewhere.") so it's not clear why Dershowitz objects to the 15-year old accepting money.

Murray Rothbard, the closest thing the Hyperlibertarians have to an "intellectual leader", treats children as the property of their parents who presumably have the LIBERTY to sell their property to a pimp. Rothbard: "The purely free society will have a flourishing free market in children." Rather than debating how old a girl must be to say "Yes", the Rothbardian school seems to focus on how old she must be to be allowed to say "No."

Obviously most "libertarian intellectuals" are self-caricatures worth only derision. But Ashli Babbit and Jason H. join with many thousands of other Americans in adopting this label. It's too bad we know nothing of their views but that they vote for Trump and do drugs!

(Apologies to any Infidels who still use "libertarian" in its obsolescent pre-Austrian sense.)

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

You say the difference is drug legalization. Therefore the Republicans have to agree with those Libertarian positions. Are you saying there more more differences than drug legalization?

The word "Democrat" has three silent k's.

Are we living in parallel universes? Show me, in THIS universe where I even mentioned drug legalization, let alone said or implied anything resembling your imputation. I sincerely hate to imagine that, with all the content under review here, you are hung-up on an obvious joke and are simply unable to move beyond it. If you were not an intelligent Infidel I might be tempted to guess you think my joke has given you a big Gotcha, and the topic of libertarianism is no longer of concern: Your sole contribution will be to prattle the Joke-Gotcha ad infinitum.

Even more interesting. Libertarians are accused of "smoking pot" because of our stand on drug legalization. Even those libertarians who never touch the stuff are in favor of legalization, and thus are accused of "smoking pot" the way you did when you said Libertarians were Republicans who liked to smoke pot.

So are you saying those who want to keep it illegal but indulge themselves are different from those who never indulge but want to legalize it?

No, I'm not going to accept "I was only joking". I want you to defend the point you made, which you won't do.