My Political Foundation Stone

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 10:33 pm

I meant assuming civilization does not collapse.

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 10:45 pm

I tried, but I really don't understand the desire by some people to return to the gold standard, except possibly for selfish reasons because they own gold and would profit thereby. Or how it would effectively be accomplished.

Gx1080 · Post by **Gx1080** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 10:49 pm

Of course that Gold will not be valuable in a Mad Max scenario.

Thing is, human beings don't stay at that level for very long, and tend to establish currency as a way to go beyond simple bartering.

Too many movies.

Count Arioch the 28th · Sun Sep 04, 2011 11:37 pm

Somalia has been at that level for my entire adult life...

Juton · Post by **Juton** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:16 am

Count Arioch the 28th wrote:Somalia has been at that level for my entire adult life...

How do libertarians or free market evangelicals explain Somalia? It's a situation where the power of the government has largely disappeared, why isn't it a utopia?

Count Arioch the 28th · Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:23 am

It is a utopia. The strong can do what they want without being constrained by the weak. On man's anarchy is another man's utopia.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:49 am

Juton wrote:
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:Somalia has been at that level for my entire adult life...
How do libertarians or free market evangelicals explain Somalia? It's a situation where the power of the government has largely disappeared, why isn't it a utopia?

"It's largely influenced by government sources, they are just governments outside the country. IE, all the random governments of neighbors and colonial powers are screwing it up."

Straight from the horses mouth. Feel free to point out how retarded it is, but know that it's not me you are criticizing.

Gx1080 · Post by **Gx1080** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:05 am

Well, I would love to explain that, but if I do that, I'm going to get called the R-word several times and I'm not in the mood for it.

Juton · Post by **Juton** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:50 am

Gx1080 wrote:Well, I would love to explain that, but if I do that, I'm going to get called the R-word several times and I'm not in the mood for it.

That's a much more honest version of Tzor's 'If you don't know I can't explain it too you'.

Vnonymous · Post by **Vnonymous** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 6:01 am

Somalia has tons of government. That government just consists of dudes with guns who shoot you when you stop giving them your stuff. "Government" is just whoever currently holds a monopoly on violence.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 6:51 am

Vnonymous wrote:Somalia has tons of government. That government just consists of dudes with guns who shoot you when you stop giving them your stuff. "Government" is just whoever currently holds a monopoly on violence.

Can you explain why if anyone with a gun constitutes a government I have to keep hearing people whine at me about how if we just didn't have a mean old government keeping us down everything would be okay?

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:16 am

How do libertarians or free market evangelicals explain Somalia? It's a situation where the power of the government has largely disappeared, why isn't it a utopia?

whenever large populations of blacks congregate, disaster entails. it has nothing to do with government or lack thereof. africans are on average one standard deviation below whites on IQ tests and as much as this truth is uncomfortable to those of us raised in an egalitarian culture, it is nonetheless true, and I believe it is the reason that african civilization has never taken root. (in before guns, germs, and steel and the empire of mali and how I think that blacks are animals and why don't we just go back to the 1800s bloo-bloo)

sufficiently homogeneous western populations can make almost any system of government work, as evidenced by the success of the western powers. it's only when cultural marxism takes root that society falters, hampered by a deluge of immigrants unaligned to the nation's interests and a group of disaffected bourgeois dissidents who strive to undermine a strong national identity.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 10:15 am

News flash: Doom does not understand economics, and he doesn't understand the positions of the people he is criticizing. If the only thing you can think of to say about Krugman is to attempt to make fun of him for his alien invasion parable, then you probably don't have an argument.

This is a consistent problem with political discourse among the the right wing. They actually don't know what progressives believe or what the arguments for progressive policies are. The information is certainly available, but they never check primary sources and have no clue what the others sides believe.

By contrast, I actually do know what Ricardian Equivalence is, and I do know how Austrians model recessions and so on and so forth. Progressives believe in facts and empiricism, which means that we actually go out and look at our opponents' claims and check them against the real world. Ron Paul is wrong because his economic system makes testable claims that we have actually tested. His ideas are wrong, but I actually do know what they are.

Doom on the flip side, is only able to make barbs at a straw man of Krugman, because he has no idea what Krugman's real arguments are or what the models are that compel him to make them.

-Username17

Fuchs · Post by **Fuchs** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 10:21 am

Since the right wing generally thinks the bible is the word of god it's no surprise they detest facts and reason.

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:20 pm

Fuchs wrote:Since the right wing generally thinks the bible is the word of god it's no surprise they detest facts and reason.

Ironically (if you believe Karen Armstrong and a few others with similar notions), it was the Renaissance and Enlightenment that led to the movement to interpret the Bible literally because they were interested in what the words actually said, instead of what [they were told] the words meant.

tzor · Post by **tzor** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 6:30 pm

Juton wrote:That's a much more honest version of Tzor's 'If you don't know I can't explain it too you'.

Actually I haven't commented yet on this topic. But since you asked.

Vnonymous wrote:Somalia has tons of government. That government just consists of dudes with guns who shoot you when you stop giving them your stuff. "Government" is just whoever currently holds a monopoly on violence.

What Vnonymous just said. It would be incorrect to suggest that libertarians want "no government" because nature abhors a vaccuum and someone will form a government and the odds are it will be despotic. What they want is a government that prevents all possible parties, including themselves, from getting the necessary power to become despotic.

Libertarianism is the political philosophy that holds individual liberty as the organizing principle of society. Libertarianism includes diverse beliefs, all advocating minimization of the state and sharing the goal of maximizing individual liberty and political freedom.

They seek the minimial level of government that can still function. ZERO is well below that level. Such situations cannot be sustained and result in someone else creating a maximum level of government.

Fuchs · Post by **Fuchs** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:09 pm

Maj wrote:
Fuchs wrote:Since the right wing generally thinks the bible is the word of god it's no surprise they detest facts and reason.
Ironically (if you believe Karen Armstrong and a few others with similar notions), it was the Renaissance and Enlightenment that led to the movement to interpret the Bible literally because they were interested in what the words actually said, instead of what [they were told] the words meant.

I am not talking about those complete and utter idiots who want to take the bible literally. I am talking about people who think the bible is the word of god, who think the bible is anything else but a book written by often sad, sick men trying to control and oppress their sect.

Whatever good people see in the bible is stuff they are projecting into it, not something gained from reading that trite stuff of propaganda.

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:12 pm

tzor · Post by **tzor** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 9:47 pm

Fuchs wrote:I am not talking about those complete and utter idiots who want to take the bible literally. I am talking about people who think the bible is the word of god, who think the bible is anything else but a book written by often sad, sick men trying to control and oppress their sect.

Wow, that is deep. I mean deep as in the interstate highway to Nilhism deep. I mean it could apply to everything. All printed material, all is vanity, all is delusion, all is propaganda. All writen by sad, sick men trying to control and oppress their sect of athiesm.

Fuchs wrote:Whatever good people see in the bible is stuff they are projecting into it, not something gained from reading that trite stuff of propaganda.

Yes, so stop projecting your stuff into athiesm.

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Tue Sep 06, 2011 6:52 am

fuchs is the definition of

Doom · Post by **Doom** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:06 am

Nope, no problems at all...apparently I missed the memo reverting standards. No biggie.

Post by **fbmf** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:54 am

For what?

If there is a problem with a post, report that post.

Game On,
fbmf

Post by **fbmf** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:49 pm

Doom wrote:Nope, no problems at all...apparently I missed the memo reverting standards. No biggie.

(For the record, editing your post is a horrid way to reply. Anyhow...)

What do you mean?

Game On,
fbmf

Doom · Post by **Doom** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:56 pm

Sorry, just didn't want to string this on. By my previous post I mean, I have no problems with any posts, and that apparently I missed the memo referred to earlier (which I can't elaborate on, since, after all, I don't know about it). No biggie. Past that, if there's something more I can help with, feel free to PM.

Post by **fbmf** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:36 pm

No, I don't think I want to handle this by PM anymore, as it concerns everybody. Let 's get this out in the open so there is no further confusion.

(And yes, in order to be clear, I am pretty much forced to speak of myself in third person. Deal with it.)

I get called out from time to time because I don't participate in board discussions very often, especially not MPSIMS controversial discussions, and this very thing is the reason why.

[The Great Fence Builder Speaks]
As I have tried to explain in the past, I draw a distinction between fbmf posting and The Great Fence Builder Speaking. fbmf is a "private citizen", so to speak. He does not speak for TGDMB management. He says what is on his mind, and you are free to tell him to go fuck himself or eat a barrel of cocks or whatever if you disagree just as if he were any other poster. On the other hand, when The Great Fence Builder Speaks, he is not participating in discussions but rather laying down and enforcing the law.

So, Doom, when fbmf called you out on something that was a seemingly blatant contradiction (the matter, to your credit, has been mostly cleared up), it was not signaling a change in board policy. fbmf does not make board policy. The Great Fence Builder does that.

There was no policy change, so we can't "revert back" to the Old Policy™. The Old Policy™ (I'm not sure what that means, but let's go with it.) didn't go anywhere.
[/TGFBS]

What I have learned from this experience (and the previous one with Plebian and his various puppets) is that I am one of the few who can acknowledge fbmf's right to state his opinion without it carrying force of law. To Lago, Arioch, and the rest who have called me out in the past for not participating very often...this is why.

Once upon a time, on another message board, a political discussion got way out of hand. One prominent poster in that discussion that got out of hand was a moderator, and although the fault for it getting out of hand was not his alone, I learned that mods and admins shouldn't participate in discussions that might get out of hand. I go out of my way to stay out of controversial topics even if I have a strong opinion. Sometimes, the temptation is just too great and I fail my Will Save.

In this instance, I thought I was safe because my question was tangent to topic per se, but the matter was further compounded by my not understanding how WHISPER works and I (indirectly) outed Doom regarding a PM, which was shitty. For that I will apologize to him publicly, but that is all I am apologizing for. I don't apologize for my question, which I still believe was legit, no matter if he or anyone else thinks I should.

Game On,
fbmf