Iraqis Went to the Polls & Saddam Goes on Trial

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Hell, you already know I don't go in lockstep with Paul Ireland -- the Non-Aggression principle will be shown to be not only useless (and only likely to be in force with an expansion of gov't power in any case, to enforce it) -- and moot, as antilibertarian regimes can be relied upon to initiate the aggression in any case (But why allow them the first punch? It might be overly effective, and kill you if you're the one trying to make libertarianism in the places that need it most.), but worse than.

The Non-Aggression principle gets even worse when you note it causes people to allow something as antilibertarian as a totalitarian to exist -- in the name of Libertarianism. There seems to me something VERY wrong with that picture. I doubt I'm the only one.

Also, I simply never credit conspiracist thinking, which is the usual failing of those determined to distrust the Fed in all things. You can be strengthened against the temptations of conspiracy theory's frustrated-romantic viewpoint by reading Why People Believe Weird Things, available in softback. Conspiracy theory fails in being too complex an explanation: it attributes to malice what can be more simply explained by stupidity, either temporary or ongoing. The most recent case in point is Louis Farrakhan and the New Orleans levees. As for the other NOI leaders who've chorused Farrakhan's view -- well, they know what they need to do to keep receiving their paychecks, don't they? Quite the nest of bigots -- "You've got to be carefully taught..." -- South Pacific

[Tonchi]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

...Why People Believe Weird Things...

I believe that will instead be the title of the textbook study of Jr.'s "reign" which history students will refer to fifty years from now.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Hell, you already know I don't go in lockstep with Paul Ireland -- the Non-Aggression principle will be shown to be not only useless (and only likely to be in force with an expansion of gov't power in any case, to enforce it) -- and moot, as antilibertarian regimes can be relied upon to initiate the aggression in any case (But why allow them the first punch? It might be overly effective, and kill you if you're the one trying to make libertarianism in the places that need it most.), but worse than.

The Non-Aggression principle gets even worse when you note it causes people to allow something as antilibertarian as a totalitarian to exist -- in the name of Libertarianism. There seems to me something VERY wrong with that picture. I doubt I'm the only one.

Also, I simply never credit conspiracist thinking, which is the usual failing of those determined to distrust the Fed in all things. You can be strengthened against the temptations of conspiracy theory's frustrated-romantic viewpoint by reading Why People Believe Weird Things, available in softback. Conspiracy theory fails in being too complex an explanation: it attributes to malice what can be more simply explained by stupidity, either temporary or ongoing. The most recent case in point is Louis Farrakhan and the New Orleans levees. As for the other NOI leaders who've chorused Farrakhan's view -- well, they know what they need to do to keep receiving their paychecks, don't they? Quite the nest of bigots -- "You've got to be carefully taught..." -- South Pacific

It's not a matter of walking "lockstep" with actual libertarians such as myself, it's that you aren't a libertarian at all. The non-aggression principle does not invite aggression, and it does not mean you can't use aggression in your own defense. It just means you can't use it against those who have not used it against you. Your so-called thoughts, are laughable.

You also say that the non-aggression principle fails because it "allows" totalitarianism to exist. You're too dim to realize that it's not our place to "allow" or "disallow" any form of government to exist. You're too clueless to realize America is a well wisher of freedom and liberty to all, but the vindicator only of our own.

You're a fool, not a libertarian.