Began as comment about banning users, but buffed up here instead

submitted by Marginotions from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Marginotions[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

rejects the property rights of the tax payers

Taxation is Tribute (some force defeated the people, who are threatened with extortion (aka tax) or expect a greater defeat.)

Thorbard is my rearrangement of Rothbard, who is Jewish ethnicity, while I'm a severe Judaphobe. Rose I know mostly from his book Most Dangerous Superstition.

Hans-Hermann Hoppe?

Will need to dig into it, "I'll be back."

I'll see your call, and up-ante with the following...

Freedom vs. Force - The Individual and the State 13 min | acdmyIDas

presentation proceeds on a classic logical proof approach: assume the opposite and prove its more easily perceived disgrace, whereupon QED, evidence is quotations from notable sources.

side issue conviction (having some strange variations, such as being of favorable moral character, or having committed a crime, being of unfavorable, immoral character)

Makes the cogent point that size of central government is important to the augmentation of common anguish at its edicts. Smaller evil is less evil. (See Breakdown of Nations L Kohr)

I just saw this video, liked it.

[–][deleted]  (6 children)

[deleted]

    [–]Marginotions[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

    this your comment to the video

    Yes. My position pretty close to agreement. For academic debate purpose I'll just say go ahead, Tuisto, and like government, I don't care.

    Thorbard argues that government services would be provided better by private enterprise. In most simple description, person buys insurance, which hires security. All government operations are executed by competitive professionals regulated by demand, not statutes, certifications, permits, etc. There were some good points in the video your critique skipped. Clever you, picked at the weakest stuff first. (wink)

    No time yet to investigate Hoppe. (I'm tempted to think of jokes to make like HOPPer, OPPA, etc.)

    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Breakdown+of+Nations+L+Kohr&t=hk&ia=web book is available as pdf, free-download, and summaries exist too

    [–][deleted]  (4 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]Marginotions[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

      I see you are studied in non-atomized individual, which is a thing. Will look into it more depth. Next, skip, jump, and Hoppe to...

      Quick study of Hans Herman-Hoppe

      However, the majority of Hoppe's colleagues surveyed by Liberty[25] rejected his theory. In his response, Hoppe derided his critics as "utilitarians".26

      In my studies, I've 'identified' the concept of utilitarianism to be equivalent to the "greater-good' argument, which is in my view, a fallacy. Why? Among other things, this is a tenet of the Jews, see Tikkun olam... good is what's good for the Jews, and (m)uck the Goyim... all things bad for them is good too. There is no universal morality, so the non-violent solution is DISCRIMINATION followed by SEGREGATION.
      "the libertarian philosophy would support the rights of both groups to act in such manners" (LoL, OK, but not in the same covenant territory, kick em out and where ever they land, let 'em be.)
      " in addition to "superior (above-average) intellectual performance and character structure as well as a compatible system of values".[46]" This quote amounts to a tl;dr of my thesis Social Virtue, etc..

      Hoppe is definitely worth more study, thnx for the heads-up, Tuisto. Over on reddit I have a series titled Our World According to ___ where ___ is filled by persons and sometimes orgs. Hoppe is for sure going to join them, and probably some other studies besides.

      [–][deleted]  (2 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]Marginotions[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

        I'm fairly sure you can read stuff on reddit without account. Just can't vote or comment without one. Quite often web searches show reddit posts on first page, so the internet community considers it a legit source, and much of it is.