 | | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) This is one of my problems with the Libertarian Party. All that sounded good on paper. I like it...in theory. Unfortunately, it's doubtful that it will happen in reality. Businesses are all too often focused on the *now*, the next quarter, (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
<snip> (...) Nitpicking here - that's not true. The public school system and the requirement to attend it were formed in the late 19th century. The general public wanted kids out of the cheap working force, because they were depressing wages for (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian Propaganda (was incorrectly referred to as SPAM)
|
|
(...) Hey, you're making fun of my pseudo-seriousness! Now *I'm* disenfranchised! Dave! (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Well no wonder you feel disenfranchised - the American people rejected Dubya both on a majority and plurality base, and he's still the president. :-( But on a greater level, you feel disenfranchised because the political philosophy you support (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian Propaganda (was incorrectly referred to as SPAM)
|
|
(...) Yes. The world at large not taking LUGNETters opinions into account! The very idea. :-) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) "Them" who? The world at large? I'm not sure what you're referring to. Dave! (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) The world is changing, regardless, though. Rather arrogant of them, eh, not to care what conclusions we come to here? Peace and freedom, in general, are winning. ++Lar (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) That's not a bad assessment, but I think it applies more at the national level than at the level of any sub-national business or industry. Ploughed ground, to be sure, but to date the Libertopian argument hasn't been convincingly put forth. (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Thanks! It was the neutral, non-partisan summation that confused me. 8^) Dave! (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) This is ploughed ground, but I'll revisit it. First, I think there would be a good amount of support for schools for the underpriviledged. In fact, in a free market, companies ought to want to support schools for all. Why? The more educated (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) One thing that I saw as interesting, though I haven't explored the meaning completely, but the chair of the North Carolina Libertarian Party is a woman. She was also their candidate for governor. Of course in the picture on this page: (URL) (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Ruby Ridge. (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) A random thought just jumped into my head... Where would the civil rights movement be had the segregationist states NOT used the National Guard to attempt to quell the demonstations? Recently (actually on my way to the April Baylug meeting), I (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) I think you have some issues here you need to deal with. Everything is challenges, fighting, giving inches, not being wrong. No inclusivness, no common ground, no exploration of issues. Your idea of agreeing is that everyone you talk to agree (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) To which case are you alluding? Dave! (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) But it's not simply of matter of whether or not a restaurant will choose to serve "coloreds:" Businesses will be able to choose whether or not to hire people on basis of any bigoted notion they can think of. Further, because it can be quite (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) On the topic of disenfranchisement... I feel pretty disenfranchised. Bush can take his 600 bucks and stick it. (...) "No person or corporation shall require any white female nurse to nurse in wards or rooms in hospitals, either public or (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Once again, here's another one of your little challenges, Larry. You don't say whether you agree or not, you just throw out some more bullsh*t questions to fish for another fight. If you DON'T AGREE that there are ethics in business and (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) *Some* did. Note the first one listed here: (URL) I'm sure you know that businesses that *wanted* to discriminate were behind those laws - typifying all businesses in these states as innocent victims isn't exactly accurate. My point was that (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Oh, me too. I just don't see it as following from allowing (not requiring) businesses (with no barriers to entry) to choose who to serve. Jim Crow laws REQUIRED businesses to discriminate. ++Lar (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
