Comments on: Suicidal Libertarianism

By: 3.9 Anarcho-Tyranny | Radish

3.9 Anarcho-Tyranny | Radish — Sat, 14 Dec 2013 01:19:49 +0000

[…] leads Nick Land to wonder: “What would count as evidence of America moving in a direction that was ‘more […]

By: Peter A. Taylor

Peter A. Taylor — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 04:08:59 +0000

I think the general sense around these parts is that democracy is part of the problem. Mexico is run by socialists because it is democratic, not because it isn’t. Democracy is only a good thing under special circumstances, which no longer appear to apply even in the US.

http://home.earthlink.net/~peter.a.taylor/autopsy.htm

By: rob

rob — Mon, 22 Jul 2013 02:20:11 +0000

I don’t think you understand that the Libertarians are for uniting advanced countries in free immigration but quarantining anti-democratic ones while going in to topple their regimes.

As you can see from OPERATION DEMOCRACY they’re not waiting around for people tpo pay attention, they’re ripping these Islamic dictaorships limb frtom limb as they did the Commies when we sat around and argued against them then in the US.See: http://www.libertarianinternational.org

The Libertarians also led the way toppled the Latin dictatorships and are building a lIbertarian movemenyt in Latin America.

By: admin

admin — Wed, 10 Jul 2013 04:54:15 +0000

Do you have any evidence to support this interpretation? It seems out of keeping with Caplan’s reliable adherence to extreme deontological stances (without notable exception, that I can find).

By: Anonymous Dinosaur

Anonymous Dinosaur — Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:25:27 +0000

“I still support open immigration. I cannot bring myself to abandon support of my foundational principles just because following those principles might prove fatal.”

As far as I can see, there’s no evidence that he means that he doesn’t care about risks and is thus suicidal because principles are higher than survival. It seems much, much more likely that this is like a response to Pascal’s Wager. Sure, maybe there’s a god and I’ll be going to hell, but why work from pure hypotheticals about what risks might happen?

That’s not to say that he’s accurately assessed the risks; it’s just to say that he almost surely meant something different than you think he does. If he found out that that risk is, in fact, what happens, it’s likely he’d change his views, because it wouldn’t be a mere hypothetical ‘scare story’ anymore.

By: Libertarian Suicide | A War Room

Libertarian Suicide | A War Room — Mon, 08 Jul 2013 00:38:11 +0000

[…] A is Bryan Caplan, and his influencees such as Don Boudreaux, who support unrestricted immigration from the socialist third world. Some of us believe that […]

By: nickX

nickX — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 17:15:18 +0000

His foundational principles constitute confusing the laws of nature with the general operating patterns of markets built open a highly evolved legal system, which in turn depends on the political environment. He thinks that, as a matter scientific law, voluntary market interactions are the only important interactions we will have with immigrants. Any coercive relationship (e.g. via politics and in particular the powers that come from being voters, members of government bureaucracies, etc.) lies beyond the ability of his foundational principles comprehend. Jumping outside his erroneous principles he can comprehend the problem, but regardless of the reality he must stick to those principles.

By: admin

admin — Wed, 26 Jun 2013 15:18:08 +0000

If California didn’t exist, Azathoth would have to invent it.

By: admin

admin — Wed, 26 Jun 2013 15:16:18 +0000

I’d forgotten that was in there. That speech and its reception is a fascinating subject. It was an exercise in concentrated classical scholarship, interpreted by the ‘educated’ establishment — either through ignorance or mendacity — as a piece of rabble-rousing gutter politics.

By: John Hannon

John Hannon — Wed, 26 Jun 2013 10:17:31 +0000

“Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.”

– Enoch Powell (from his “Rivers of Blood” speech)