 | | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Don't think so? Think again. And is that supposed to be some kind of threat? Now who needs a lesson in diplomacy? (...) Bite me. Some people lose the right to be treated mannerly, and I think you have, IMO. -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) You're taking this further and further away from the reality of what I wrote and choosing a negative interpretation. If you can't see that, that's your problem, not mine. You could have picked so many ways to address my comment, but you chose (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Well, whenever I'm considering buying anything I always look at where the product was made. Generally, I look for the product made in the U.S.A., Japan or in Western European countries because, as far as I know, their labor laws coincide with (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian Propaganda
|
|
Here we go again. Sorry for the length, but some folks need to have facts pounded in nice and tight before they begin to comprehend. (...) Then, don't pretend to know my mind. Maybe I need to put an (s) after each statement meant to be sarcastic? (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) I haven't attacked anyone, Larry. Telling someone to "mind their tone" is hardly an attack. And I didn't call Tom's notions or opinion ridiculous or any other thing. If you want to play games and jump and nitpick what I say, twist it to mean (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) I think you need to read your own wording. "Since we all must share this one small world for the next billion years" Those are YOUR words. Do you seriously believe this? Can you be so pessimistic about our progress as to think we'll still be (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian Propaganda
|
|
(...) It is an interesting read. Thanks for the URL. (...) You have quite an attitude about this, don't you? Well, I don't have proof. What I have is hundreds of conversations on the matter and an overall impression that across demographics, most (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: McViegh is no Libertarian
|
|
(...) Maybe you should note the lack of capitalization in the word libertarian. As there is wide variety within the LP, there is even wider variety in the stances of those who could reasonably call themselves 'libertarian.' Thomas Jefferson approved (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian Propaganda
|
|
I have to dig into Matt's last post and this one in more depth... right now i have time only to say one thing... (...) This seems to be a GREAT site, thanks for digging it up, KoC (King of Cites.. er, maybe that's not the best acronym... how about (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: McViegh is no Libertarian
|
|
(...) I subscribe to Consumer Reports and I read it (ahem) religiously. More information is good. I tend to favor buying products that have more information on them. I think food labels ought to be accurate and complete. Any producer that puts a (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: McViegh is no Libertarian
|
|
(...) no definately not monolithic... we come in all shapes and sizes... :) (...) As an aside, if we as consumers wanted to have full disclosure on the ingredients of a product and/or the source of those ingredients, should the food producers (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Can you provide cites on this? (...) How successful are you at this Daniel? I try to as much as I can. I'm curious about your attempts. Reply offline if you would like. (...) I seriously thought about this when I learned LEGO was shutting down (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: McViegh is no Libertarian
|
|
(...) I don't know enough about the "veg" movement (if it is indeed monolithic, which I doubt) to say for sure. I'll say this much about my own personal feelings on the matter, which are partly derived from first principles (but not completely, (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: McViegh is no Libertarian
|
|
(...) that's a good policy.... (...) I'm curious if the "veg" movement and libertarianism are mutually exclusive? I believe you said in a previous thread that you tried to switch your diet once, so I don't think so... just wondering. -chris (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Might theoretically be simplest but I doubt it. Better: Drop the sanctions, drop restrictions on private individuals giving aid, and let his own people do it. What Bush I did to the Iraqi opposition, leading them on, then leaving them out to (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) On the attack again, Daniel? Calling something a ridiculous notion is hardly an insult, it's just a characterization of the notion itself. The very idea that someone might find fault with something you say gets to you, doesn't it? Here I (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | McViegh is no Libertarian
|
|
Snipping all but one statement away to make a key point. (...) Judge outcomes not statements... This creature is no more libertarian than Scott Arthur is. Maybe he forgot the pledge he signed about not initiating the use of force? Maybe he didn't (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: McViegh, Libertarian, and Vegans (aka What a Party!)
|
|
Wow! Truly a surrealistic reading. Hard to agree with the words of a mass-murderer but, objectively speaking, there were some interesting points brought up. Thanks, Chris. Dan (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Ridiculous? What gives with the insults, Tom? Have I done something wrong to you? Mind your tone and read it again. "Everything that has ever happened or will ever happen with mankind" as in everything we do begins here on this planet. This is (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian Propaganda
|
|
Before reading this post in reply to Christopher Weeks reply to my reply to Larry Pieniazek's original post, please read my reply to Larry's reply to my reply to his original post here: (URL) . It will help solidify all of my post here. Warning, the (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian Propaganda (was incorrectly referred to as SPAM elsewhere in the thread)
|
|
Warning! I am replying to Larry Pieniazek here! Of course, that means lots of quoted text is included to keep the context clear, and this post is a doozy! You have been warned! (...) *sniff* I feel SO special *sob* (gently wipes small tear of (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | McViegh, Libertarian, and Vegans (aka What a Party!)
|
|
The following appears in the July 2001 issue of Harper's Magazine on page 20. It's McViegh's response to a guy from PETA who asked McViegh to make a political statement by having a vegan last meal. I thought it would be interesting to post here in (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
Yeah, let's do it RIGHT - drop the sanctions, and assassinate the bastard. That's the simplest fix ;-) (...) -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) Bay Area DSMs (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Where do you get this ridiculous notion from? Are you SERIOUSLY going to tell me you think we'll never get off this planet in the next billion years? I suppose you believe we haven't really been to the moon already? (...) That isn't going to (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Seems so, according to that one report and I don't doubt for a minute that Saddam wouldn't take the money from the so-called "oil-for-food" program to build palaces and let Iraqis suffer. Even if this report were 100% true, it doesn't change (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Yes, I would agree because "willing" is the operative here. But I'm talking about "having to" situations, where prices are dictated by a dominating power rather than made by mutual, good faith agreements. I'm talking about dirty trade (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some Lego buying stats
|
|
(...) Hi again, Selcuk (sorry I don't know how to type the proper "c"!), All of the answers to your question so far have been pretty representative of the middle class (and we are probably more highly educated on Lugnet than average), but I don't (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian Propaganda (was incorrectly referred to as SPAM elsewhere in the thread)
|
|
(...) Let's stipulate that, for the sake of discussion. What can be done? Or that is, how far can the LP go? Remember that the LP is the "Party of Principle". A lot of big internal spats happen because some action or message is proposed which seems (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian Propaganda (was incorrectly referred to as SPAM elsewhere in the thread)
|
|
I have been playing too long in other branches of the tree and neglected to give this post my special once over... (...) Let's skip Waco (Chris is dealing with your misconceptions about it just fine). The general assertion is that government (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian Propaganda
|
|
(...) In a sense? A bunch of people died for no good reason and most Americans don't even care! It is way more than tragic "in a sense." (...) The kids are not the only tragedy. The adults are too. As is the fact that such a miscarriage of justice (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) I just read an interesting piece in The New Republic about the sanctions on Iraq: (URL) that the Iraqi govt. IS able to get food from other nations, but it exports it to pay for luxuries for the party elite. It supports the case that sanctions (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian Suntan
|
|
(...) I burn fairly readily, but that's not what annoys me. What annoys me is that, after burning to Crayola red one day, the next day I'm back to killer-whale-belly-white, with no transition hue. Always been that way. Dave! (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A piece of U.S. history (was: Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda))
|
|
<grinning and blushing at the same time> (...) Yeah, that's a tough one. ;-) (...) Hehe. It's Newton North High-School (NNHS), a public school. Your only problem would be the rent/house price in the town, probably. Sky-rocketing. Scary. -Shiri (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A piece of U.S. history (was: Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda))
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Shiri Dori writes: <One of the best posts I've ever seen, especially in .debate...read it, seriously!> Shiri, 1) I want to give you a high-five, but can't figure out how to do it through the computer. 2) Give me the name (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Here: (URL) C. (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) It's not that the example doesn't suit me, it's just that it's incomplete. I gave an example similar to your scenario of pricing above the prevalent retail and asked if it was fair or not under your definition. I think you need to give another (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Uh, what *did* you say about fascinating? -Shiri (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | A piece of U.S. history (was: Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda))
|
|
Whew! What a long post. I've been typing for almost an hour. So careful, great ramble ahead, and the footnotes are almost as long as the post itself. ;-) (...) Matt already found some stuff for you and all, I just wanted to say that I didn't really (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Sorry, should have said "announcing the laying off of tens of thousands of workers daily"...and I don't mean in total! Look at this from today's TechTV news: (URL) said it will take a $830 million restructuring charge, which is associated with (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Denial is a powerful thing. As I said, we agree on much more than we disagree, why focus on the points of disagreement. <snipped discussion on Toys R' Us> You asked for my opinion on fair pricing, I gave it. I'm satisfied with my opinion or (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) I think you're numbers on layoffs are a bit off... 10s of thousands of workers daily is quite a few. In Libertopia, there would certainly be no regulation of schools. Of course schools would vary all over the map as to how good an education (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Well, I can't do everything for you, but you might want to check out the book review that the cite points to: (URL) the book that review is about: "Market Education: The Unknown History", Coulson, Andrew J. (1999) ...and possibly the books (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
Define Middle Class ;-) MC varies widely depending on the COL in your area. In the vast majority of the US, I'd be considered MC from my salary. Here in Sillycon Valley, I'm far from it - I couldn't even begin to afford a house in any way. (...) -- (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian Suntan
|
|
(...) Limit that to Ukrainian. I can get a tan. Irish/German/Dutch. Of course, this is all relative, since my wife and son can sit out in the sun all day and never burn. Bruce (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Ummmm? Not sure where to go here. Let's do this: (URL) can't copy the text out of the PDF file and put it here, so you'll have to go read it yourselves. Here's the gist: In 1813, Connecticut passed law to get businesses to educate their child (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) White as snow, despite my efforts to gain a tan (curse my Irish/German/ Ukrainian blood!) but I'm only barely middle class--could I still get in? Dave! (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Um, that's not a Lar (0) I don't think, as while there ARE Doubting Thomases (1) I don't know of any Retracting Daves (2). 0 - much less a ++Lar 1 - prominent Figures of Speech 2 - and the image there is one I'd just rather not get into, er, (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Nice! Anyone can use Dave! in a sentence--the real art comes in making it appear that my ! naturally wound up at the end! (...) Well, in that case, you're a big silly doofus-head. See? I can be inflammatory, too! 8^) (I think I've over-stepped (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Well, I am not a big fan of them either, but I was referring to the National Education Association, my apologies, I figured it would be clear from context... So don't burn the wrong wrongheaded group by mistake! (or is that miss-stake?) (...) (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) I in no way, shape, or form was lumping you in with Scott. I would never do that to you, Scott is in a class all by himself. (...) Retract away, Dave! (see, I can pull a ++Lar too!) Scott seems to want to state that a predominantly white male (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) I don't refute the King's cite, but I'd be interested to know precisely what "evidence shows that majority literacy was achieved under the largely market-based systems of the early 19th century," and what the "majority" represented. If it was (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Allow me to elucidate: the LP claims that it aims to help all society, yet the overwhelming majority of LP members are middle class white males. If, as has been asserted, the LP really is (or will be at some indeterminate future time) for the (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) I pointed out the real difference between your two examples - you consistently refuse to address it. (...) The scenario in regards to Jim Crow is the state government gave you an excuse to allow the segregated busing you wanted (you not being (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Unless it was a private school, no bet. <GD&R> ++Lar (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) More important--I'd like to know where she had an excellent US History class. Not in the US, I'd wager. 8^( Dave! (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Matthew Gerber REGALLY PROCLAIMS: (...) YOU ARE the king of Cites. What a great cite. It seems to be saying that mandatory schooling didn't work. That seems to be somewhat anti-dogmatic (if you accept NEA dogma anyway). (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) I'll let your own words and posts speak for themselves and let it go at that. I'm satisfied with my characterisation. (...) Suppose they didn't do that though? Take FAO for an example... they sell well above prevailing retail and don't price (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Cool, found it! It's good to be the king! From: (URL) England and America, the evidence shows that majority literacy was achieved under the largely market-based systems of the early 19th century, and that the spread of completely tax-funded (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
But companies would want well-educated employees no matter WHERE they came from, and would most likely contribute on both the local AND national level. For a simple, real world example, look at Silicon Valley as a whole - finding qualified (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Here's info for England: (URL) Education Act for England (one for Scotland followed soon after) established a national system of primary schools for children up to age 12; in 1880 attendance at primary school was made mandatory." I can't find (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) True dat... but we are trying very hard to establish that not everyone currently unhappy with the U.S. government is necessarily libertarian and you ain't helping. :-) ++Lar (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Um, who would that be? We don't have any of *those* here, do we? :-) PS, I think you spelled absorption wrong. :-) ++Lar (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Pardon me, but are you describing me or YOU here?! I think you're a bit confused, you just described several aspects of your on-line self in that paragraph. Get a grip on reality, my friend, and realize that you mostly stir up trouble here and (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Scott, Some of your inferences are going beyond asinine. I'll stop there, because all I'll do is give you the satisfaction of getting a rise out of someone, which is all you seem to want to do here. If you have a middle name, you should change (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) No problem. I wouldn't know myself, if I hadn't just ended a year with an excellent U.S History class. :-) My teachers, both this year and last, were really amazing and I doubt I will forget what I learned any time soon. (...) Hmmm. Very good (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) This isn't a cite, but I'd heard the same thing and was reluctant to voice it, since I couldn't document it. And what did I say about fascinating?! Dave! (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) So what you are saying is that someone of one ethnicity can't think up ideas that benefit people outside of that ethnicity? Scott, THINK about what you type before you do so, this is making you look extremely stupid. (...) You haven't (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Libertarian National Socialist Green Party (was Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda))
|
|
And how does this in ANY way make the Libertarian Party like the LNSGP? Taking a splinter group (hell, I wouldn't even call this a splinter group of the LP) and making the assumption that the main party is like the splinter group is so colossally (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Fascinating! Do you have a cite for that? Should be interesting reading. ++Lar (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) That's not exactly true. It may not be mustering votes, but like I said, it doesn't have to win elections, per se. Peace and freedom ARE winning. So I can feel disenfranchised for my own reasons. (...) Preventing racism and requiring it are (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) \ (...) Water vapor. Bruce (we'll skip the dicussion on light absorbtion and leave it for some anal-retentive type) :-) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Four messages back from the one I'm typing now. You haven't seen a demonstration of how this is detrimental?!? Did you miss the reasons for the civil rights movement? Ensuing riots in reaction to racism? I pointed out earlier that you get that (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Oh, I'm able, all right. I could just go to the UN site or wherever and quote demographics. I'm just unwilling to continue to spar with you about the assertion that LUGNET is demographically more white and more male than the norm because it's (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Might have missed the conclusion of that thread if it was in a different thread but haven't seen a demonstration of how this is actually detrimental (to anyone other than the business owner foolish enough to do it) yet. (...) (URL) queen of (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Doubt away, Thomas. You'd be wrong, though, if you thought that the LP was in favor of government mandated segregation. (...) Just giving off the cuff examples of some classes of people or organizations that might benefit from change but are (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes: <concern for long term viability under demographic skewing> Fair enough. However the long term viability of the LP as a party isn't that important to me, per se. While I am quite ready to throw (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) No, I'm just alluding to the fact that certain individuals are attracted to certain types of groups. Nothing more. (...) I can't debate anything regarding the LP. I'm largely ignorant to it's political agenda and demographic, which seem to be (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Thanks - I just never connect the initials to the group. :-) (...) It's a pretty good analogy that isn't quite right. Libertarians tend to be white, male, and middle-to-upper-middle class. That isn't rich. Shouldn't the rich be Libertarians if (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Dave, you just made my day. ;-) Gotta run! -Shiri (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Shiri, you're a woman--you have no place in a discussion of white male rule. Take off your shoes and return to the kitchen, please. (the preceding draconian chauvinism was brought to us on the basis that Shiri has repeatedly demonstrated her (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
