Libertarianism is the inclusion of every sapient being into the decision making process and all that logically follows from that. Utilitarianism is the objective of ensuring the most happiness for all sapient beings and all that logically follows from that. Sometimes they compliment each other, other times they contradict.
Discuss.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-27 16:26
>>39
Then you must really be in a shitty program for being this retarded on the subject. I know that CS programs generally don't deal with processor design, but you should know something this simple.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-27 16:33
>>40 >>41
We're now 3 people reading this thread.
It's you, the other guy who hates you, and I.
And knowing this you try eristics on me? What the fuck?
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-27 16:34
>>42
Are you still claiming CISC is better, or are you going to prove yourself more intelligent than the other faggot?
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-27 16:42
>>43
You're an interesting fellow, but I'm not quite convinced yet.
How about you prove that your style doesn't stem from ignorance and I back off?
But don't be too subtle.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-27 16:48
>>44
You claimed CISC was better, which was plain out wrong, and when informed about your failure you resort to meaningless bullshit. But hey, at least you aren't explicitly repeating NO CISC IS BETTER BECAUSE I DEFINE IT TO BE BETTER REGARDLESS OF ALL CONTRADICTING EVIDENCE, which at least shows you to be a person capable of conscious thought, congratulations.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-27 16:53
>>45
Still not convinced but if you are what I think you are why are you wasting your time bashing libertarians?
Are you a commie or something?
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-27 16:55
>>46
Why aren't you being convinced by solid facts, which I not only told you but also gave sources, and are throwing around stupid accusations repeatedly? Are you a libertarian or something?
>>49
Doesn't quite answer the question but I'll just wait and observe.
My guess is that you don't know either.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-27 17:11
>>50
It doesn't answer your question? What were you trying to do when you jumped on with false claims, that's a better point to start off...
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-27 17:18
>>51
The way you do it I had the impression that it's just for fun and not because of politics.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-27 17:19
>>52
Could be, but I support truth while I'm at it
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-27 17:32
>>53
And the truth is not subject to debate, amirite? At least not on the interwebs?
I'd be a hypocrite if I were to criticise that but that means we're not going to become friends after all.
Kudos for your endurance though.
>>54
Truth isn't subject to debate in several fields. But hey, this discussion was far more productive than the ongoing BUSH IS COMMIE one, in the sense that a subject actually completely irrelevant to the topic and the board became known.
Wow, I see a lot of people bashing others just because they associated the same idea with a different word, etatism? socialism? The basic idea is that the government is taking on the majority of our responsibilities and not holding us liable. But in the same thread they threaten us by saying we will give them back to you no problem, but the problem is that it would be too overwhelming to do everything at once. What ever name you call it, it's tyranny! It's more like totalitarianism than anything else. Yeah, there are little things here and there, but the overall picture. We are completely out of control of our own lives and THEY KNOW IT; we barely grasp it. It scared the everliving shit out of me when I understood that I was dealing with the same treatment in my own HOME! FROM MY OWN PARENTS! JEEZ! It's everywhere, but I couldn't see the forest on account of being surrounded and overwhelmed by so many god damned trees. It's like the Vietnamese Jungle here! But, thankfully some skilled individuals came up with "The Art of War" and "Chaos Theory" and "The Bill of Rights", thank God someone was paying attention cause I sure wasn't!
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-28 2:41
>>31 >>32 >>33 >>34
You keep saying there is gallons of proof but never post any. I already explained why I consider Bush to be socialist but you have been fixating on "bush is socialist" instead of the explanation so I guess there is no point in me repeating it for the 8th time.
Perhaps in another time and place you would be able to make me shut up and I would be unable to point out your logical fallacies, but this is America. Sorry.
http://dis.4chan.org/read/newpol/1180954230/836
Does not sum up the thread, it sums up the collapse of your ideals when confronted to the idea that state socialism is as much of a negative force as crony capitalism.
This is the full picture. http://dis.4chan.org/read/newpol/1180954230/827-834
As can be seen I explained why I believed the Bush administration was socialist, because most of the policies I disagreed with were/are socialist in nature.
>If I were to list my disagreements with his domestic policies it would consist mainly of excessive taxation and unnecessary regulation all in the name of benefitting the people. That said many republicans themsleves are suprised to hear themselves being called socialist even though they agree with me on the same points. Semantics? Or perhaps I am the only one willing to use that dirty word? You decide.
>>57
Now we learn that the retard is unable to read aswell. It has been repeatedly stated that your definition of socialism is utterly and totally wrong, and cited texts etc. etc. were all posted, none of which were you able to comprehend with your meager mental capabilities. And now here you are repeating BUSH IS SOCIALIST BECAUSE I HAVE A TOTALLY RIDICULOUS DEFINITION OF SOCIALIST WHICH ONLY I AND MAYBE TEN OTHER RETARDS ON THE WHOLE GLOBE HOLD. As you can see, you are repeating the same bullshit and denying evidence again and again and again, and for what, really? Do you feel better about your retardation by repeating things that are so obviously wrong? Very, very pathetic and sad.
>>57
Also, it's funny because the posts you cited only prove how delusional you are, as you have been repeating the same retarded crap from that point on even though the cited posts explicitly tell why you fail, but it seems that you were incapable of grasping that too.
Enjoy your DERP DERP DERP DERP STAYT SOSHALIST KROOONY KAPITALIST DERP DERP DERP WHY DON'T I KNOW ANYTHING AND REPEAT RETARDED THINGS LIKE A PARROT? DERP DERP DERP
>>58 >>59 >>60 Here is my explanation.
"Socialism is the belief that the economy should be run by the people, most socialists believe this ought to be done through state control of the economy. I believe this is an awful mistake because it circumvents economic freedom, is inefficient since it ignores the invisible hand of the free market and makes corruption extremely easy."
And the Dictionary's...
"a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole."
The jump from "community" to "people" and "means of production" to "economy" isn't exactly that far. You seriously need to start agreeing with me before you embaress yourself further.
And likewise, fuck face, you fail to point out that the Government is under the control of the Federal Reserve, a private institution, via the loan of the national deficit coming out of our pockets as inflation and visible by price hikes as well as paying off the national deficit via Federal Income Tax. Just wait until May when we will have the voluntary compliant choice of inserting under our skin an RFID chip, We will all be poor pathetic human animals once again thanks to our fellow man. Thank you all for your tyranny, we mire ourselves in our own wealth of propriatary illusions and solitude. What do you think movies, music, and merchandise really are? You can't wear them to protect yourself from the environment. You can't eat them. You can't feel safe using the scrap of plastics and papers as weapons and shields. We are soooo fucked.
And your definition obviously does not make bush socialist, but you are too retarded to comprehend this too. Enjoy your perpetual whining.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-29 3:42
HAY GUYS, I HERD BUSH WAS A SOSHALIST, MOVING FOR COMMUNITY OWNERSHIP, GIVING UNION RIGHTS OUT, GIVING COMMUNAL OWNERSHIP TO LARGE CORPORATIONS, INCREASING THE TAXING OF THE RICH AND LOWERING THAT OF THE LOWER AND MIDDLE CLASSES
WHAT, HE DID NONE OF THOSE AND HE JUST SPEND THE MONEY ON A WAR AND SOME RETARD THOUGHT THAT WAS SOCIALISM BECAUSE HE DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING? NO, NO THAT CAN'T HAPPEN
>>63
anarchist communism is capitalist then, right? retard.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-29 4:51
>>63
Onoz im a cuntface. Also "social organization" is a category of organization not a type of organization, the Indian caste system for instance is a forms of social organization. Furthermore Bush believes that his administration is a bureaucracy that represents the people which fulfils the "community" criteria of the definition of socialism. >>64
The federal reserve is a "private" in the same way North Korea is a "people's republic". It is a state monopoly over the US's currency which uses it's legal status to stamp out competition. http://www.usmint.gov/pressroom/index.cfm?flash=yes&action=press_release&id=710 http://www.usmint.gov/consumer/index.cfm?action=HotItems
Bear in mind the liberty dollar organization never claimed it's currency was legal tender. http://www.rabidquill.com/?p=17 >>65
What part of "Also" don't you understand? >>66
*yawn*
0/10, come up with something new
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-29 5:17
>>68
More of EVERYTHING IS SOCIALIST BECAUSE I'M RETARDED stuff. His isn't capable of holding much data, so he labels himself as LIBERTARYAN and anyone not anarchistic SOCIALIST, even though there are socialist and non-statist things, but that's too much for his meager mental capabilities.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-29 5:31
>>69
You will be needing to point out where it was said that socialism and organizations outside the state are mutually exclusive in order for your argument to be valid.
>>70
The problem is, retard, you claimed bush was socialist because he was statist you fucking moron.
I did see communists and socialists get grouped together. Than social democrats joined them. After that, retarded Americans grouped liberals with them too, and now the pathetically retarded declare everyone not libertarian "socialist", even george fucking bush, because clearly their brain doesn't have the capacity beyond simple bifurcated classification. What's even sadder is, that these retards cling on to their delusions no matter what is the truth. They should put this retard on a documentary, on how he manages to stop at red lights and maybe even graduate despite having such a pathetically tiny mind that works on the simplest Aristotelean logic chains.
>>73
So libertarianism isn't EVERYONE IS SOCIALIST BUT ME, AND I'M RIGHT BECAUSE SOCIALISM IS BAD! I WIN, I WI-WHY ARE YOU POINTING AND LAUGHING, IDIOTS? IS IT BECAUSE YOU'RE SO OWNED?
Thanks a lot, captain obvious.
Name:
Anonymous2008-05-08 4:05
The main reason people accept statism is because they believe it is socialist. You are free to be socialist under a libertarian administration, you are just not allowed to use the state to force it on other people.
>>79
I think you should admit your failure before crying about irrelevant stuff, like in >>75 which doesn't make any sense, of course, to educated people.