| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > > > LP POINT 1
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Larry,
> > > > Can you please show me how wrong I am?
> > > >
> > > > Scott A
> > > >
> > > > From:
> > > > http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=7427
> > > >
> > > > =+=
> > > > > > I liked this, it pretty much sums up my view of the LP:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Libertarians and their "I've got mine, Jack" philosphy are people who were
> > > > > > born on third base and think they've hit life's triple. In America's
> > > > > > egalitarian society it should surprise no one this cramped, neo-Victorian
> > > > > > philosophy has not caught on.
> > > > > > Russell Sadler, commentator, Jefferson Public Radio in Ashland, Oregon
> > > > >
> > > > > There are so many fallacies, errors, and ad hominem attacks in this one,
> > > > > it's hard to know where to begin. Is it your point, though? Is it the one
> > > > > you want to pick? It's pretty weak.
> > > >
> > > > So weak that you will not answer it? Show me this guy is wrong. Show me what
> > > > the support for LP is. Show me it is a representative cross section of the
> > > > US public.
> > >
> > > Clearly state the question, please, along with your assumptions.
> > >
> > > In the absence, though...
> > >
> > > I've never claimed that the LP has massive support among the voting populace
> > > as a political party.
> >
> > That is not the point of my point:
> >
> > "Show me it is a representative cross section of the US public."
> >
> > I'm interested in breadth - not depth. Show me that all socio-economic
> > groups support the LP in a broadly representative manner - show me it is not
> > weighted towards "people who were born on third base and think they've hit
> > life's triple" as you asserted.
>
> I'm not sure what that phrase means, exactly. It seems pejorative and seems
> to (along with phrases like "cramped, Victorian") show the speaker's bias
> and tendency to want to use ridicule instead of critical thinking. But I
> don't believe I claimed the LP is supported broadly by "all socioeconomic
> groups". Why would you expect it to be?
The libertarian claim to benefit all society... not just the poperty owning
part of it.
> What matters to us is that
> libertarian ideas (small l) are catching on. We don't have to win elections
> to achieve that. We don't even have to get support from *all* the groups,
> especially not the socioeconomic groups who are (since they were free
> riding) going to be worse off, until they realise that there are no free >goods.
So you have to be cruel to be kind... I see. So, how long would it take? How
many would die? How much would crime rise by an the short term?
>
> > What you almost outpoll Buchanan easily? That implies you beat him? :)
>
> Snipe.
No Larry, a jest :)
Scott A
>
> > > What I *have* said is that small l libertarian ideas are on the ascendency,
> > > in the main, world wide. Do you dispute that point? Do you dispute that many
> > > countries in the world are moving in the direction of more personal and more
> > > economic freedom?
> >
> > Yep, I read that Chilli is a prime example of your principles.
>
> Snipe.
Nope, a fact. Chilli and New-Zealand are best examples of it... along with
medieval Iceland(!). Do your research Larry.
Scott A
>
> Do you or do you not agree that the world is moving in the direction of more
> personal freedom and more economic freedom?
Tell that to starving kids in the developing world... I'm sure that'll chear
them up.
Scott A
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: LP POINT 1
|
| "Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message news:G4p2uy.KL2@lugnet.com... (...) who were (...) America's (...) neo-Victorian (...) Oregon (...) one, (...) the one (...) me what (...) the (...) populace (...) not (...) hit (...) seems (...) (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: LP POINT 1
|
| Repeating the original cite and with much snippage of multiple quotes, irrelevancy, signatures, etc (the interested reader knows how to follow references upwards, or should), as always: (...) I'll repeat my analysis of this theme (that (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
| (...) I'm not sure what that phrase means, exactly. It seems pejorative and seems to (along with phrases like "cramped, Victorian") show the speaker's bias and tendency to want to use ridicule instead of critical thinking. But I don't believe I (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
78 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
