цитата дня

[ded_maxim]

There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.

Comments

[nnikif.livejournal.com]

You're like Andrea Dworkin arguing that all sexual acts between men and women are rape.
That makes you hard to take seriously.

Again, I'm not arguing from my point of view, I'm arguing from the extreme libertarian's point of view. And yes, I believe that extreme libertarianism is just as crazy as Dworkin's feminism.

Since we live in America, "constitution talk" is relevant to any conversation on how our government should be set up.

First, I don't live in America. Second, we were talking about libertarian principles, not about constitution. Making a particular constitution a part of discussion about general principles is like talking about the taste of the apples when discussing the abstract physical problem involving the falling apple.

Your point about contracts is well made, but it has no relevance to the essential fact: there's nothing libertarian and capitalistic about a standing army. In my opinion, this is one of the proofs of the fact that perfectly libertarian society is pure fantasy. It's only good as a philosophical idea, a symbol to have in mind when judging the actual political reality.
Among other things, libertarianism is utterly undemocratic: if the government is to have no power, the votes cast in the elections become meaningless.

P.S. Yes it's me on the userpic, some three years ago. Why?

[wsobchak.livejournal.com]

Oh, so you're creating a strawman argument. Well, that's cool. Why not go all the way and say that in the extreme libertarian's point of view, if you see somebody wheeling a baby past you and you're feeling hungry, you have the right to go ahead and eat that baby?

First of all, since you live in Russia, don't you have bigger things to worry about on the political front that libertarians in America? Just saying...Second, since I don't live in a vacuum, the constitution is germane to my consideration of which political principles I'd like to see enacted on my block.

Since libertarianism and capitalism are, as far as I know, constructed with the personal liberty of all individuals as the highest goal (and not, as you seem to believe, with the abolition of government,) their personal liberty from foreign invasion and local oppression must be guaranteed. There is, right now, no feasible way to guarantee the inviolateness of national borders and rule of law beyond a military and law enforcement. If in the future there is a better way, I'll be all for it. Until then, working in the military or in law enforcement strike me as honorable options which do not conflict with the principle of personal liberty as paramount. By the way, this also answers your objection about the conflict of libertarianism and democracy. As long as the government has a function, the people need a mechanism to control it, which democracy provides.

P.S. I was wondering if you looked as much like an arrogant douche as you sound.

[nnikif.livejournal.com]

man, i actually didn't go ad hominem here, even if you could read my words that way.
i don't agree with your arguments, but they are generally intellectually sound. going for a total FAIL with your "P.S." is really not worth you.

[wsobchak.livejournal.com]

don't go breaking my heart-oh, don't go breaking my heaaart!

[nnikif.livejournal.com]

You know, Dude, I myself dabbled in pacifism once. Not in 'Nam of course.

[wsobchak.livejournal.com]

say what you will about the tenets of National Socialism, dude, at least it's an ethos.

[ded-maxim.livejournal.com]

Dude, that last bit was completely uncalled for.