General

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

Short Seller — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 06:39:35 GMT

Sorry, I posted this elsewhere without noticing this thread...

Your reply to the Guardian, is qualitatively about as good as, your UPB:

Links:
ANCAPS Discussion Forum
MolyneuxCultWatch

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

ryanpatgray — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:58:11 GMT

Sage:

Giles, Roderick's position is that voting isn't immoral, but it is inefficient and should be minimized as a strategy.

That is my view as well. From a moral standpoint (depending on your motivation for voting at least) it can be justified as a form of self-defense, its effectiveness is another matter. It could be compared to using a medicine dropper filled with water to try to put out a forest fire.

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

FreedomainRadio — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:26:30 GMT

Sorry, I posted this elsewhere without noticing this thread...

As you may know, Freedomain Radio was featured in an article in the British newspaper The Guardian last weekend.

Now, as we all know, the mainstream media is often far from accurate when it comes to representing libertarian, free-market or voluntarist ideas. I think that this article is a very good example of how a source can take a reporter for a ride.

If you would like to read the article, and my response to it, you can click below, I think it is very interesting, please let me know what you think.

http://www.fdrurl.com/guardian

Best wishes,

Stef

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

Sage — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 04:19:10 GMT

Giles, Roderick's position is that voting isn't immoral, but it is inefficient and should be minimized as a strategy.

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

Donny with an A — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 04:00:23 GMT

I had in mind "Universal education is the most corroding and disintegrating poison that liberalism has ever invented for its own destruction"

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

hayekianxyz — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 23:54:52 GMT

Solid_Choke:
"There is a road to freedom. Its milestones are Obedience, Endeavor, Honesty, Order, Cleanliness, Sobriety, Truthfulness, Sacrifice, and love of the Fatherland." -Hitler

Sounds good.

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

Solid_Choke — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 23:12:08 GMT

Donny with an A:

(I can't BELIEVE no one has quoted Hitler yet!)

"There is a road to freedom. Its milestones are Obedience, Endeavor, Honesty, Order, Cleanliness, Sobriety, Truthfulness, Sacrifice, and love of the Fatherland." -Hitler

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

banned — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 23:03:47 GMT

GilesStratton:
http://praxeology.net/nextelection.htm

Woah, did you read the date on that? Long's opinions haven't changed for over 12 years?

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

aestheticbend — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 22:15:46 GMT

The state's purpose is to pursue the agenda of the gay mafia and overthrow the heterosexual male and the inherent virtuosity of heterosexuality.

I do not see why the traditionalists cannot isolate the virtues they see in traditional social forms and defend those, rather than defending tradition qua tradition.

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

Nitroadict — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:42:25 GMT

Redundant thread is redundant.

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

hayekianxyz — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:52:03 GMT

Brainpolice:
Why does everything go back to the reds with you, as if that's an example of statism as a whole?

It's an example nonetheless, albeit one that's all too inconvenient for you.

Brainpolice:
some kind of bastion of virtue that is always opposed to the state.

Brainpolice:
None of that aims at abolishing the family so much as co-opting and controling it. The abolition of the family as such, however, doesn't follow.

So now you're playing semantic games?

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

Jon Irenicus — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:51:39 GMT

In the case of buisiness-state and church-state relations, it's usually a tit for tat in which one is granted special privileges so long as loyalty is maintained to the other. As a consequence of this, religious and economic institutions can effectively be artificially strengthened through patronage with the state. They're never really eliminated, they just become more like states in themselves and become part of a parasitic class. They've hardly been historical enemies of the state at all.

Yes, that is what I mean though, the amalgamation is effective destruction.

-Jon

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

hayekianxyz — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:47:35 GMT

Jon Irenicus:
Giles, what do you mean when you say Long accepts the political process? As far as I can tell he supports various voluntary causes, but not political means per se.

Roderick Long:
But first, once the Rothbardian position is correctly distinguished from all-or-nothing perfectionism, it's no longer clear that Rothbardians can't be involved in ordinary politics — voting, running for office, and so forth. Such activities might be regarded as giving impermissible sanction to the state; but if you infiltrate the Death Star in order to blow it up, does that really count as falling to the dark side? To wield political power, admittedly, is to run the risk of being corrupted; but is such corruption inevitable? It seems like a sizeable bloc of Ron Paul clones in Congress could be pretty effective in scaling back the state without sacrificing any libertarian principle.

and

http://praxeology.net/nextelection.htm

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

John Ess — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:46:17 GMT

What do all of you think of "military families"?

Re: Molyneux continues to embarrass Libertarian movement

Brainpolice — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:44:15 GMT

Jon Irenicus:

it co-opts them or forms synergetic relationships with them.

Contorting them beyond all recognition and amalgamating them, in the process. It may not quite be "destruction", but preservation it definitely is not.

-Jon

In the case of buisiness-state and church-state relations, it's usually a tit for tat in which one is granted special privileges so long as loyalty is maintained to the other. As a consequence of this, religious and economic institutions can effectively be artificially strengthened through patronage with the state. They're never really eliminated, they just become more like states in themselves and become part of a parasitic class. They've hardly been historical enemies of the state at all.