Libertarians: Stop Using Logic

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
Hm. Cynical. Any recent experience make you more so?

[ QUOTE ]

Heck, that's the only reason mainstream economics, which not only repeatedly fails at demonstrating statistical validity but even makes no attempt to do so, exists.


[/ QUOTE ]

A clarification and a question. Is this a comparison to Austrian economics? If so, where's the justification? Academic "main-stream" economists are generally very well versed in empirical statistics; in fact, there's a post on the blogosphere about how anal they are about it. Have you read Caplan's, "Why I Am Not An Austrian Economist"?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not trying to defend Austrian economics anymore. I actually see a lot of good reasons not to be an Austrian; I just don't see any reason why the alternatives are any better.

[ConstantineX]

[ QUOTE ]
Remember, to convert someone to a minority - some might say fringe - political point of view, it's important to act as obnoxiously as possible and to stereotype all other political views accordingly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Having a legitimate political view doesn't preclude that view from having a stereotypical audience. Alot of black, violent criminals would like the War on Drugs repealed, but that doesn't make your view any less legitimate.

I would say that most mainstream political views are authoritarian. While HMK's tone suggests a bit of obnoxiousness, I don't really see it as as say, a moral failing of Democrats that some liberal ideas are authoritarian, something you might say is a caricature. It's just a consequence of evolutionary theory with regards to memes; most populist ideals appeal to ego in some way. And it would do well for self-described libertarians to better adapt their ideas to fit that mold to enter public discourse. Instead of saying, "THIS is why I'm right", argue more along the lines of "YOU don't want to be wrong, do you?"

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The 2+2 anarchocapitalism explosion never would have happened if borodog didn't have three letters after his name.

[/ QUOTE ]

This part made me LoL. I remember reading a reply once that was from Shake I believe that said (paraphraing) "You [whomever he was speaking to] and Boro can both make projections, but Boro has a PhD so I think his will be better". For a second I thought Boro's PhD was in Astro-physics, thank god he strightened me out.

Cody

[/ QUOTE ]
Wasn't me. I try to stay as far away from that type of statement as possible.

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
Memorize a bunch of numbers.

[/ QUOTE ]
Better yet, rely purely on conjecture/idealism.

[ QUOTE ]
Attack the other side.

[/ QUOTE ]

With Ponies

[ QUOTE ]
If you're talking to liberals, act oppressed

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good one. "Poor Ron Paul doesn't get enough press."

[ QUOTE ]
Volunteer.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought volunteerism/charity were the cure to all of society's ills.

[ QUOTE ]
Have a PhD.

[/ QUOTE ]

Better yet, don't have a PhD, attack "liberal education elite" when the disagree with you, but fully credential the PhDs who agree with you as if they were infallible.

[lehighguy]

I learned this from Fox News interviews of Ron Paul.

1) Ask someone if they hold a rediculous opinion that they don't actually hold, and then seem surprised when they say they don't. Question them a few times on this matter in different ways.

2) Ask people why they associate with "fringe wierdo(s) X". When they ask who the hell that is, point at that the two once met at a party, or that they wrote articles in the same newspaper, or something similair.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
Hm. Cynical. Any recent experience make you more so?

[ QUOTE ]

Heck, that's the only reason mainstream economics, which not only repeatedly fails at demonstrating statistical validity but even makes no attempt to do so, exists.


[/ QUOTE ]

A clarification and a question. Is this a comparison to Austrian economics? If so, where's the justification? Academic "main-stream" economists are generally very well versed in empirical statistics; in fact, there's a post on the blogosphere about how anal they are about it. Have you read Caplan's, "Why I Am Not An Austrian Economist"?

[/ QUOTE ]

You should read the responses. Caplan's been destroyed. Multiple times.

http://www.mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae6_3_4.pdf

http://www.mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae6_3_5.pdf

http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/19_1/19_1_5.pdf

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
I learned this from Fox News interviews of Ron Paul.

1) Ask someone if they hold a rediculous opinion that they don't actually hold, and then seem surprised when they say they don't. Question them a few times on this matter in different ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Newspaper link

<font color="white">Paul's "explanation" for this has been that he outsourced his newsletters for all of those years and never actually read them (for over four years). Interesting.</font>

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I learned this from Fox News interviews of Ron Paul.

1) Ask someone if they hold a rediculous opinion that they don't actually hold, and then seem surprised when they say they don't. Question them a few times on this matter in different ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Newspaper Link You mean any of these opinions, all of which are direct quotes from Ron Paul's own newsletter?[/url]

Paul's "explanation" for this has been that he outsourced his newsletters for all of those years and never actually read them (for over four years). Interesting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bull [censored]. He had a staff writer who wrote some pieces that shouldn't have made it into his newsletter. She was let go, and he's regretted that they were published under his byline for going on two decades.

Is this the best you have? 15 year old bull [censored]? Smearing a guy who hires gays, blacks, minorities, women, you name it with the hate brush because you can't touch his ideas?

Pathetic.

[GoodCallYouWin]

I wouldn't write that link off so quickly. While the first three are pretty obviously the same slanderous accusations that have been circling (and disproven) for some time, the rest appear to be genuine words of wisdom. Take for example :

"* "[Hillary Clinton] is one of the most dangerous women in public life. Not only is she a fanatical abortion advocate, she wants parents to register with the government as a condition for having children to be able to sue and `divorce' themselves from their parents. Maybe her daughter ought to sue her parents for attempting to raise her as a leftist. That sure qualifies as abuse to me.""


"Disgruntled taxpayer "Dean Hicks fired bombs through mortars at night at buildings of the Internal Revenue Service in California. Hicks did damage federal property, but no individuals were injured... Hicks was sentenced to 20 years in prison, given a $45,000 fine, and ordered to pay $335,000 in restitution to the IRS. If he had been a serial murderer, he would not have gotten this sort of sentence."
"


" "Why do we need the federal government? There's no Cold War and no Communist threat. Many other nations are breaking into smaller and smaller pieces. The centralization of power in Washington occurred in a different time. Why not think about getting rid of the federal government, returning to the system of our Founders, and breaking up the United States into smaller government units?""

Some real gold in here, imho.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Bull [censored]. He had a staff writer who wrote some pieces that shouldn't have made it into his newsletter.

[/ QUOTE ]

For four years.

[ QUOTE ]
Is this the best you have? 15 year old bull [censored]? Smearing a guy who hires gays, blacks, minorities, women, you name it with the hate brush because you can't touch his ideas?

Pathetic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, no, I've got tons more, but apparently you're not very good at arguing. You see, you're already using words like "smear" and "pathetic". "Pathetic" would be if I made those quotes up or took something out of context, but no, he actually published all of that and still distributes old copies of it today if you ask him.

I mean, the other option is that he never looked at his own newsletter in four years, or, alternatively, that it was read by so few people who actually give a damn about stuff like calling blacks "fleet footed" that nobody noticed. Pick one.

edit:

[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't write that link off so quickly. While the first three are pretty obviously the same slanderous accusations that have been circling (and disproven) for some time, the rest appear to be genuine words of wisdom.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, none of those views are the least bit on the fringe, especially the one about a serial murderer getting &lt; 20 years while a 'disgruntled taxpayer' who *fired a mortar into a building* got railroaded by the system. Oh man, such a horrible miscarriage of justice we have here - not fringe at all.