What the anarchcapitalists need to understand: Moral clarity

[mosdef]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
At least our usual thug camp has the decency to logically critique our views on the gold standard, price floors, private security, and taxes. Your argument is simply "it's wrong, therefore it's wrong."

[ QUOTE ]

The fact is that we need a government leaders that have moral clarity and are willing to fight for it. George Bush is the perfect example of a leader with moral clarity. Bush saw the threat being posed by dictators and Islamic fundamentalists and had the courage to take action against it by confronting Saddam Hussien. Yes the war in Iraq is not going perfectly, but the world is better off now that a brutal dictator is gone and the world understands that America is willing to fight for freedom and democracy world wide.

[/ QUOTE ]

This paragraph has permanently discredited any opinion you may have, and any post you will ever have in the future to this forum.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm pretty sure this guy is heading for BANNEDSVILLE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe so, but surely you guys must like ME a little bit more now? By comparison?

[Steven Bickford]

[ QUOTE ]
At least our usual thug camp has the decency to logically critique our views on the gold standard, price floors, private security, and taxes. Your argument is simply "it's wrong, therefore it's wrong."

[/ QUOTE ]

And your argument is: All government is wrong, therefore government is wrong. Real deep stuff you ACers come up with.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
I have been lurking in these forums for a while and refrained from posting, but I can no longer hold my toungue (or fingers if you will).

There are a large number of anarchocapitalists in here who advocate a complete lack of government. According to them, government is immoral because it forces people to engage in involuntary transactions.

Unfortuntately, these ACers miss out on the much bigger picture: The government NEEDS to supply and impose moral clarity, both at home and abroad. Without government as a source of moral clarity, this world will be headed for a crisis of biblical proportions.

[/ QUOTE ]

How does government magically gain possession of moral clarity? Are you simply wishing it's going to occur? Guess what: that will never happen so stop talking about it.

[ QUOTE ]
If you ACers are delusional if you think we can survive in this world of grave threats without government. And yes some of the sources of those grave threats are governments. But those are bad governments.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right. *Those* governments are bad. This one here, the one *I* support, is good. Because it tries to force people to do the things *I* think people should be forced to do.

[ QUOTE ]
And the only way that we can fight those bad governments is with a government of our own that possesses moral clarity. Imagine how WW II would have turned out if America was merely an AC territory. If it were not for the US government, we would all be speaking German and Japanese now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right. Why would Japan and Germany invade an area with no centralized political structure to attack? Where they would face constant guerilla attacks? What would they gain? Without FDR imposing a ban on Americans trading oil with the Japanese, they would have no need to launch an attack on Pearl Harbor.

France fell so fast because of their centralized defense (don't forget the centrally-planned Maginot Line!). Topple Paris and the entire country falls.

How do you think the US revolutionaries (who were much, much closer to anarchocapitalism than the current variant of republican-democracy practiced in the USA) were able to beat the British, who had by far the most powerful military machine in the world at the time?

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think the ACers would have fought to save the world? I don't think so. Where was Murray Rothbard when the Germans invaded Poland and the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor? Rothbard was born a Jew, but he was too busy studying at Columbia to bother to fight to saves the lives of innocent Jews being slaughtered by Hitler.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think it was common knowledge that Jews were being exterminated *during* the war? And of course, this entire line is nothing more than a combo ad hominem/strawman attack anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
That seems to be typical of the anarchocapitalists in here. They talk all day about the importance of freedom, yet the only freedom that they seem to be willing to do anything about is their own. There are billions of people in this world living under repressive regimes and ACers think that problem can be magically solved by simply wishing that all governments dissolve. Guess what: that will never happen so stop talking about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Translation: stop pointing out that the behavior I wish to engage in is immoral and oppressive.

[ QUOTE ]
The fact is that we need a government leaders that have moral clarity and are willing to fight for it. George Bush is the perfect example of a leader with moral clarity. Bush saw the threat being posed by dictators and Islamic fundamentalists and had the courage to take action against it by confronting Saddam Hussien. Yes the war in Iraq is not going perfectly, but the world is better off now that a brutal dictator is gone and the world understands that America is willing to fight for freedom and democracy world wide.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. Here's a list of some of those people who are "better off" now.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/ira...es/casualties/

How much "better off" is "the world"? Don't forget to account for all of those dead people (how much do you value their lives at, anyway?) and certainly don't forget to account for this:

http://nationalpriorities.org/index....amp;Itemid=182

Yeah. Getting better and better all the time.

[Coffee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Worst. Pro-government argument. Ever.

[/ QUOTE ]

Better than no argument at all, which is what your post consists of.

How bout we move this discussion to a more concrete question: If there is no government, who will prevent terrorists from setting off a nuclear bomb in a major US city? You? Borodog?

[/ QUOTE ]



Steven...George W. Bush was in power before, during, and after the September 11 attacks. Explain how the government has made any difference in what the terrorists were doing. Bombs are still exploding, Iraqi insurgency is growing, and there appears to be no end in sight. Are you honestly arguing that we are better off than we were before, due to the government of George W. Bush?

I am a Libertarian, so I do believe in limited government, and in regard to being attacked, I think that we should have a military to answer the call. But, you have fundamentally shifted the point you were trying to make: that government is the arbiter of moral clarity. You then proceed to extol George W. Bush as an arbiter of such clarity, despite being the head of a political party that has been rocked by bribery and illicit sexual activity scandals in the past two years and has been characterized as the pork-loving corrupt politics along the lines of movie politicians. What in God's name are you referring to that George Bush has done to be the arbiter of such upstanding moral clarity, aside from him being a Christian, attending church regularly, and being stubborn, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary of his own opinions and convictions?

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Worst. Pro-government argument. Ever.

[/ QUOTE ]

Better than no argument at all, which is what your post consists of.

How bout we move this discussion to a more concrete question: If there is no government, who will prevent terrorists from setting off a nuclear bomb in a major US city? You? Borodog?

[/ QUOTE ]

If there is no US government stationing troops in 140 nations around the world, no US government propping up murdering dictators, no US government invading and bombing and cajoling and assasinating and couping and bribing and killing and interfering in every corner of the globe for more than a hundred years, who the [censored] would want to put a nuclear bomb in a major city north of the Rio Grande and south of the 49th parallel?

How effective was that half-a-trillion dollar per year defense budget at stopping those terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center that could have been stopped by a few $20 guns that government regulations prohibited from being on the planes?

What a joke.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
f there is no government, who will prevent terrorists from setting off a nuclear bomb in a major US city? You? Borodog?

[/ QUOTE ]

If there is no government, WHY would terrorists *want* to set a bomb off in a major US city?

OK, this has got to be a gimmick account. Who is it? It's not me, I promise.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
At least our usual thug camp has the decency to logically critique our views on the gold standard, price floors, private security, and taxes. Your argument is simply "it's wrong, therefore it's wrong."

[/ QUOTE ]

And your argument is: All government is wrong, therefore government is wrong. Real deep stuff you ACers come up with.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whose gimmick account are you anyway? bisonbison?

Besides. Osama bin Laden is simply providing the United States with much needed Moral Clarity. You should applaud him.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
You then proceed to extol George W. Bush as an arbiter of such clarity, despite being the head of a political party that has been rocked by bribery and illicit sexual activity scandals in the past two years and has been characterized as the pork-loving corrupt politics along the lines of movie politicians.

[/ QUOTE ]

This would be what they're talking about when they say you're "either with us or with the terrorists". STFU, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, eat your popcorn, enjoy the movie. Your betters will make the decisions for you and keep you safe at night.

[Steven Bickford]

[ QUOTE ]




[/ QUOTE ]

Funny you should post that picture. I think his speech sums up pretty well what I am trying to get accross here:

[ QUOTE ]
You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall.
We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!


[/ QUOTE ]

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]

How bout we move this discussion to a more concrete question: If there is no government, who will prevent terrorists from setting off a nuclear bomb in a major US city? You? Borodog?

[/ QUOTE ]

I love how neo-cons make absolutely no attempt to question why terrorists attack the US government. Could it have something to do with the fact that we have been instilling evil dictatorships like Saddam Hussein in their countries to oppress their people for our purposes for decades? Or the fact that we have used constant military pressure to keep OPEC trading in USD? Or the fact that our early progressive regime was responsible for the creation of a country to house their mortal enemies in the middle of palestine, and that we have been arming them endlessly in a quixotic attempt to allow peace in a group fo countries that wants to kill each other? Would Osama bin Laden have even existed if it wasn't for the tax-funded CIA? Would he have been able to dispatch terrorists that took over four jumbo jets with box cutters if US regulations actually allowed the airlines to provide, you know, security on their airplanes?

Oh no, wait, the muslims attack us because they are jealous of our MTV, Playboy models, and big penises.