Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Libertarian populism is bunk


  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

#31    Norbert Dentressangle

Norbert Dentressangle

    Fat and complacent

  • Member
  • 25,885 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tanybwlch

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 13 July 2013 - 06:55 AM

View PostAlmagest, on 13 July 2013 - 02:36 AM, said:

For such a 'smart' and 'logical' political party, the Libertarians love to use youtube links and image macros instead of actual arguments.
This is what I've often said. It would be nice to have a handy brief summary of what their views and policies are in various pertinent areas, rather than just lots of cartoons and videos of people Talking. I'm afraid I have a very limited patience threshold with people Talking.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#32    Norbert Dentressangle

Norbert Dentressangle

    Fat and complacent

  • Member
  • 25,885 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tanybwlch

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 13 July 2013 - 06:55 AM

<insert video of someone talking>

Edited by Colonel Rhuairidh, 13 July 2013 - 06:56 AM.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#33    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,611 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 13 July 2013 - 07:26 AM

Quote

A nation without honour will sooner or later lose its freedom and independence. This is in accordance with the ruling of a higher justice, for a generation of poltroons is not entitled to freedom. He who would be a slave cannot have honour; for such honour would soon become an object of general scorn.

Do you agree with the above quote? Read on to see who wrote it.




If the posters of the cartoons are suited for intellectual conversation they should use that ability and steer away from the 4chan-eque tactics.

Whatever the case the following quotes below are an excellent summary. It is propaganda, no, not the dirty word meant to fool others where the posters of it do not believe what they are pushing out.

Propaganda, the type the poster believes themselves. German propaganda to their own citizens during the war was believed by the higher ups. It was a message they approved of themselves for themselves.

That type of propaganda does have a purpose, it is meant for a certain demographic.

Guess who wrote the following?

Quote

The second question of decisive importance is this: To whom should propaganda be made to appeal? To the educated intellectual classes? Or to the less intellectual?

Propaganda must always address itself to the broad masses of the people. For the intellectual classes, or what are called the intellectual classes to-day, propaganda is not suited, but only scientific exposition. Propaganda has as little to do with science as an advertisement poster has to do with art, as far as concerns the form in which it presents its message.

Quote

The blase intellectuals are always the first to criticize propaganda, or rather its message, because this appears to them to be outmoded and trivial.

http://gutenberg.net...s02/0200601.txt


Unfortunately this is the internet so we will just have to deal with "internet culture".

Edited by The world needs you, 13 July 2013 - 08:13 AM.


#34    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,611 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 13 July 2013 - 07:43 AM

View Postspartan max2, on 13 July 2013 - 06:13 AM, said:

yes because using various sources and mediums to explain our views must not be a "smart" or "logical" thing. :whistle:

We have arguments, people just have to bother to listen.

Plus im pretty sure those links and images have points they make, some could even go as far to say that those points are part of the "actual argument', just saying.

and on a unimportant note a party with lots of young people tend to like the internet.

Libertarianism is doomed if it is truly populated by young people who "tend to like the internet" if that is code for turning the forums into an image board.

I believe young people are not all like that, the internet is more than that, and that libertarianism has a future beyond that.

Cartoons injected into what should be a serious discussion are the equivalent of 1337 and txtspk.

It might seem cool to some but is not going to be taken seriously by others.

Edited by The world needs you, 13 July 2013 - 07:44 AM.


#35    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,625 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 13 July 2013 - 07:43 AM

I think you have the idea that "propaganda" is stuff you don't like while sincere discussion is stuff you like.  My definition is that propaganda is the use of tactics other than logic and argument.  Cartoons and music and all the logical fallacies and bandwagoning and quotations from famous people and cherry picking and card stacking and insults (both the ad hominem type and the more common types) and all the appeals to babies and puppies and grandmothers and of course to God are all propaganda.  One good test is to see whether it rhymes.


#36    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,611 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 13 July 2013 - 07:50 AM

View PostFrank Merton, on 13 July 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

I think you have the idea that "propaganda" is stuff you don't like while sincere discussion is stuff you like.  My definition is that propaganda is the use of tactics other than logic and argument.  Cartoons and music and all the logical fallacies and bandwagoning and quotations from famous people and cherry picking and card stacking and insults (both the ad hominem type and the more common types) and all the appeals to babies and puppies and grandmothers and of course to God are all propaganda.  One good test is to see whether it rhymes.

Propaganda in this instance are cartoons for mass appeal. Even if I liked the message of the cartoon the format would still be disapproved of. Sincere discussion is never cartoons.

In either case Almagest nailed it when he stated, "For such a 'smart' and 'logical' political party, the Libertarians love to use youtube links and image macros instead of actual arguments."

It just happens only one side here ever posts cartoons or they do so more than others. Your litmus test of "if it rhymes" is also a way to tell if it is propaganda using the definition provided in the Mein Kampf quotes.

Cartoons are trivial.

Edited by The world needs you, 13 July 2013 - 07:54 AM.


#37    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,625 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 13 July 2013 - 07:59 AM

The official propaganda produced by the propaganda ministry here is embarrassing in its primitiveness -- stick figures showing how we shouldn't smoke or do drugs or fail to wear a helmet on a motorbike or fail to wear a condom.

Next to these are the slick professional ads put out by Pepsi and Pizza Hut and so on.  I think the former work better for the very reason of their sincerity.


#38    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,611 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 13 July 2013 - 08:09 AM

Stick figure propaganda sounds as if it would be most effective due to the simplicity. The simpler the better in fact when it comes to that sort of thing.

Comics are also a favorite form such as the Jack Chick tracts in Christian propaganda.




Also our fellow forum libertarians have proven to be intelligent and able to write eloquently when they choose to so do not mistake the earlier posts as condemnation of their intelligence instead of the behavior.

In fact it appears only as a lazy habit some can get into to begin posting images and use simple attack phrases instead of a more thorough arguments.

The cartoons and things like "lol FAIL" as a whole post can be written off as "internet behavior" making it easy to fit in many places online.

Still, they are capable of so much more than internet memes and the like.

Lowest common denominator...

Edited by The world needs you, 13 July 2013 - 08:12 AM.


#39    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,611 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 13 July 2013 - 08:53 AM

Could someone tell us what has changed with libertarianism in regards to the first paragraph in bold below from when it was first written in 1965 until now? Does it still seem the same? Why has it not grown?

Quote

The average American is not likely to have heard of the Liber­tarian movement or what it rep­resents and seeks to achieve. But, it seems to be clearly out of its embryo stage, prepared to exert an increasing influence.

—snip

http://bit.ly/1b94NX8


I wish books still only cost $2.00.

Now here is some advice from the same article written by Alexander Evanoff in 1965.

Quote

Five Booby Traps

In the first chapter of Liber­tarian Leadership are listed five erroneous approaches toward the objective of freedom which Lib­ertarians must avoid:
  • The belief that freedom can be obtained by uncovering card-carrying communists. This posi­tion seems to hold that our ills originate in Moscow. But com­munism originates as much in the minds of the American people as in any other and is a world-wide phenomenon.
  • There are those who believe that loss of freedom stems from what is called "the ignorant mass­es" and that the solution is sim­ply to teach the man in the street that there is no such thing as "free lunch or some other such simplicity that can be grasped as he passes a bulletin board or drowsily reads baby-talk literature in a barber chair."
  • There is a considerable num­ber who would offer political ac­tion as their highest bid for free­dom. Organize "right down to the precinct level" and elect "the right people" to public office. This is futile under present circum­stances, as if freedom could be had by activating the present ab­sence of understanding, so as to shift existing ignorance into high gear!
  • Another group believe that the price of freedom need not be much higher than the cost of beaming radio reports behind the iron curtain, and telling those slave peoples how luxuriously and splendidly we live in our freedom, our gadgetry, and our affluence.
  • Then there are those who feel that a "free world" can be assured if we tax our own people heavily enough to give to foreign govern­ments and thus purchase friend­ship in exchange for cash. It is as if subsidized relationships were the basis for freedom.

http://www.fee.org/t...a#axzz2YuZNiMWD



While modern libertarians have seem to discarded points 4 and 5 they should take note of points 1,2, and 3.


All five points could be updated as follows:

  • The belief that freedom can be obtained by uncovering mainstream statists. This posi­tion seems to hold that our ills originate in the mainstream media. But statism originates as much in the minds of the American people as in the messages of the media.
  • There are those who believe that loss of freedom stems from what is called "the ignorant mass­es" and that the solution is sim­ply to post online that there is no such thing as "free lunch or some other such simplicity that can be grasped as he scrolls through a forum thread and drowsily reads baby-talk literature and looks over cartoon images."
  • There is a considerable num­ber who would offer political action through independent parties as their highest bid for free­dom. Organize "right down to the precinct level" and elect "the right people" who are not part of the two-party system. This is futile under present circum­stances, as if freedom could be had by activating the present ab­sence of third parties, so as to shift existing disinterest in independent candidates into high gear!
  • Another group believe that the price of freedom need not be much higher than the cost of posting online, and telling those "sheeple" how luxuriously and splendidly we could live in our freedom, our privacy, and our affluence only if we got rid of our government.
  • Then there are those who feel that a "free world" can be assured if we stop taxing our own people and allow big business to do as it wishes in all matters. It is as if corporations were the basis for freedom.
How would you update the advice? Do you believe libertarianism is more successful than it was in 1965?

Edited by The world needs you, 13 July 2013 - 09:15 AM.


#40    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,625 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 13 July 2013 - 12:43 PM

The problem is that people don't like freedom.  They don't like it when officials tell them what to do, but they do like it when it happens to their neighbor.  Let your front yard go to weed some time and see.


#41    Jeremiah65

Jeremiah65

    Seeker of knowledge

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,078 posts
  • Joined:25 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The mists at the edge of your dreams...

  • "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Aristotle

Posted 13 July 2013 - 12:50 PM

HEY!  Do not crack on my cartoons and pics!  You all are just jealous you can't be so clever!

I find the use of visual aides in making a point to be very valuable and I WILL continue to use them here and everywhere else...get used to it or don't...I do not care.

The "meme" thing is very effective in this day and age...and what is the old saying?...a picture is worth a thousand words...

Just for you

Posted Image

Posted Image

I find humor in them...so therefore...plan on seeing them in my posts from now till the servers burnout...

The Libertarian political party was founded in 1971.  Yes it is more successful today than ever.  As people become disgruntled and disenfranchised with the "old two main parties"...they are looking for alternatives.  Some do their homework and actually look for a party that truly represents them...some people are just asleep and are fine with the "paper or plastic" choices the media shoves in their face.

Edited by Jeremiah65, 13 July 2013 - 12:53 PM.

"Liberty means responsibility.  That is why most men dread it."  George Bernard Shaw
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."  Thomas Jefferson

Posted Image

#42    Norbert Dentressangle

Norbert Dentressangle

    Fat and complacent

  • Member
  • 25,885 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tanybwlch

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 14 July 2013 - 06:36 AM

View PostJeremiah65, on 13 July 2013 - 12:50 PM, said:

HEY!  Do not crack on my cartoons and pics!  You all are just jealous you can't be so clever!

I find the use of visual aides in making a point to be very valuable and I WILL continue to use them here and everywhere else...get used to it or don't...I do not care.

The "meme" thing is very effective in this day and age...and what is the old saying?...a picture is worth a thousand words...

Just for you

Posted Image

Posted Image

I find humor in them...so therefore...plan on seeing them in my posts from now till the servers burnout...

The Libertarian political party was founded in 1971.  Yes it is more successful today than ever.  As people become disgruntled and disenfranchised with the "old two main parties"...they are looking for alternatives.  Some do their homework and actually look for a party that truly represents them...some people are just asleep and are fine with the "paper or plastic" choices the media shoves in their face.
So would a handy precis of their ideals and, even more pertinently, what concrete policies they have, be useful? I suppose it can be found on the inter Net, but perhaps a handy summary might be helpful.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#43    acidhead

acidhead

    Were Not Your Slaves!

  • Member
  • 10,827 posts
  • Joined:13 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Victoria, BC CANADA

Posted 14 July 2013 - 06:49 AM

The founding fathers were Classical Liberals... more commonly known today as Libertarians

"there is no wrong or right - just popular opinion"

#44    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,611 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 14 July 2013 - 07:13 AM

The Founding Fathers Were Not Libertarians

Quote

While I welcome a good verbal spar with an Ayn Rand acolyte, I have no stomach for the heaping helping of historical revisionism that has been appended to the libertarian cause by its leaders. It's one thing to argue on, ahem, principle that the federal government should not be allowed to control carbon emissions or which races of people get to eat in which restaurants, but it is quite another to assert the frankly ludicrous claim that our country was established by a group of libertarians who intended to bequeath to us a toothless national government. The idea that our Founding Fathers envisioned a regime opposed to regulation and the protection of its citizens' welfare from private actors, laughable to any serious historian, has nevertheless become the signature bromide of the libertarian vocabulary. The Constitution, it is often remarked, establishes a government of limited powers -- an unobjectionable truth -- but the fact that its powers are limited does not negate the mountain of evidence that those venerable lions who invented American democracy were far more concerned with corporate usurpations of freedom than by any threat posed by a government fairly elected by the people.

"The power of all corporations ought to be limited," wrote James Madison, the framer whose influence echoes most resoundingly in the Constitution, as "the growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuses." Madison's preference for a strong national government was borne of a distaste for the debtor relief laws being passed by state legislatures during the post-war economic downturn of the 1780s. Like fellow Federalists James Wilson and Alexander Hamilton, he saw the Constitutional Convention as an opportunity to craft a central government powerful enough to serve as an effective check on the states -- an entity that for all intents and purposes hadn't existed during the ill-fated tenure of the Articles of Confederation. In the Virginia Plan, the Convention's initial blueprint for what would ultimately become the Constitution, Madison argued that Congress should have the power to veto state laws, that the president should serve for an unlimited number of seven-year terms (nine years for senators), and that the country should be ruled by what Thomas Jefferson called the "natural aristocracy" -- that is to say, elites. He left the Convention frustrated that the national government, despite being granted broad commerce powers, was not made to be as powerful as he had hoped.

Jefferson, of course, is the Founding Father most often cited for his supposedly libertarian sentiments, perhaps due to his wariness of the national government with respect to its interference in the rights of states. To draw from Jefferson's anti-federalism that he was anti-government, however, would be a mistake, as he too was infinitely more guarded against corporate tyranny than the public variety. "I hope we shall... crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations," he wrote in 1816,* "which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." While Jefferson was not technically a Framer -- he was in France for the duration of the Constitutional debates -- challenges to the Constitution among those delegates who shared his less-than-enthusiastic views on Federalism likewise centered on, well, anything but modern libertarian concerns. Some thought that states would be better equipped to levy taxes than a central government, some thought that Congress would eliminate elections once in power, some thought that state legislatures should be permitted to recall their senators, and some thought that there needed to be a religious oath requirement for elected officials.

http://www.huffingto...e_b_822973.html

Edited by The world needs you, 14 July 2013 - 07:22 AM.


#45    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,625 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 14 July 2013 - 07:34 AM

The two dominant political parties have such a stranglehold on the mechanism of voting apparatus in most states that I can see no route to a major restructuring of the main parties.  Indeed, nowadays when an election is relatively close, regardless of whoever really won, the party in control of the voting apparatus always pulls out a victory, and the "first-past-the-post" system effectively disenfranchises third-party voters.

I could envision a scenario where one of the two parties suffers a collapse, and, indeed, that has happened a few times, causing a certain rethink and the party bounces back next election cycle as the party centrists reassert control.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users