liberty student:The dictionary is a red herring.
No it is how your define words. You keep attempting to intentionally mis-define the word "libertarian" and when you cannot support your wrong definition from a single dictionary you change the argument.
"Anarchism misunderstands the real nature of man. It would be practicable only in a world of angels and saints" - Ludwig von Mises
liberty student:Kinsella is an LvMI scholar, and you are at LvMI. Still want to maintain that his work for mises.org is irrelevant?
Strawman
liberty student:No, I'm saying it is irrelevant because Block is an anarchist.
No it is not irrelevant, Dr. Block used the phrase "limited government libertarian" which you claim cannot be used.
liberty student:So I will ask again, are Hoppe, Block and Rockwell wrong?
Wrong about what? Dr. Block used the phrase "limited government libertarian".
Poptech:No it is how your define words. You keep attempting to intentionally misdefine the word libertarian. Then when you cannot support your wrong definition from a single dictionary you change the argument.
No, it is a red herring. You're trying to avoid answering that you hold unlibertarian positions, by arguing the definition of the word from sources.
You've even gone so far as to say the work LvMI scholars do on property rights is "irrelevant".
I've asked you very simple ans straightforward questions.
Do you support monopoly government, yes or no?
Do you support the use of coercion, yes or no?
Did you read Kinsella's article (that you claim is "irrelevant)?
If yes, where was he wrong? If no, why are you here again?
Think twice before responding again without good faith to these questions.
If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North
Poptech: liberty student:Kinsella is an LvMI scholar, and you are at LvMI. Still want to maintain that his work for mises.org is irrelevant? Strawman
It is not a strawman. You claimed Kinsella's views on libertarianism are irrelevant, did you not?
Again, think carefully before responding.
you know, dictionaries record popular usage. you are asking the man on the street what libertarian means when they are not political philosophers.
some people are political philosophers and if you want to discuss with them you might try listening to what they say. they probably have a more precise vocabulary and definitions than your man on the street.
anyway:
Main Entry: lib·er·tar·i·anPronunciation: "li-b&r-'ter-E-&n, -'te-rE-Function: nounDate: 17891 : an advocate of the doctrine of free will>>>2 a : a person who upholds the principles of individual liberty especially of thought and action<<<<
you dont uphold it when arguing with me about the role of the state. in that conversation i uphold it. so maybe we should call you a 'part-time' or 'occasional' or 'often' libertarian ? is that a superior compromise?
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
liberty student:No, it is a red herring. You're trying to avoid answering that you hold unlibertarian positions, by arguing the definition of the word from sources.
My position on anything has nothing to do with the definition of the word "libertarian"
liberty student:You've even gone so far as to say the work LvMI scholars do on property rights is "irrelevant".
Irrevelant to the definition of words in the dictionary.
liberty student:I've asked you very simple ans straightforward questions.
Yes you did to change the subject because you cannot support your definition of the word libertarian from ANY dictionary.
liberty student:It is not a strawman. You claimed Kinsella's views on libertarianism are irrelevant, did you not?
I stated Kinsella is not a dictionary and thus irrelevant for defining words.
Poptech: liberty student:It is not a strawman. You claimed Kinsella's views on libertarianism are irrelevant, did you not? I stated Kinsella is not a dictionary and thus irrelevant for defining words.
you do know that the dictionary is compiled by human beings who are themselves, not dictionaries.....
nirgrahamUK:is that a superior compromise?
Nothing to compromise, I am a libertarian by definition. So deal with it.
you are by definition less of one than i am though. arent you?
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."
nirgrahamUK:you are by definition less of one than i am though. arent you?
Nope
Juan:no, you are an american nationalist.
Nope, wrong again.
Poptech:I stated Kinsella is not a dictionary and thus irrelevant for defining words.
/facepalm
"Constitution worship is our most extended public political ritual, frequently supervised as often by mountebanks as by the sincere"-James J Martin
Juan:You are a pro-war jingoistic amerikan who believe that a bunch of murderers and thieves - known as the amerikan government - has the 'right' to tax their fellows humans and has the 'right' to murder people if the people refuse to pay. And that is justified in the name of the 'constitution' or the 'american nation' or some similar trash. You are a nationalist - a blind supporter of the nation state - deal with it.
All lies as usual.
This argument is going nowhere. Maybe you could should agree to disagree. Obviously you guys aren't changing each other's minds. You're even going so far as to call this guy some pretty nasty things, and even I agree that government = mafia, in any form.
How do you guys feel about Harry Browne? He was part of the political party, even if he espoused that government was a mafia, too. He did some great things for the movement.
"I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do."
Bleh. "Maybe you could should?" I meant, "Maybe you guys should.."
Poptech: liberty student:It's irrelevant. The definition is incorrect. ROFLMAO!!! So the dictionary is wrong?
liberty student:It's irrelevant. The definition is incorrect.
ROFLMAO!!! So the dictionary is wrong?
You understand what a dictionary is, correct? How about linguistics? Dictionaries most certainly do not set the definitions of words. They reflect common usage. Language changes over time, and dictionaries are expected to change with them. If they don't, their definitions become incorrect. The dictionary does not decree the proper definition of a given word; it is a record of the common definitions.
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