I am a fan of lots of the articles at antiwar.com. Also a big fan of lots and lots of the interviews on antiwar radio.com from both Charles Goyette and Scott Horton. They often just talk about the bullshit of war from people all over the political spectrum in a very informative way. That being said, there is a libertarian core to antiwar.com and sometimes antiwar radio will have libertarians come on and give their rap. especially about the holy magic of free market capitalism. Scott Horton has a blog called thestressblog.com
recently Scott responded to a recent critique of libertarianism by William Blum:Thought you might have a comment or at least find it interesting.
Here it is: http://thestressblog.com/2007/08/10/dearest-readers-of-stress/
From Willliam Blum’s latest:
Libertarians: an eccentric blend of anarchy and runaway capitalism What is it about libertarians? Their philosophy, in theory and in practice, seems to amount to little more than: “If the government is doing it, it’s oppressive and we’re against it.” Corporations, however, tend to get free passes. Perhaps the most prominent libertarian today is Texas Congressman Ron Paul, who ran as the Libertarian Party’s candidate for president in 1988 and is running now for the same office as a Republican. He’s against the war in Iraq, in no uncertain terms, but if the war were officially being fought by, for, and in the name of a consortium of Lockheed Martin, Halliburton, Bechtel, and some other giant American corporations, would he have the same attitude? And one could of course argue that the war is indeed being fought for such a consortium. So is it simply the idea or the image of “a government operation” that bothers him and other libertarians?
Paul recently said: “The government is too bureaucratic, it spends too much money, they waste the money.”[9]
Does the man think that corporations are not bureaucratic? Do libertarians think that any large institution is not overbearingly bureaucratic? Is it not the nature of the beast? Who amongst us has not had the frustrating experience with a corporation trying to correct an erroneous billing or trying to get a faulty product repaired or replaced? Can not a case be made that corporations spend too much (of our) money? What do libertarians think of the exceedingly obscene salaries paid to corporate executives? Or of two dozen varieties of corporate theft and corruption? Did someone mention Enron?
Ron Paul and other libertarians are against social security. Do they believe that it’s better for elderly people to live in a homeless shelter than to be dependent on government “handouts”? That’s exactly what it would come down to with many senior citizens if not for their social security. Most libertarians I’m sure are not racists, but Paul certainly sounds like one. Here are a couple of comments from his newsletter:
“Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action.”
“Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the ‘criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”[10]
Author Ellen Willis has written that “the fundamental fallacy of right libertarianism is that the state is the only source of coercive power.” They don’t recognize “that the corporations that control most economic resources, and therefore most people’s access to the necessities of life, have far more power than government to dictate our behavior and the day-to-day terms of our existence.”[11]
Scott
August 11th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Paul,
William Blum is an idiot. To wit:
Libertarians: an eccentric blend of anarchy and runaway capitalism
–No public property=all property is private. A=A is now eccentric. Better throw in the term ‘runaway’ to make sure the benefit of the doubt flows to the State.
What is it about libertarians? Their philosophy, in theory and in practice, seems to amount to little more than: “If the government is doing it, it’s oppressive and we’re against it.”
–Right. That’s all there is to it. There never have been millions of pages of writings by libertarian scholars explaining any of this. Oh, and yes, government - by definition - is an expropriating property protector. Everything they do is at least financed, most often enforced as well, at the point of a gun. That is oppressive and libertarians are indeed against it.
Corporations, however, tend to get free passes.
–That’s a wonderful assertion. Got any evidence? See, this is what leftists always do, they pretend that libertarianism is an argument for the status quo. Well, that’s horse-shit. We live in a 3 Trillion dollar a year globe spanning empire. A neo-mercantilist or, in fact, fascist system. But to a leftist, this is the fault of markets rather than the 3 Trillion dollar state. While at the same time, they pretend that this is libertarian paradise and that’s why is sucks.
–The fact of the matter is that no one opposes the true cause of our predicament - billionaires on welfare - better than libertarians, because we - unlike lefties like Blum - can tell the difference between a company competing in a market and buying up a Congressman.
Perhaps the most prominent libertarian today is Texas Congressman Ron Paul, who ran as the Libertarian Party’s candidate for president in 1988 and is running now for the same office as a Republican.
–Yay Ron!
He’s against the war in Iraq, in no uncertain terms, but if the war were officially being fought by, for, and in the name of a consortium of Lockheed Martin, Halliburton, Bechtel, and some other giant American corporations, would he have the same attitude? And one could of course argue that the war is indeed being fought for such a consortium. So is it simply the idea or the image of “a government operation” that bothers him and other libertarians?
–God! What an idiot! Really, I mean do I even need to explain this? Is it not obvious just reading the above ridiculousness? The STATE is waging war in Iraq. They are Taxing and Inflating the Money to pay for it, and they are waving a big American flag while they do it. What’s that you say? The public, democratic tax-collecting Government is doing all this on behalf of some corrupt private companies? Well, shit. We ought to abolish capitalism then.
–Seems like Ron Paul would love war as long as the Government announced it was doing it for some corporations, huh? (How dumb does a man have to be to be a state loving leftist these days? It’s like arguing with a born again who insists the Earth is 6,000 years old. Facts don’t matter. They just keep chanting slogans like a warblogger. Create their own reality.)
Paul recently said: “The government is too bureaucratic, it spends too much money, they waste the money.”[9]
Does the man think that corporations are not bureaucratic?
–Well, that’s obviously what he was saying, right?
–See, it’s like this:
–I like skateboarding.
–”Is Horton saying that water-skiing isn’t fun?”
–That is the obvious implication, no? No.
–Leftist: One entirely incapable of reason, loves government.
Do libertarians think that any large institution is not overbearingly bureaucratic? Is it not the nature of the beast?
–No, actually there are none of us who think that.
Who amongst us has not had the frustrating experience with a corporation trying to correct an erroneous billing or trying to get a faulty product repaired or replaced?
–No one. Obviously to anyone with eyeballs, even William Blum, the bigger and more centralized a system gets, the less efficient it will be.
–Now the extremely challenging part: So, do you want to give these giant inefficient corporations access to the 3 Trillion dollar U.S. treasury, have the anti-trust division stamp out their competition or otherwise regulate them out of business, granting them State-protected perpetuity or let them fail in the market and be replaced by someone who does a better job?
Can not a case be made that corporations spend too much (of our) money?
–How do they get that money? Do they bribe Congressmen for it, or do they suggest to people that they might want to invest/purchase their goods or services? If they haven’t stolen it from the taxpayer or defrauded their investors they can spend it however they want. Or what? Put a bureaucrat on the board to make sure it’s “fair”?
What do libertarians think of the exceedingly obscene salaries paid to corporate executives?
–That’s for the stockholders to decide. Going rates for good CEOs are pretty high these days. If it’s a bad deal, the stock holders will stop making it. (Personally, I think they are way out of proportion to what I would pay them.)
Or of two dozen varieties of corporate theft and corruption?
–Oh, we love it! Really, I just can’t figure out how people can be so dumb. If I was a doctor, I’d probably check all my left wing patients for giant scars on their heads from where a brick or falling anvil or something knocked all the sense out of them.
–I should start a new Yahoo group: pro-fraud libertarians. It’ll be huge in no time.
Did someone mention Enron?
–Well, I was just about to. Enron made all of their money off of government. Force, theft, fraud and most importantly: Lobbying! The myth of electrical deregulation is just that - a myth. Every Damned Thing That Every Damned Enron Employee Did Every Damned Day was spelled out in The Law somewhere. They used State power to steal.
–For my part, I’m glad they went out of business. Too bad the Governments of so many of the States invested their Public pension funds in that fascist scam. I suppose Blum thinks Bush should have intervened and saved them for the greater good.
Ron Paul and other libertarians are against social security. Do they believe that it’s better for elderly people to live in a homeless shelter than to be dependent on government “handouts”? That’s exactly what it would come down to with many senior citizens if not for their social security.
–First of all, Ron Paul has never voted to spend a single dime out of the Social Security fund on other things. Second of all, Mr. Blum, there’s this neato new thing called Google. It’s what they call a Search Engine. See? And if you had one of those (or could put that tiny little brain of yours to use on the one you already have), then you would see that Ron Paul M.D. has repeatedly called for the young to be able to opt out of Social Security and for the savings gained from abandoning the empire to be spent towards paying off ALL of those who’ve spent their lives paying in.
–He has said repeatedly that it will take “generations” to wean the people off of their dependence on the state and that “we are certainly not going to turn people out on the street in the meantime.”
–In 1996 and 2000, LP presidential candidate Harry Browne advocated a plan to sell off all unconstitutional federal assets and buy annuities for all due their SS payments.
–And besides Mr. “I have a big heart because I’m a socialist,” What are You going to do, let a bunch of people starve in the street? Taking care of others is for the State to make me do by your will, but not something you do yourself.
Most libertarians I’m sure are not racists, but Paul certainly sounds like one. Here are a couple of comments from his newsletter:
“Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action.”
“Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the ‘criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”[10]
–Again, for William Blum and other mildly retarded leftist dumb asses out there:
–20 years ago a staffer wrote some mean things in a Ron Paul newsletter and was immediately fired.
–Big deal, right? (If you use your Google or other favorite search machine, you can read all about this in 50 different places.)
–Even the New York Times got this story right. William Blum is a disgrace. Does someone pay that fool to write? Seems like he ought to be a janitor at a government school or something on that scale.
Author Ellen Willis
–Who?
has written that “the fundamental fallacy of right libertarianism is that the state is the only source of coercive power.” They don’t recognize “that the corporations that control most economic resources, and therefore most people’s access to the necessities of life, have far more power than government to dictate our behavior and the day-to-day terms of our existence.”[11]
–Yeah, well, she’s clearly as stupid as you. One more time for the really, really slow: Those corporations that control most economic resources control them because they control the State. With minimal or no government and a free market, the only people controlling recourses are those who can make the most money pleasing their customers - that is, those who’ve earned it.
–Sorry everyone for all the cussing, but WTF, these Democrats can’t run a simple search before smearing a man and a movement?
–I don’t know why I bother. Trying to teach a leftist is a hopeless and thankless task.
–Fine. Fine. Government is wonderful. Private people owning that which they create and justly acquire and trading those things is evil. The only man running for office on a platform of liberty secretly means to sell us all off to the plantation masters - who never have any help from the state. Whatever.
Scott wrote: "20 years ago a staffer wrote some mean things in a Ron Paul newsletter and was immediately fired. Big deal, right? (If you use your Google or other favorite search machine, you can read all about this in 50 different places.) Even the New York Times got this story right. William Blum is a disgrace. Does someone pay that fool to write? Seems like he ought to be a janitor at a government school or something on that scale."
Of course, Scott was so busy declaiming that he didn't notice that Blum's footnote 10 cited the source and explained that RP blamed a staffer.
3 comments:
I am a fan of lots of the articles at antiwar.com. Also a big fan of lots and lots of the interviews on antiwar radio.com from both Charles Goyette and Scott Horton. They often just talk about the bullshit of war from people all over the political spectrum in a very informative way.
That being said, there is a libertarian core to antiwar.com and sometimes antiwar radio will have libertarians come on and give their rap. especially about the holy magic of free market capitalism.
Scott Horton has a blog called thestressblog.com
recently Scott responded to a recent critique of libertarianism by William Blum:Thought you might have a comment or at least find it interesting.
Here it is:
http://thestressblog.com/2007/08/10/dearest-readers-of-stress/
From Willliam Blum’s latest:
Libertarians: an eccentric blend of anarchy and runaway capitalism
What is it about libertarians? Their philosophy, in theory and in practice, seems to amount to little more than: “If the government is doing it, it’s oppressive and we’re against it.” Corporations, however, tend to get free passes. Perhaps the most prominent libertarian today is Texas Congressman Ron Paul, who ran as the Libertarian Party’s candidate for president in 1988 and is running now for the same office as a Republican. He’s against the war in Iraq, in no uncertain terms, but if the war were officially being fought by, for, and in the name of a consortium of Lockheed Martin, Halliburton, Bechtel, and some other giant American corporations, would he have the same attitude? And one could of course argue that the war is indeed being fought for such a consortium. So is it simply the idea or the image of “a government operation” that bothers him and other libertarians?
Paul recently said: “The government is too bureaucratic, it spends too much money, they waste the money.”[9]
Does the man think that corporations are not bureaucratic? Do libertarians think that any large institution is not overbearingly bureaucratic? Is it not the nature of the beast? Who amongst us has not had the frustrating experience with a corporation trying to correct an erroneous billing or trying to get a faulty product repaired or replaced? Can not a case be made that corporations spend too much (of our) money? What do libertarians think of the exceedingly obscene salaries paid to corporate executives? Or of two dozen varieties of corporate theft and corruption? Did someone mention Enron?
Ron Paul and other libertarians are against social security. Do they believe that it’s better for elderly people to live in a homeless shelter than to be dependent on government “handouts”? That’s exactly what it would come down to with many senior citizens if not for their social security. Most libertarians I’m sure are not racists, but Paul certainly sounds like one. Here are a couple of comments from his newsletter:
“Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action.”
“Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the ‘criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”[10]
Author Ellen Willis has written that “the fundamental fallacy of right libertarianism is that the state is the only source of coercive power.” They don’t recognize “that the corporations that control most economic resources, and therefore most people’s access to the necessities of life, have far more power than government to dictate our behavior and the day-to-day terms of our existence.”[11]
Scott
August 11th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Paul,
William Blum is an idiot. To wit:
Libertarians: an eccentric blend of anarchy and runaway capitalism
–No public property=all property is private. A=A is now eccentric. Better throw in the term ‘runaway’ to make sure the benefit of the doubt flows to the State.
What is it about libertarians? Their philosophy, in theory and in practice, seems to amount to little more than: “If the government is doing it, it’s oppressive and we’re against it.”
–Right. That’s all there is to it. There never have been millions of pages of writings by libertarian scholars explaining any of this. Oh, and yes, government - by definition - is an expropriating property protector. Everything they do is at least financed, most often enforced as well, at the point of a gun. That is oppressive and libertarians are indeed against it.
Corporations, however, tend to get free passes.
–That’s a wonderful assertion. Got any evidence? See, this is what leftists always do, they pretend that libertarianism is an argument for the status quo. Well, that’s horse-shit. We live in a 3 Trillion dollar a year globe spanning empire. A neo-mercantilist or, in fact, fascist system. But to a leftist, this is the fault of markets rather than the 3 Trillion dollar state. While at the same time, they pretend that this is libertarian paradise and that’s why is sucks.
–The fact of the matter is that no one opposes the true cause of our predicament - billionaires on welfare - better than libertarians, because we - unlike lefties like Blum - can tell the difference between a company competing in a market and buying up a Congressman.
Perhaps the most prominent libertarian today is Texas Congressman Ron Paul, who ran as the Libertarian Party’s candidate for president in 1988 and is running now for the same office as a Republican.
–Yay Ron!
He’s against the war in Iraq, in no uncertain terms, but if the war were officially being fought by, for, and in the name of a consortium of Lockheed Martin, Halliburton, Bechtel, and some other giant American corporations, would he have the same attitude? And one could of course argue that the war is indeed being fought for such a consortium. So is it simply the idea or the image of “a government operation” that bothers him and other libertarians?
–God! What an idiot! Really, I mean do I even need to explain this? Is it not obvious just reading the above ridiculousness? The STATE is waging war in Iraq. They are Taxing and Inflating the Money to pay for it, and they are waving a big American flag while they do it. What’s that you say? The public, democratic tax-collecting Government is doing all this on behalf of some corrupt private companies? Well, shit. We ought to abolish capitalism then.
–Seems like Ron Paul would love war as long as the Government announced it was doing it for some corporations, huh? (How dumb does a man have to be to be a state loving leftist these days? It’s like arguing with a born again who insists the Earth is 6,000 years old. Facts don’t matter. They just keep chanting slogans like a warblogger. Create their own reality.)
Paul recently said: “The government is too bureaucratic, it spends too much money, they waste the money.”[9]
Does the man think that corporations are not bureaucratic?
–Well, that’s obviously what he was saying, right?
–See, it’s like this:
–I like skateboarding.
–”Is Horton saying that water-skiing isn’t fun?”
–That is the obvious implication, no? No.
–Leftist: One entirely incapable of reason, loves government.
Do libertarians think that any large institution is not overbearingly bureaucratic? Is it not the nature of the beast?
–No, actually there are none of us who think that.
Who amongst us has not had the frustrating experience with a corporation trying to correct an erroneous billing or trying to get a faulty product repaired or replaced?
–No one. Obviously to anyone with eyeballs, even William Blum, the bigger and more centralized a system gets, the less efficient it will be.
–Now the extremely challenging part: So, do you want to give these giant inefficient corporations access to the 3 Trillion dollar U.S. treasury, have the anti-trust division stamp out their competition or otherwise regulate them out of business, granting them State-protected perpetuity or let them fail in the market and be replaced by someone who does a better job?
Can not a case be made that corporations spend too much (of our) money?
–How do they get that money? Do they bribe Congressmen for it, or do they suggest to people that they might want to invest/purchase their goods or services? If they haven’t stolen it from the taxpayer or defrauded their investors they can spend it however they want. Or what? Put a bureaucrat on the board to make sure it’s “fair”?
What do libertarians think of the exceedingly obscene salaries paid to corporate executives?
–That’s for the stockholders to decide. Going rates for good CEOs are pretty high these days. If it’s a bad deal, the stock holders will stop making it. (Personally, I think they are way out of proportion to what I would pay them.)
Or of two dozen varieties of corporate theft and corruption?
–Oh, we love it! Really, I just can’t figure out how people can be so dumb. If I was a doctor, I’d probably check all my left wing patients for giant scars on their heads from where a brick or falling anvil or something knocked all the sense out of them.
–I should start a new Yahoo group: pro-fraud libertarians. It’ll be huge in no time.
Did someone mention Enron?
–Well, I was just about to. Enron made all of their money off of government. Force, theft, fraud and most importantly: Lobbying! The myth of electrical deregulation is just that - a myth. Every Damned Thing That Every Damned Enron Employee Did Every Damned Day was spelled out in The Law somewhere. They used State power to steal.
–For my part, I’m glad they went out of business. Too bad the Governments of so many of the States invested their Public pension funds in that fascist scam. I suppose Blum thinks Bush should have intervened and saved them for the greater good.
Ron Paul and other libertarians are against social security. Do they believe that it’s better for elderly people to live in a homeless shelter than to be dependent on government “handouts”? That’s exactly what it would come down to with many senior citizens if not for their social security.
–First of all, Ron Paul has never voted to spend a single dime out of the Social Security fund on other things. Second of all, Mr. Blum, there’s this neato new thing called Google. It’s what they call a Search Engine. See? And if you had one of those (or could put that tiny little brain of yours to use on the one you already have), then you would see that Ron Paul M.D. has repeatedly called for the young to be able to opt out of Social Security and for the savings gained from abandoning the empire to be spent towards paying off ALL of those who’ve spent their lives paying in.
–He has said repeatedly that it will take “generations” to wean the people off of their dependence on the state and that “we are certainly not going to turn people out on the street in the meantime.”
–In 1996 and 2000, LP presidential candidate Harry Browne advocated a plan to sell off all unconstitutional federal assets and buy annuities for all due their SS payments.
–And besides Mr. “I have a big heart because I’m a socialist,” What are You going to do, let a bunch of people starve in the street? Taking care of others is for the State to make me do by your will, but not something you do yourself.
Most libertarians I’m sure are not racists, but Paul certainly sounds like one. Here are a couple of comments from his newsletter:
“Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action.”
“Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the ‘criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”[10]
–HORSE SHIT.
–WILLIAM BLUM: Lazy, non-researching, smear recycling, Commie, Pinko Piece of shit.
–Again, for William Blum and other mildly retarded leftist dumb asses out there:
–20 years ago a staffer wrote some mean things in a Ron Paul newsletter and was immediately fired.
–Big deal, right? (If you use your Google or other favorite search machine, you can read all about this in 50 different places.)
–Even the New York Times got this story right. William Blum is a disgrace. Does someone pay that fool to write? Seems like he ought to be a janitor at a government school or something on that scale.
Author Ellen Willis
–Who?
has written that “the fundamental fallacy of right libertarianism is that the state is the only source of coercive power.” They don’t recognize “that the corporations that control most economic resources, and therefore most people’s access to the necessities of life, have far more power than government to dictate our behavior and the day-to-day terms of our existence.”[11]
–Yeah, well, she’s clearly as stupid as you. One more time for the really, really slow: Those corporations that control most economic resources control them because they control the State. With minimal or no government and a free market, the only people controlling recourses are those who can make the most money pleasing their customers - that is, those who’ve earned it.
–Sorry everyone for all the cussing, but WTF, these Democrats can’t run a simple search before smearing a man and a movement?
–I don’t know why I bother. Trying to teach a leftist is a hopeless and thankless task.
–Fine. Fine. Government is wonderful. Private people owning that which they create and justly acquire and trading those things is evil. The only man running for office on a platform of liberty secretly means to sell us all off to the plantation masters - who never have any help from the state. Whatever.
Scott
Scott wrote: "20 years ago a staffer wrote some mean things in a Ron Paul newsletter and was immediately fired.
Big deal, right? (If you use your Google or other favorite search machine, you can read all about this in 50 different places.)
Even the New York Times got this story right. William Blum is a disgrace. Does someone pay that fool to write? Seems like he ought to be a janitor at a government school or something on that scale."
Of course, Scott was so busy declaiming that he didn't notice that Blum's footnote 10 cited the source and explained that RP blamed a staffer.
Thge rest of Scott's response is equally shoddy.
Post a Comment