Republidertarianazi shows off his thinking skills

[theVOID]

Yet everytime I read about Fascism I cant tell where the state ends and corporations begin. They blend so well into each other.

Which is entirely distinct from free markets, a separation of state and industry.

It also fits with the Libertarian method in the states "vote economic freedom first, then YOU will get social freedom".

Oh, you've got sources for that "method" from libertarian thinkers do you?

You see, the Libertarians in the state only care for economic freedom. Once they are rich, they can AFFORD their social freedom.

And yet most libertarians, like any other social group, aren't rich... There are many more rich people who support conservative and liberal political movements than libertarian ones.

Do they want to give up their cushy lawyer job prosecuting drug offenders? FUCK NO!

Do you think prosecutors have a choice based on their own political leanings? No, they follow the directives of the legislators. As if you really expect a DA who is personally for individual sovereignty wouldn't take to court a person arrested by the police for drug possession...

They will bump their cocaine lines and prosecute coke users at the same time. THAT, is the libertarian idea in the states. Freedom for ME!

I'm sure there are some prosecutors who use cocaine and other substances that they prosecute, there are hypocrites in all walks of life, but have you got any evidence that libertarian leaning prosecutors are more likely to use cocaine than other prosecutors?

And in my view it's none of my business who does what with their own body, that includes using drugs. I frown upon heroin, cocaine and other addictive substances and have many a time persuaded people not to use them, I've also helped a number of people get clean from addiction but if people do chose to use these substances it's their own decision and I have no moral authority to seize their property or imprison them for it. Do you believe you have a moral authority to punish people for choices they freely make with their own bodies in cases where the rights of no other people were violated?

I havent seen a single libertarian choose ranks with social Progressives.

No? You haven't heard of Noam Chomsky and the myriad of other left-libertarians then?

Because social freedom isnt profitable.

Tell that to some of the ultra-rich defence attorneys out there.

Reach for them straws..reach and reach and reach for them..just a bit closer..
Jews eat and "rape" babies? Me? No.

Anyone who is everyone knows that Jews sacrifice christian babies to satan.

So you actually deny that calling all republicans and libertarians jew-murdering tyrants is in principle the same as calling all jews or africans paedophiles? For what reason?

Watch Void as his libertarian "social liberties" melt down from "everyone deserves social freedom" to "I have power and you are offending me".

You do have social freedoms, you also have the freedom not to belong to any organisation with policies you do not agree with. The difference is that people do not have the freedom to disassociate from the state.

Shall me and you go through the site and rate up everyones warning meter for calling creationists idiots? Adrian says its equivalent.

It's up to the members in question to report the posts. If someone is being constantly attacked and feels the need to report it we will give (and have on plenty of occasions given) written and formal warnings for it. Creationists are just as free to make use of the report system as everyone else.

WOW...look at all of those bullshit equations.

I agree, they ARE bullshit equations, sadly for you those bullshit equations are the very backbone of the theory and reason behind the stimulus spending (the attempt to increase economic output) that YOU support. You do support stimulus spending, don't you?

You cant predict economies.

Is that intended to be an absolute statement, or are you speaking in general? You can certainly predict to some extent the impact of the actions on some actors on the actions of other actors, that is the primary concern of AE, the methodology of which is known as Praxeology. It is in contrast those whom are not of the AE train of thought who believe they can effectively predict and manipulate the economy, it is the entire idea behind the vast majority of contemporary mainstream economics - Everything from Quantitative Easing to setting interest rates to deficit spending to regulations that seek to move economic momentum into other sectors - All of these features are not ones advocated by AE but rather by the opposing schools of though.

http://www.econmacro.com/keynesian/simpl..._model.htm

You are 180 degrees backwards on this.

Where exactly do you place "human greed and corruption" into that equation?

I don't, you'd have to ask Paul Krugman or Ben Bernanke how they factor it in.

Yeah..I thought so.

Again, you are entirely backwards, AE does not contain these pithy assumptions and equations.

..and you say you are influenced by anarchist ideas.

What part of something I have said (and not what you just falsely assumed to be my position) would make you think that I am not influenced by Anarchists?

As far as your test, I dont give a shit about it.

More like you won't acknowledge how little you understand of that which you are criticising.

What makes you think I place so much faith into Keynesian economics? Because I say I am a mixed economist?

Do you know how useless a term like "mixed economist" is to describe an economic philosophy? Mixed economics is everything between Communism (all state) to anarchism (no-state). All liberals, libertarians, progressives, conservatives, fascists, monetarists etc are to one extent or another "mixed economists".

I only assume you are a keynesian (knowingly or not) because every single piece of economic rhetoric you produce is exactly what I would find written by the likes of Keynes, Krugman and the like. I'm not aware of a single thing you've said that would be contrary to ideas espoused by those of the keynesian school, though if I'm mistaken please do correct me and provide examples.

LMFAO! They have turned it into a fascist system, as always "privatise the profits, socialise the loses".

Firstly, libertarians almost unanimously (as one of the defining elements of libertarian/anarcho-capitalist economics) call for the abolition of corporate welfare. Look at the work of anyone from Mises to Hayek to Rothbard to Schiff to Rockwell and you will see all of them on multiple occasions calling for the state to let failing businesses fail. It is a very different school of thought that proposes such intervention.

Secondly, fascism calls for all economic activity to be in the national interest and while fascists would typically call for the rescuing of failing assets they definitively DO NOT allow private interests to act as they like and keep the proceeds, they have regulation specifically designed to direct economic activity into that which the state sees as benefiting the national interest. I have also never seen a single fascist calling for fully private profits, here is a quote from the American fascist movement that you yourself have so promptly called upon as a definitive representation of fascist ideas;

"Though private property and free trade must be upheld and defended, business ultimately serves the greater good of the state, and must be guided towards JUST and NOBLE purposes."

http://www.americanfascistmovement.com/platform.html

You will also notice on that page many of the things they say they are NOT, including;

"CAPITALISM OR COMMUNISM:

Both Capitalism and Communism are materialist systems that promote degeneracy and crush the human spirit. They consider nothing but man's basest instincts, but man cannot live on peace, land and bread alone."

Fascists are ANTI-CAPITALISM and (most) libertarians promote FREE MARKETS. Those two ideas are mutually exclusive.

The rest of your post is you pointing out the mistakes that I willingly admitted, all the time still brushing the superman cape of your libertarian utopia and not admiting a single mistake of your own..as always.

I call for no utopia, I have no desire to see society structured to suit my preferences other than via persuasion. As long as each person is free to pursue their own goals, and so long as they do not interfere with the rights of others in the process, they are free to do whatever they please in my view, whether or not that works towards my ideal of a modern high-tech society full of well educated atheists, art and culture.

There is no utopia. there is no inherent economic or social model. Being a fan of anarchy, you should know this.

Can you find a single instance where I said there was? I have repeatedly called for a free and voluntary society with government only as needed to protect the rights of the citizenship and those who are utterly incapable of caring for themselves. Hell, I even support some level of public healthcare for the same reason that if we assume a police force has a moral authority to protect the rights of people, some government healthcare is needed to help protect people's right to their life.

I also make the distinction between adults and children, such that children cannot be held responsible for themselves, nor can they be held responsible for the failures of their parents, thus I support providing all children with adequate care and education, and since it is a burden on the taxpayer, through the most cost effective means - I'm even partial to an argument for public schooling for low-income families in this respect.