"Freedom" thread or something

dr wu23 wrote: I think  those who write for tv or film drama understand politics or social conditions as well as anyone out there,

Really?  Really?

dr wu23 wrote: Look....the bottom line is that any type of real libertarianism is a pipe dream. Ain't never gonna happen because The Powers That Be like things the way they are....period.

The improbability of the drastic reduction or abolition of the power of the state does not diminish the necessity of striving towards the same.  Just because reaching an ideal is improbable does not mean we should not pursue it, for we strive to form the real in the image of the ideal even though the ideal may never be fully realized.

dr wu23 wrote: Ambient Hurricanes wrote: dr wu23 wrote: I think  those who write for tv or film drama understand politics or social conditions as well as anyone out there, Really?  Really? dr wu23 wrote: Look....the bottom line is that any type of real libertarianism is a pipe dream. Ain't never gonna happen because The Powers That Be like things the way they are....period. The improbability of the drastic reduction or abolition of the power of the state does not diminish the necessity of striving towards the same.  Just because reaching an ideal is improbable does not mean we should not pursue it, for we strive to form the real in the image of the ideal even though the ideal may never be fully realized. Really..? Yes...certainly as well as a 19 year old from Drury University or do you think they aren't educated in the same things the rest of us are? Strive all you want...it makes one feel better about themselves.

You would do well to check your assumptions at the door before having a discussion with me.  If you think you're debating with a know-nothing party-happy college student, you're in for a nasty surprise.

I have no idea how informed any particular screenwriter is about politics (probably some are informed and some not) but it makes no sense to formulate an argument based on a TV show and to appeal to the authority of a screenwriter whose political credentials you know absolutely nothing about.  At the very least the libertarians here have read about and considered these issues and pretty well know what they're talking about. 

The point isn't to feel better about yourself, the point is the pursuit of truth and freedom.

dr wu23 wrote: Ambient Hurricanes wrote: dr wu23 wrote: Ambient Hurricanes wrote: dr wu23 wrote: I think  those who write for tv or film drama understand politics or social conditions as well as anyone out there, Really?  Really? dr wu23 wrote: Look....the bottom line is that any type of real libertarianism is a pipe dream. Ain't never gonna happen because The Powers That Be like things the way they are....period. The improbability of the drastic reduction or abolition of the power of the state does not diminish the necessity of striving towards the same.  Just because reaching an ideal is improbable does not mean we should not pursue it, for we strive to form the real in the image of the ideal even though the ideal may never be fully realized. Really..? Yes...certainly as well as a 19 year old from Drury University or do you think they aren't educated in the same things the rest of us are? Strive all you want...it makes one feel better about themselves. You would do well to check your assumptions at the door before having a discussion with me.  If you think you're debating with a know-nothing party-happy college student, you're in for a nasty surprise. I have no idea how informed any particular screenwriter is about politics (probably some are informed and some not) but it makes no sense to formulate an argument based on a TV show and to appeal to the authority of a screenwriter whose political credentials you know absolutely nothing about.  At the very least the libertarians here have read about and considered these issues and pretty well know what they're talking about.  The point isn't to feel better about yourself, the point is the pursuit of truth and freedom. No assumptions just implying that at nineteen one has a lot to still learn, but you certainly were ready with an assumption when you asked 'really' in a suggestive manner. Nice to see you agreed that some are at least informed...and probably better than you and I at times on various topics. And nothing can surprise me anymore at my age. The pursuit of truth and freedom.....wow......I thought like that when I was 19...and in college.

Since you seem intent on not answering any of my arguments and instead merely making condescending remarks about my age, I'm done discussing with you unless you actually have something good to say.  I'm not going to waste my time with superfluous appeals to ethos when there's plenty of rational conversation to go around.

dr wu23 wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: dr wu23 wrote: humans are basically a nasty lot when left unregulated. This is said a lot, but it has never actually been shown. Are you kidding.....?

Did that seem funny in any way?

Equality 7-2521 wrote: dr wu23 wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: dr wu23 wrote: humans are basically a nasty lot when left unregulated. This is said a lot, but it has never actually been shown. Are you kidding.....? Did that seem funny in any way?

Again..are you kidding..?Any chance they get people will act up when no one is looking or controlling what they do...especially when all hell breaks loose and no one is there to stop them.

dr wu23 wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: dr wu23 wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: dr wu23 wrote: humans are basically a nasty lot when left unregulated. This is said a lot, but it has never actually been shown. Are you kidding.....? Did that seem funny in any way? Again..are you kidding..?Any chance they get people will act up when no one is looking or controlling what they do...especially when all hell breaks loose and no one is there to stop them. that was the point.

My point is that no, that's not the case. And you have nothing to support your position. Humans have no default state they revert to in absence of our arbitrary definitions of authority.

A lot of this really depends on how you define your terms.  For example, if you want to argue that humans are fundamentally evil, and by that you mean that they are hell-bent on murdering, raping, and stealing from each other, you're going to get annihilated in debate by the sheer force of common sense.  But if by "fundamentally evil" you mean that humans are by nature primarily self-interested and lost in their own self-importance, then that's quite a bit more feasible.  The same kind of thing goes for any other position on the issue.

dr wu23 wrote: Nothing to support it....what planet are you living on? Try reading the newspaper once in a while....the world is constantly at each others throat and that's with govts in place.

A rational one.


Edited by Equality 7-2521 - January 26 2014 at 21:11

Nobody is so interested in you or your views that is going to spend 20 minutes of his life watching a video to learn what you think. If you wants us to know, tell us yourself. 

Time to resurrect this thread to ask a question to the libertarians here: what do you feel about mergers like the one that is possibly going to happen between Comcast and Time Warner, thus creating a mega-monster company with a semi-monopoly of one industry? I guess your preference for the market to be let free and government not to intervene will make you say "if they want, why would it bother me?" But this is basically reducing options for people, this is basically making sure one single company can do whatever it wants in prices, offers and everything without any relevant competition that would be able to stop her from abusing its power. Isn't this a horrendous market consequence that can be addressed? I know libertarianism asks for anti-trust laws to be repelled, but I don't really see how this can be supported in the benefits of anyone but Comcast shareholders...