Republidertarianazi shows off his thinking skills

[theVOID]

Is that where we are going now? So I cant point out how Libertarians and fascists are grouped up (using proof after proof)

Libertarianism calls for a small-state with individual autonomy, Fascism calls for a large authoritative state.

This alone makes the two completely incompatible, a "little big government with both limited and unlimited power" is about as logically possible as a "square circle".

because its considered a personal attack on you and Void?

When you say libertarians and republicans are Nazis you are doing no different than if someone was to post thread after thread claiming that jews eat and rape babies, If someone did that and Summer or other people of Jewish descent on this forum felt personally offended would would you object? Also, would you deny that the act of posting thread after thread about Jews raping babies was flame baiting and intentionally confrontational and disrputive? Comparing libertarians and republicans to mass murdering xenophobes is entirely the same thing.

I don't agree with Adrian that "creationists are idiots" is a good example though it certainly has elements of offence to it, someone being a creationist means they believe things to be true about the world which are demonstrably false and while the beliefs can be idiotic calling someone an idiot unequivocally is almost always both factually wrong and offensive though it's hardly hate speech to the same extent, a somewhat a more analogous example would be calling all creationists paedophiles.

I just did..I gave you a BLUNT one and you just brushed it off and started back up with the "wheres your proof?" again.

So, a fascist organisation supporting Ron Paul makes libertarians fascists?

Awesome! Obama is a communist, Democrats are part of the Phelps family, Al Gore is an environmental extremist/terrorist, Castro is a 'worker' etc etc...

But to talk to you and void about your "austrian school"? OMG, talk about an idolized economicphilosophy of GOLD!!! It is PERFECT! Scientifically tested with scientificmathematicall formulas that can predict market surges, and predict this, and that. You guys never do any wrong or make any mistakes.

Uuuuh.... wow... We already knew you barely understood what Austrian Economics is about but "economicphilosophy of GOLD" shows you are entirely ignorant of it.

AE is no more an economic philosophy of gold than keynesianism is an economic philosophy of digging ditches, it is true for both that many proponents from each 'school' advocate those specific or similar ideas, a "gold standard" (or more specifically 'sound money') in the former and "digging ditches and filling them back up" (when there is sparse economic activity) in the latter but each idea is in no way a necessary part of the ideology, let alone it's defining element - They are conclusions reached by some of the proponents in response to various economic problems, 'sound money' (either tied to material wealth or as a function of economic growth) is a proposed solution (or more astutely a preventer) to the boom/bust cycle and "Digging ditches" (increasing government activity through any potential means - the Variable G in Y = C + I + G.) is a solution to falling consumption and the 'liquidity trap' and overall output in Keynesianism.

I challenge you to an Ideological Turing Test in regards to Keynesian vs Austrian economics, I guarantee you I understand Keynesian economics far better than you understand Austrian Economics. Actually, I guarantee you I understand Keynesian economics better than you do.

So if you're interested I suggest we find third parties to administer the test.

Watch this..Im an indep Progressive, and I decided to vote for Obama

Oh, a progressive voted for Obama... Not only that but progressives are still recommending that people vote for Obama in the next presidential election over any of the potential other candidates... Wait, Just like you argued that;

1) Fascist x supported Ron Paul for president in 2012
2) Therefore, Ron Paul is a fascist

That makes Obama a progressive! We can replace the words Fascist with Progressive and Ron Paul with Obama and your argument works just as well (or just as poorly to be specific).

I put Glenn Beck in front of you guys and you are like "NO, NO, NO, He's not a Libertarian..he only says he's one! No 'true' libertarian would say some of the things he does say."

I acknowledged that Glenn Beck has said he is becoming more and more libertarian. I haven't seen any evidence of him describing himself as a libertarian beyond that, he could well be a "conservative libertarian" by his own admission, he's still nuts. I also noticed the changes in Beck's positions post libertarian-influence, namely he is no longer against gay marriage. I'm quite pleased that Beck is becoming more libertarian, as you should be, as someone who is extremely influential amongst conservatives a voice like his calling to end restrictions on same-sex marriage, scaling back the military and not punishing people for drug use would do a hell of a lot of good.

Don't get me wrong, he's still more than anything a rambling loon.

So, in the end, we have a group of "true" libertarians (Void and Adrian OBVIOUSLY being members) who hold economic policies that cannot fail, and one would only be a fool to vote other wise, and the goal post is successfully out of reach of anyone or anything possibly scoring against us 'true' libertarians.

There is a distinct difference there; libertarianism has a fairly robust set of principles attached to it and as such claims can be evaluated against said principles, progressivism only has loose connotations about objectives and values. Someone can be said to be libertarian (or not) based on a consideration of these principles, progressivism is a far more esoteric term and someone being a progressive (or not) is much more subjective.

It's roughly analogous to the following; Asking if someone is a libertarian is more like asking if a given system is an engine, while there are different engines the general concept is well defined and things can be definitively said to be engines or non-engines. Progressivism is more contextual or subjective which in general advocates little more than "change" - In a far-right nation that is liberalisation, regulation and social security, in a far-left society that is more economic freedom, decentralisation and individual responsibility, each are progressive depending on the context - there is no such dependence on context with libertarianism.