Political Theory

Re: Agorism activity

ozzy43 — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:29:35 GMT

Geoffrey Allan Plauche:

ozzy43:
It seems that you are not even interested in how childish all of this is and the harm you are doing to your cause by failing to demonstrate an appropriate level of maturity, which can be done, even if one is faced with childish provocation. All I can say is: good luck. I think you're going to need it.

I'm starting to wonder just how unbiased you really are seeing as how you are so willing to form an opinion based on incomplete information. If you're really interested in truth, you'll try to get a more complete picture and be less one-sided in your criticism. If anyone is doing the cause of liberty harm it is people like Max who barge into a forum to promote a new project for liberty while simultaneously seeking to discredit alternatives to it in rude and pretentious fashion, accusing everyone else in the process of being do-nothings, and so on and so forth. I don't have an overriding obligation to waste my time dealing patiently with every single rude and pretentious libertarian who enters these forums with an agenda. I'm trying to finish my dissertation so that I can graduate and get a job exposing young minds to the literature of liberty. If he cares to have a civil, respectful discussion I might feel more inclined to devote more time to him. But since he has yet to do so, I'm justified in calling him on his bad behavior and providing a quick debunking of his claims and criticisms.

If you are beginning to question whether I am unbiased, I'm beginning to question your ability to understand the English language. I must say it does not suprise me at all to see the exact same tactics now being used: if someone does not agree, or continues to disagree with you, yes, that is sufficient evidence of bias it seems. Because I call it like I see it does not make me biased, but think whatever you like.

I am not passing judgment on you, agorism, nor the Liberty Colony. My purpose in this thread has not been to assess from a macro level 'who was an *** first' which is what you are telling me I am not doing. Fine. That's not my goal. You are right - I am not doing it. And I am not going to do it. I could care less what the prior conversations looked like. That information is immaterial to the point I am laboring to make, so far futilely.

Do you not grasp that it is not mature to keep saying 'yeah but he started it!'?!?!?! This has been your consistent response to every single one of my posts. You want me to go read 673 posts in 24 threads so I can come to a macro level decision about who has been naughtiest? Are you kidding me? What am I to do then? Jump in and bash the side I find more offensive? Are you f**king kidding me?

Maturity has nothing to do with 'who started it' - it has everything to do with who - even if he was justified in perpetuating it - chooses not to. I can assure you, after a couple decades of fatherhood, that this is a factual statement.

Let's start with this: "If he cares to have a civil, respectful discussion I might feel more inclined to devote more time to him. But since he has yet to do so, I'm justified in"

What I am saying to you - and have been trying to say all along - is this: this thread started that way. So he met your first condition. Whereupon he was reviled and ridiculed by what would appear to be your young hooligan followers. So you did not. So on the basis of this thread and this thread alone, you have made a false statement.

Look, dude, people are rude and pretentious. Especially libertarians, are rude and pretentious. I am rude and pretentious, and so, I suspect, are you, at times. You certainly have some rude and pretentious followers, to which fact this thread clearly attests.

So what? Are you going to go to battle with one of your advisors, or with a colleague, if they turn out to be rude and pretentious? Get over it already. People sharing the same fundamental beliefs - that the State and anti-liberty by its very nature and cannot be bargained with on any level - need to learn to get along, whether they agree on actions or not. At worst, they need to agree to disagree.

This, BTW, is addressed to all parties involved on all sides here. You are up against the most fearsome and powerful and malevolent entity the world has ever seen: the State. It will mangle and crush you without batting an eye. And here you are sniping at others who believe as you do? Control yourselves. Evince - or develop - some maturity.

Or don't. IMO, it won't matter anyway. IMO, liberty will never flourish unless and until humans have evolved well past the 'teenage' stage at which we currently seem to be stuck. GB Shaw was dead on target - you'll never persuade the masses that liberty is in their best interests - because for 99% of the sheep out there - it isn't.

I've said all I have to say in this thread. I hope - thought without much reason - it will die a quick and merciful death.

Re: Agorism activity

Maxliberty — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:52:56 GMT

Geoffrey Allan Plauche:
I'm trying to finish my dissertation so that I can graduate and get a job exposing young minds to the literature of liberty. If he cares to have a civil, respectful discussion I might feel more inclined to devote more time to him. But since he has yet to do so, I'm justified in calling him on his bad behavior and providing a quick debunking of his claims and criticisms.

I do not see anywhere that you or anyone else in this thread have debunked anything regarding my claims and criticisms. This thread has repeatedly demonstrated that agorists can not explain the contradictions of agorism. Youhaven't even tried to answer the questions and those that have tried have failed spectacularly.

Re: Agorism activity

Geoffrey Allan Plauche — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 04:58:53 GMT

ozzy43:
It seems that you are not even interested in how childish all of this is and the harm you are doing to your cause by failing to demonstrate an appropriate level of maturity, which can be done, even if one is faced with childish provocation. All I can say is: good luck. I think you're going to need it.

I'm starting to wonder just how unbiased you really are seeing as how you are so willing to form an opinion based on incomplete information. If you're really interested in truth, you'll try to get a more complete picture and be less one-sided in your criticism. If anyone is doing the cause of liberty harm it is people like Max who barge into a forum to promote a new project for liberty while simultaneously seeking to discredit alternatives to it in rude and pretentious fashion, accusing everyone else in the process of being do-nothings, and so on and so forth. I don't have an overriding obligation to waste my time dealing patiently with every single rude and pretentious libertarian who enters these forums with an agenda. I'm trying to finish my dissertation so that I can graduate and get a job exposing young minds to the literature of liberty. If he cares to have a civil, respectful discussion I might feel more inclined to devote more time to him. But since he has yet to do so, I'm justified in calling him on his bad behavior and providing a quick debunking of his claims and criticisms.

Re: Agorism activity

ozzy43 — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 04:28:42 GMT

Geoffrey Allan Plauche:

ozzy43:
Now, you say Max 'storms into these forums bashing alternatives to his Liberty Colony idea' - my reading of THIS thread (I can only speak to this one) is that it was the pro-agorist camp - somebody named MacFall - who brought up the Liberty Colony and began ridiculing it, with Niccolo and others (not yourself at that stage) gleefully jumping on that particular bandwagon, tee-hee, tee-hee.

Well, you should read the previous threads on agorism and the Liberty Colony since this thread is but the latest in a prolonged conversation dealing with both subjects. You're forming an opinion based on incomplete information.

It seems that you are not even interested in how childish all of this is and the harm you are doing to your cause by failing to demonstrate an appropriate level of maturity, which can be done, even if one is faced with childish provocation. All I can say is: good luck. I think you're going to need it.

Re: Agorism activity

Geoffrey Allan Plauche — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:47:30 GMT

IRShenchmanJon:

The opposite of what? Do you mean that they aren't dead ends or that they aren't demonstrating anything?

I don't think that either one is necessarily a dead end. They each have different goals and employ different means to achieve them.

Re: Agorism activity

IRShenchmanJon — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:39:21 GMT

The opposite of what? Do you mean that they aren't dead ends or that they aren't demonstrating anything?

Re: Agorism activity

Geoffrey Allan Plauche — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:17:28 GMT

ozzy43:
Now, you say Max 'storms into these forums bashing alternatives to his Liberty Colony idea' - my reading of THIS thread (I can only speak to this one) is that it was the pro-agorist camp - somebody named MacFall - who brought up the Liberty Colony and began ridiculing it, with Niccolo and others (not yourself at that stage) gleefully jumping on that particular bandwagon, tee-hee, tee-hee.

Well, you should read the previous threads on agorism and the Liberty Colony since this thread is but the latest in a prolonged conversation dealing with both subjects. You're forming an opinion based on incomplete information.

Re: Agorism activity

ozzy43 — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:04:41 GMT

Geoffrey Allan Plauche:

ozzy43:
It's my opinion that you'd all have a far higher chance of success if you could just f**king learn to work together, but that's clearly too much of a sacrifice to ask at this point. Splitters. Oughta be ashamed of yourselves.

Tell that to the guy who storms into these forums bashing alternatives to his Liberty Colony idea. You'll note that I said I hope his scheme works out. Your quote of me above is part of a reaction to his rude attack on agorism; I was pointing out that his own project suffers from the same weakness he alleges of agorism. I would be content if people like Max didn't go around feeling the need to discredit every means of fighting liberty but their own.

I have not been around this forum for quite some time - used to post quite a bit, but the rants and raves and the adolescent attempts to prove one was smarter than the other (in which I all too frequently engaged, truth be told), often at the expense of the important topic under discussion, drove me off.

Recently, in my wanderings, I had occasion to read through Konkin's work (NLM). Also recently, had occasion to post some stuff here. While here, happily, I ran across this agorism thread, and, as Konkin's work had been thought provoking, I thought I'd see what everyone had to say. I was looking for information. What I found more closely resembled an elementary school food fight than a substantive discourse. That has continued up to the more recent posts.

So I started with no preconceived notions, and no position on any of this (had never heard of the Libetry Colony for example) short of some interest in, and lots of agreement with, what Konin had to say. Definitely had some skepticism as to its potential efficacy, however. This thread SHOULD have provided info to address my concerns, given me various perspectives on agorism, etc. Unfortunately, I know no more now than I did upon my first read.

But the point is - I came at this without being on one "side" or another - I am on liberty's side and unutterably opposed to the State. That's the only side that it makes ANY sense for a thinking man to be on, IMO.

Now, you say Max 'storms into these forums bashing alternatives to his Liberty Colony idea' - my reading of THIS thread (I can only speak to this one) is that it was the pro-agorist camp - somebody named MacFall - who brought up the Liberty Colony and began ridiculing it, with Niccolo and others (not yourself at that stage) gleefully jumping on that particular bandwagon, tee-hee, tee-hee. It was like a bad memory from junior high school. Stupid juvenile bullsh*t.

Max and some others were asking what appear to be legitimate questions and which were in fact inline with the questions I developed reading Konkin's work, and were making assertions and challenges. That is, they were NOT "bashing" agorism (though from a confirmed agorist's point of view, it may subjectively have *FELT* like that) rather they were CHALLENGING it.

A PhD candidate above all - and I am well aware of the significance of this status - must understand the difference between bashing and challenging, and between childish responses and adult ones. In the adult world, when someone acts childishly, you do not descend upon the instant to that level and 'fight fire with fire'. You maintain an adult bearing, and respond as an adult. If, that is, you are a serious person worthy of regard.

If, when one's ideas are under challenge, one feels the need to instantly devolve into schoolboyish name calling and ridiculing - make no mistake, this is precisely what occurred here - this undermines the perception of those ideas, which is often for all practical purposes the same as undermining the ideas themselves.

In other words, from where I sit - and I continue to hold myself out as an objective and thoughtful observer - agorism is being tainted by this sort of treatment. It deserves better from its adherents than this, IMO.

Here's a suggestion: collect the questions being asked about agorism by Max and others and create a new thread which posts the answers explicitly. That way, you can stop saying they've been answered already, and he can stop saying they haven't, which activity at least appears to consume the majority of communication in this thread. I sure as hell have seen precious few actual answers in this thread, although innumerable posts have said those answers have been made.

Re: Agorism activity

Niccolò — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 23:13:23 GMT

IRShenchmanJon:

I think the Liberty Colony and agorism are dead ends. They're both basically trying to demonstrate what is basically right to a corrupt culture that has told them that such possibilities are like the wolves at the door

Funny, it would seem to be the exact opposite.

Re: Agorism activity

Maxliberty — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 22:46:34 GMT

IRShenchmanJon:

I think the Liberty Colony and agorism are dead ends. They're both basically trying to demonstrate what is basically right to a corrupt culture that has told them that such possibilities are like the wolves at the door.

The corporations will take over, the poor will starve to death, all the animals will go extinct, health care and the roads will disappear, the DROs will become like a government, no one will be educated, everyone but CEOs will earn .01 cent an hour, pollution, Mexicans, meth addictions, terror, Chomsky said something about "hate" and Rothbardian police force monopolies for the rich, the proletarian class consciousness won't be pleased, the bourgeois class consciousness would be very pleased, central banks need to control business cycles, global warming, etc.

So there.

And what is it you propose to do?

Re: Agorism activity

Maxliberty — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 22:45:51 GMT

Geoffrey Allan Plauche:

Maxliberty:
If you really believe agorism is the superior strategy then maybe you should spend some time defending it. The real reason you don't defend it is because you are probably smart enough to realize it can't be defended with logic and evidence in the real world.

Yeah, right, you keep telling yourself that nonsense..... Your every post just adds further confirmation to my points.

I have not seen you address any of the gigantic contradictions in agorism to date. Why don't you just try answering the simple questions that I and anybody else would ask of agorism. This is a place to discuss ideas so respond to the simple questions and contradictions that are apparent in agorism.

Unlike you I am interested in results. Agorist strategy by it's own contradictions can't produce the society that you advocate it will. I have demonstrated that in this thread and you and your fellow agorists have failed to explain the contradictions. So once again lets's debate and I will take my simple education against your great mind and we can see who comes out the winner.

Re: Agorism activity

IRShenchmanJon — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 21:40:14 GMT

I think the Liberty Colony and agorism are dead ends. They're both basically trying to demonstrate what is basically right to a corrupt culture that has told them that such possibilities are like the wolves at the door.

The corporations will take over, the poor will starve to death, all the animals will go extinct, health care and the roads will disappear, the DROs will become like a government, no one will be educated, everyone but CEOs will earn .01 cent an hour, pollution, Mexicans, meth addictions, terror, Chomsky said something about "hate" and Rothbardian police force monopolies for the rich, the proletarian class consciousness won't be pleased, the bourgeois class consciousness would be very pleased, central banks need to control business cycles, global warming, etc.

So there.

Re: Agorism activity

Niccolò — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:52:51 GMT

liberty student:

Not at all. It's just that you have a habit of criticizing grown men who support their own families, when you have absolutely no experience with that reality. It's easy to talk big, when you don't have to do the heavy lifting.

You're a grown "man"?

Lol.

Re: Agorism activity

liberty student — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:50:57 GMT

Not at all. It's just that you have a habit of criticizing grown men who support their own families, when you have absolutely no experience with that reality. It's easy to talk big, when you don't have to do the heavy lifting.

Re: Agorism activity

Niccolò — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:44:35 GMT

liberty student:

Niccolò:
But does it really matter what a crazy person thinks anyways?

About as much as a teenager working on his state education, and living off of someone else's labour.

Apparently, families are abolished in Libby's world.