The Mises Community
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

So, relationship discussion anyone?

This post has 121 Replies | 13 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,247
Points 65,050
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

Then it isn't much of an issue for you? And I meant avoid emotional ties. I can get along with people at the level of "acquaintance", they just won't be very good friends or anything more than that (never said females, that'd be even worse possibly) if they're dogmatically anti-liberty, though tbh lack of an opinion on a matter is less severe a grievance to me than intransigence. I dislike not being able to discuss things with people and if they're so anti-liberty that it becomes a taboo to discuss the matter it's not going to work out.

To darkness I condemn you...

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 7,643
Points 132,720
MVP
SystemAdministrator

Democracy for Breakfast:
Mises is an elitist philosophy.

Nonsense.

 

If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 7,643
Points 132,720
MVP
SystemAdministrator

Democracy for Breakfast:
I feel that there's something wrong with that.

Try reason, not feelings.

Democracy for Breakfast:
I network as much as possible, which Is important.

A person can network their household skills for someone else's skills in another area.

Democracy for Breakfast:
You shouldn't disregard people just because they have different opinions, or are impenetratable(sp?).

That's collectivism.  Time is scarce.  I'm not going to spend it on people who yield a poor or negative return, when I can invest that time elsewhere.

When someone is such a loser that I would be better off talking to no one, it is the rational course of action, to refrain from "networking" rather than networking a negative.

Democracy for Breakfast:
They may just not be into Political Theory, but have other interests they are passionate about.

I don't care.  I don't have to like everyone.  I don't intend to like everyone.  I like people who have character.  People who don't are of little value to me.

If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,669
Points 81,345

Don't worry about it bro, don't let the statist get you down. If you're feeling down just remember that you've got your anarchistcapitalist buddies right for here.

If I didn't know you were such a die hard libertarian, who adheres rigidly to the NAP I would tell you to walk over there and beat the shit out of her. But you're a follow of Murray Rothbard (for future reference, when in trouble ask yourself "What would Murray do?") so I've got other advice. Send her an email with the nastiest words you can think of "statist", "keynesian", "socialist", "monetarist", "positivivst" and so on. Liken her to John Maynard Kenyes or Milton Friedman, you get the idea.

Just remember man, when the anarchistcapitalist revolution happens you'll be the fuckin' coolest kid in town. Forget Che, you'll be on all the t shirts. People will reap praise on you like you can't imagine, you'll be a God on earth. You rule the place (in a non coercive way, of course).

Perhaps you just need to be more edgy about your views. You're not a pessimist, you're a "realist". Stop talking about disliking the state, you be hatin' on the pigs. Anyway, why would you be a pessimist? You and your pals are bringing down the state any day now, you've got it all sorted.

If this advice doesn't work I suggest a mixture of glue, booze and cigarettes, you'll be better in days man. Tattoo Rothbard on your back and "Fuck the State" on your forehead.

 

"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"

Bob Dylan

  • | Post Points: 65
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 7,643
Points 132,720
MVP
SystemAdministrator

GilesStratton:

Don't worry about it bro, don't let the statist get you down. If you're feeling down just remember that you've got your anarchistcapitalist buddies right for here.

If I didn't know you were such a die hard libertarian, who adheres rigidly to the NAP I would tell you to walk over there and beat the shit out of her. But you're a follow of Murray Rothbard (for future reference, when in trouble ask yourself "What would Murray do?") so I've got other advice. Send her an email with the nastiest words you can think of "statist", "keynesian", "socialist", "monetarist", "positivivst" and so on. Liken her to John Maynard Kenyes or Milton Friedman, you get the idea.

Just remember man, when the anarchistcapitalist revolution happens you'll be the fuckin' coolest kid in town. Forget Che, you'll be on all the t shirts. People will reap praise on you like you can't imagine, you'll be a God on earth. You rule the place (in a non coercive way, of course).

Perhaps you just need to be more edgy about your views. You're not a pessimist, you're a "realist". Stop talking about disliking the state, you be hatin' on the pigs. Anyway, why would you be a pessimist? You and your pals are bringing down the state any day now, you've got it all sorted.

If this advice doesn't work I suggest a mixture of glue, booze and cigarettes, you'll be better in days man. Tattoo Rothbard on your back and "Fuck the State" on your forehead.

Quoted for immortality.

If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 4,094
Points 65,835
Moderator

Off-Topic Giles?

Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid

Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,188
Points 88,290
Juan replied on Wed, Sep 30 2009 4:12 PM
Well as an exercise in sarcasm/parody/irony it was not bad, but it was ultimately pointless, or worse, as with most of Giles' posts.

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 32
Points 425
mhamlin replied on Wed, Sep 30 2009 4:13 PM

liberty student:

GilesStratton:

Don't worry about it bro, don't let the statist get you down. If you're feeling down just remember that you've got your anarchistcapitalist buddies right for here.

If I didn't know you were such a die hard libertarian, who adheres rigidly to the NAP I would tell you to walk over there and beat the shit out of her. But you're a follow of Murray Rothbard (for future reference, when in trouble ask yourself "What would Murray do?") so I've got other advice. Send her an email with the nastiest words you can think of "statist", "keynesian", "socialist", "monetarist", "positivivst" and so on. Liken her to John Maynard Kenyes or Milton Friedman, you get the idea.

Just remember man, when the anarchistcapitalist revolution happens you'll be the fuckin' coolest kid in town. Forget Che, you'll be on all the t shirts. People will reap praise on you like you can't imagine, you'll be a God on earth. You rule the place (in a non coercive way, of course).

Perhaps you just need to be more edgy about your views. You're not a pessimist, you're a "realist". Stop talking about disliking the state, you be hatin' on the pigs. Anyway, why would you be a pessimist? You and your pals are bringing down the state any day now, you've got it all sorted.

If this advice doesn't work I suggest a mixture of glue, booze and cigarettes, you'll be better in days man. Tattoo Rothbard on your back and "Fuck the State" on your forehead.

Quoted for immortality.

Hahaha, awesome.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 521
Points 10,125
zefreak replied on Wed, Sep 30 2009 4:23 PM

Giles, what do you have against anarchists?

“Elections are Futures Markets in Stolen Property.” - H. L. Mencken


 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,457
Points 24,305
Daniel replied on Wed, Sep 30 2009 4:27 PM

zefreak:

Giles, what do you have against anarchists?

Most economists at GMU are not anarchists, therefore, Giles cannot support anarchism. Lol :p

My favorite online shop: www.cafepress.com/libertyphile Big Smile

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 521
Points 10,125
zefreak replied on Wed, Sep 30 2009 5:07 PM

Daniel:

zefreak:

Giles, what do you have against anarchists?

Most economists at GMU are not anarchists, therefore, Giles cannot support anarchism. Lol :p

Leeson is arguably an anarchist, albeit a consequentialist one.

“Elections are Futures Markets in Stolen Property.” - H. L. Mencken


 

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,802
Points 49,830
Moderator

Democracy for Breakfast:
What?

The government killed 170 million of its own people last century, and she calls you a pessimist for being against that?

'It is difficult to imagine any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time.' - Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 864
Points 15,165
Angurse replied on Wed, Sep 30 2009 5:54 PM

Daniel:

Most economists at GMU are not anarchists, therefore, Giles cannot support anarchism. Lol :p

Are you sure about that?

 

Laissez faire et laissez passer, le monde va de lui même

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,457
Points 24,305
Daniel replied on Wed, Sep 30 2009 6:31 PM

Angurse:

Daniel:

Most economists at GMU are not anarchists, therefore, Giles cannot support anarchism. Lol :p

Are you sure about that?

No. It was a quip against Giles.

My favorite online shop: www.cafepress.com/libertyphile Big Smile

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 259
Points 8,580

GilesStratton:

Don't worry about it bro, don't let the statist get you down. If you're feeling down just remember that you've got your anarchistcapitalist buddies right for here.

If I didn't know you were such a die hard libertarian, who adheres rigidly to the NAP I would tell you to walk over there and beat the shit out of her. But you're a follow of Murray Rothbard (for future reference, when in trouble ask yourself "What would Murray do?") so I've got other advice. Send her an email with the nastiest words you can think of "statist", "keynesian", "socialist", "monetarist", "positivivst" and so on. Liken her to John Maynard Kenyes or Milton Friedman, you get the idea.

Just remember man, when the anarchistcapitalist revolution happens you'll be the fuckin' coolest kid in town. Forget Che, you'll be on all the t shirts. People will reap praise on you like you can't imagine, you'll be a God on earth. You rule the place (in a non coercive way, of course).

Perhaps you just need to be more edgy about your views. You're not a pessimist, you're a "realist". Stop talking about disliking the state, you be hatin' on the pigs. Anyway, why would you be a pessimist? You and your pals are bringing down the state any day now, you've got it all sorted.

If this advice doesn't work I suggest a mixture of glue, booze and cigarettes, you'll be better in days man. Tattoo Rothbard on your back and "Fuck the State" on your forehead.

 

Haha ^_^.

 

You know I really appreciate the comicality, but I'd just like to point out it wasn't political views that was the issue. It was my pessimism about life and my generally cynical attitude. I'm naturally negative, and she said it bored the shit out of her one day, because I guess she got sick of it.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 176
Points 3,895

GilesStratton:

You and your pals are bringing down the state any day now, you've got it all sorted.

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 259
Points 8,580

Jon Irenicus:

Then it isn't much of an issue for you? And I meant avoid emotional ties. I can get along with people at the level of "acquaintance", they just won't be very good friends or anything more than that (never said females, that'd be even worse possibly) if they're dogmatically anti-liberty, though tbh lack of an opinion on a matter is less severe a grievance to me than intransigence. I dislike not being able to discuss things with people and if they're so anti-liberty that it becomes a taboo to discuss the matter it's not going to work out.

 

You should worry more about her being open minded to where shes interested in your philosophical beliefs. Also, its important to be more open minded about potential companions because you need to have a lot of experiences with many different personalities to know what you really want when you finally decided to settle down with someone.


Also, you'll never know how well you get along with someone unless you try, or give them a chance.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 195
Points 3,015
Bank Run replied on Wed, Sep 30 2009 11:44 PM

MissPoliteia:
It sort of seems as if you think that a woman who is pretty and can cook cant be intelligent. Im not going to get all feminist on you but the the quotes you selected are too much of a cliché, specially said

     I believe most women are quite clever. I have just found that their wit is conniving in nature. In general a man is bamboozled into marriage. So much so that the woman makes it seem is if getting bamboozled was really his idea. Of course beauty is a subjective value judgment. "Beauty is worse than wine, it intoxicates both the holder and beholder"~Aldous Huxley. I'm not about to say it's impossible to have beauty and brains in the same package, it is just very rare. To paraphrase a piece of Dorian Grey; a beautiful person won't ever become a profound thinker, because should a brilliant thought enter their head it would get quickly lost, as their mind would turn to thinking about themselves.

     As for my preference, it is due to knowing just as a woman would be foolish to see a man more handsom than here so it would be a competition for her in intellectual matters.

     I once thought I was becoming a mosogynist until I heard the following Mencken quote. "Misogynist: a man that hates women as much as they hate each other."

Kind regards

Individualism Rocks

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 898
Points 15,845
Moderator
wombatron replied on Thu, Oct 1 2009 12:09 AM

liberty student:

Democracy for Breakfast:
He basically said "Relax, emotional meanings in relationships are meaningless, so save yourself the heartache because you will be way better off, and its more important to find a good mother and good housewife".

IT IS MENCKEN.

Have to agree with LS here (and I am a feminist of sorts).  To sum it up, Mencken said that women are bad, and men are worse (and less intelligent to boot).

 

Market anarchist, Linux geek, aspiring Perl hacker, and student of the neo-Aristotelians, the classical individualist anarchists, and the Austrian school.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 7,643
Points 132,720
MVP
SystemAdministrator

wombatron:
I am a feminist of sorts

Confused

wombatron:
To sum it up, Mencken said that women are bad, and men are worse (and less intelligent to boot).

The only group Mencken loathed more than the one he was insulting at the moment, is the group he was not insulting.

If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North

  • | Post Points: 20
Page 2 of 7 (122 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next > ... Last » | RSS

Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528

Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119

contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises

Mises.org sitemap