(August 4, 2011 at 10:00 pm)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:Call them libertarians if you like
No, Void, they call THEMSELVES libertarians.
Hey, Min, I already acknowledged that.
Quote: You sound just like the xtian shitwits when they start saying that anyone who disagrees with them can't be a xtian. I won't let them get away with the No True Scotsman argument and I can't let you do it either.
That's BULLSHIT Min, I never said they weren't "true libertarians" and I was, I said they are at best "conservative libertarians", that says NOTHING about them being true, it's more analogous to the mormon/catholic/calvinist factions of Christianity, by that distinction you could take a christian who takes wafers and believe they are eating the "body of Christ" and call them "Catholic" or a christian who believes we have no free will and are inherently depraved and call them "calvinists" or one who believes Jesus came to america and left some golden tablets and call them "mormon" - Just like that you could take a Libertarian who believes in public education, low regulation and individualism and call them "left-libertarians" or someone who is 'traditional' on social issues and pro-business and call them "conservative libertarians" or someone who like me who believes in as much freedom as possible both socially and economically and call them "classical liberals" - They are all generally in the "libertarian" camp of political philosophies, that was the ONLY point I was trying to make.
Quote:Here, the word does not mean what you want it to mean. And these two fuckers are calling the shots. That's the problem.
They "Call the shots", bullshit. They are two people with money who fund a specific type of ideology, they are no more authoritative on the "true" definition of libertarianism than I am or Noam Chomsky is, yet you've given them this authority over what "libertarian" means for all libertarians in America period - Who's the one committing the no true Scotsman fallacy here min? If anyone it's you.
.
