|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Mr. BlackCat
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Location: Insert witty remark HERE
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:48 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
visitorq has admitted he's a truther, can we please stop paying attention to him now. His verison of 'truth' is 'take whatver most people believe and fanatically claim the opposite while calling those who disagree sheep and unintelligent'.
Listen, I am no supporter of Bush and I think there are questions about 9/11. But if someone claims it was an inside job? They are the crazy homeless man on the street telling me quarters give me gamma rays through government lasers. Sad? Yes. Worthy of debate? Nah. Sadly, this is what libertarianism is. Conspiracy theories put forth by people wealthy enough to stay off that street corner and therefore give the impression of credibility.
visitorq is going to roast me! Can't wait! Am I a mission of the Cuban anti-capitalist brigade who have infiltraded the British government through my sofa cushions or am I Bush himself writing under a sock to dispell rumours that the lunar landing was in a Holywood studio to convince the Russians to hand over the formula for mind control though jet engine vapour? oooooohhhh...I can't wait to find out! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mr. BlackCat wrote: |
visitorq has admitted he's a truther, can we please stop paying attention to him now. His verison of 'truth' is 'take whatver most people believe and fanatically claim the opposite while calling those who disagree sheep and unintelligent'.
Listen, I am no supporter of Bush and I think there are questions about 9/11. But if someone claims it was an inside job? They are the crazy homeless man on the street telling me quarters give me gamma rays through government lasers. Sad? Yes. Worthy of debate? Nah. Sadly, this is what libertarianism is. Conspiracy theories put forth by people wealthy enough to stay off that street corner and therefore give the impression of credibility.
visitorq is going to roast me! Can't wait! Am I a mission of the Cuban anti-capitalist brigade who have infiltraded the British government through my sofa cushions or am I Bush himself writing under a sock to dispell rumours that the lunar landing was in a Holywood studio to convince the Russians to hand over the formula for mind control though jet engine vapour? oooooohhhh...I can't wait to find out! |
All the lame jokes and attempted mockery in the world won't make up for your lack of any real rebuttal to anything that I and others have posted (filling whole threads documented facts). My side has been right about pretty much everything, while yours just keeps coming with the wise-cracks. You're nothing but a pack of clowns. More like children than anything.
If you wanna talk about "sad" - how about a witless nobody coming onto an internet forum to regurgitate a few jokes he watched on Comedy Central, and make fun of serious issues instead of contributing anything worth a damn to the discussion? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rambler
Joined: 18 Jun 2011
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 11:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| Bush/Obama, on the other hand, are very similar to Nazis in practically every way except for their rhetoric. |
Anybody still reading this thread... You'll be smarter and happier in life if you completely ignore people who make statements like these. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 2:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rambler wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Bush/Obama, on the other hand, are very similar to Nazis in practically every way except for their rhetoric. |
Anybody still reading this thread... You'll be smarter and happier in life if you completely ignore people who make statements like these. |
Smarter? Surely not. Happier? I suppose... ignorance is bliss (until they take your bliss away). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnnyenglishteacher2
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 2:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| ghostrider wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| How much worthless drivel can a person post in a single thread? Let's wait for ghostrider to show us. |
So you finally have the honesty to admit that your own beliefs are drivel.
| visitorq wrote: |
| Next thing they'll saying Hitler was a libertarian (oh, wait I think ya-ta boy has already claimed that)... |
Well, libertarians have a history of being affiliated with neo nazi, holocaust denial, and white supremacy groups and gladly accepting donations from such groups. http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/12/ron_paul_quackery_enabler.php |
Libertarian views (and those of Ron Paul) are literally the polar opposite of fascism... There is no other presidential candidate more utterly opposed to everything the Nazis stood for than Ron Paul. Bush/Obama, on the other hand, are very similar to Nazis in practically every way except for their rhetoric. |
Not that I want to sit on the fence, but...
What if there are two types of libertarians? On the one hand there could be the visitorq-type libertarian who is suspicious of government and believes that most of the injustices in the world come through government. On the other hand, there might be the libertarian-authoritarian, believing in libertarianism for the wealthy and authoritarianism for everyone else and believe, for example, in racial hierarchy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 3:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| johnnyenglishteacher2 wrote: |
| On the other hand, there might be the libertarian-authoritarian, believing in libertarianism for the wealthy and authoritarianism for everyone else and believe, for example, in racial hierarchy. |
"Libertarian-authoritarian" is an oxymoron. Either you're for freedom or you're for tyranny.
No doubt there are some authoritarian elitists types who apply the label "libertarian" onto themselves, but it's obviously a crock. Kind of like how politicians who handed the country over to private banking interests early in the last century and plunged our nation into two major world wars and the Great Depression called themselves "progressives". Or how pro-war, race-obsessed, authoritarian-socialist types like ya-ta boy get pegged as "liberals" (when classical liberalism has nothing to do with what that ilk stands for). All the labels are distorted and misappropriated, especially in the mainstream media, so that up means down, war means peace, bad equals good, and libertarian somehow comes mean "right wing Nazi". Textbook Orwellian stuff.
Ultimately libertarianism is simply about protecting individual liberties: the freedom to do what you want as long as you don't infringe upon the rights of others. In that sense it's very straightforward; although it does not therefore mean all libertarians agree about every single issue (esp. controversial ones like taxation, or moral issues like abortion or capital punishment). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| johnnyenglishteacher2 wrote: |
What if there are two types of libertarians? On the one hand there could be the visitorq-type libertarian who is suspicious of government and believes that most of the injustices in the world come through government. On the other hand, there might be the libertarian-authoritarian, believing in libertarianism for the wealthy and authoritarianism for everyone else and believe, for example, in racial hierarchy. |
I think the latter are considered right-wingers. They have both libertarian and authoritarian views. Some of them even believe they are libertarian, but they aren't really. They want low taxes for everyone but believe in a strong military and the so-called right to life but also the death penalty. Whether they are for or against a war largely depends on what party the President is from. They're GOP creatures.
These people outnumber libertarians and call themselves libertarians so your confusion is understandable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| Or how pro-war, race-obsessed, authoritarian-socialist types like ya-ta boy get pegged as "liberals" (when classical liberalism has nothing to do with what that ilk stands for). All the labels are distorted and misappropriated, especially in the mainstream media, so that up means down, war means peace, bad equals good, and libertarian somehow comes mean "right wing Nazi". Textbook Orwellian stuff. |
The social liberal versus classical liberal thing in America stems from our history. Our revolution and even more so the resulting Constitutional system was very liberal in the true classical liberal sense (with one glaring exception). Thus the conservatives are those who wanted to preserve the old order, which was actually a kind of new classical liberal state. And the social liberals were those who wanted to work within the order and retain individualism (important also to classical liberalism) but also advance communitarian structures and state involvement in the economic sphere. Progressive is a much better term for them, overall. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| The social liberal versus classical liberal thing in America stems from our history. Our revolution and even more so the resulting Constitutional system was very liberal in the true classical liberal sense (with one glaring exception). Thus the conservatives are those who wanted to preserve the old order, which was actually a kind of new classical liberal state. And the social liberals were those who wanted to work within the order and retain individualism (important also to classical liberalism) but also advance communitarian structures and state involvement in the economic sphere. Progressive is a much better term for them, overall. |
Progressivism was well over a century removed from revolution-era classical liberalism (although some of its ideas could be traced back to Hamiltonianism). Basically Progressivism was, and still is, the US version of the Fabian Socialists in Britain, who advocated a more steady, creeping sort of socialist takeover of society (as opposed to a sudden, sweeping revolution).
They simply cannot be lumped in with conservatives at all; at best they can be called socialists in liberal clothes. Really though (to call a spade a spade), they were the prototype of fascist/corporatism that went on to be the dominant system in the 20th century. The very first thing they did when they got Wilson into the presidency was set up a central bank (the Federal Reserve), amend the constitution to allow for income tax, and then plunge us into a major war.
They then positioned their people into the most influential positions of power in the mass media, with people like Edward Bernays leading the way, basically inventing the propaganda industry. Figures like Margaret Sanger (the eugenicist racist who advocated forced sterilization of the "feeble minded") also offer a good insight into the Progressive agenda. Prohibition (which basically gave birth to organized crime in America: both the mafia and the feds) also ranks high on their list of "accomplishments". Last but not least, the Progressives brought the US firmly under the thumb of internationalism (formed by the ancestors of the same class of robber barons who use the US and its military to enforce their global empire to this day). John D. Rockefeller Jr. set up the Council on Foreign Relations during this time (the pre-eminent globalist think tank, which continues to dictate US policy even now) - and after Wilson took our unwilling country into WWI, he went on to found the League of Nations (the prototype for the UN). Blame for our nation's catastrophic plunge down the path of militarism (more wars of aggression than any other modern state I can think of) can be laid firmly at the feet of the Progressives.
So to summarize: the Progressives brought us central banking, income tax, interventionist foreign policy, war, eugenics, mass media propaganda, and an overall merger between state and corporate power run by a ruthless elite. Yet they still refer to themselves with a word that denotes "progress". Calling any of that 'progress' is about as absurd as calling the Nazis humanitarians. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Friend Lee Ghost
Joined: 06 Jun 2011
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| rambler wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Bush/Obama, on the other hand, are very similar to Nazis in practically every way except for their rhetoric. |
Anybody still reading this thread... You'll be smarter and happier in life if you completely ignore people who make statements like these. |
Smarter? Surely not. Happier? I suppose... ignorance is bliss (until they take your bliss away). |
VQ, you sure have a lot of patience to deal with all these idiots who come here a-sniping without even refuting anything you've said. Zs if calling someone a name makes all the facts go away.
Anyway, Gary Null, who hosts the Natural Living radio show with probably the largest audience in the world, confirms everything you have said about David Rockefeller's influence on the world political and financial economy, and how he founded the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderbergs who, as a group, manipulate most major commodities of the world (and just about everything else).
Most recently he mentioned it on his show on 7/15 around minute 21, although the entire program is well worth hearing. In fact, his guest later in the program is Dr. Judy Wood discussing her scientific investigation of 9/11 which is a must-listen. (It wasn't controlled demolition after all!)
| Quote: |
Dr. Judy Wood is a former professor at Clemson University�s Department of Mechanical Engineering, specializing in the research of thermal stress and deformation analysis with optical imaging, biomaterial composition, and biomimicry. She is an expert in the field of interferometry, an optical method of stress analysis to determine interference patterns and their effects. She has authored over 60 peer reviewed research papers.
Dr. Wood has applied her scientific expertise, since the time of 911, to conduct what is probably the most thorough forensic study on the collapse of the world trade towers � based on over 40,000 images, video clips, volumes of witness testimonies. Her findings led her to file a federal qui tam case for science fraud against the contractors who controlled the official 911 Commission report. Her research has been published in a 500 page book, �Where Did the Towers Go?: Evidence of Directed Free-Energy Technology on 911.� |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 5:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
To me libertarianism is predicated on two bases- Ensuring maximum economic freedom for all social classes in being entrepreneurial and ensuring that the maximum amount of effective decision making is enabled to an individual voter and local communities.
If a town wants to mandate skirt lengths and ban booze I have no problem with that. Liberty means you can choose your community's laws, not maximum anarchy for everyone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
FLG: thanks, I'll check it out.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| If a town wants to mandate skirt lengths and ban booze I have no problem with that. Liberty means you can choose your community's laws, not maximum anarchy for everyone. |
I think most libertarians would agree this is reasonable. But if you also mean they would be banned from wearing what they want or drinking on their own property, then it gets complicated. And of course they should be willing to voice their opinions on the matter publicly regardless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
FLG: thanks, I'll check it out.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| If a town wants to mandate skirt lengths and ban booze I have no problem with that. Liberty means you can choose your community's laws, not maximum anarchy for everyone. |
I think most libertarians would agree this is reasonable. But if you also mean they would be banned from wearing what they want or drinking on their own property, then it gets complicated. And of course they should be willing to voice their opinions on the matter publicly regardless. |
I don't agree with either.
There's simply no compelling reason to mandate skirt lengths in public meaningfully beyond indecent exposure levels.
As for banning booze in a town/county, yes its constitutional, but its terrible policy. As a practical matter it corrupts law enforcement and often makes them the primary dealer of alcohol.
Libertarianism is not exactly the same as Constitutionalism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 9:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| There's simply no compelling reason to mandate skirt lengths in public meaningfully beyond indecent exposure levels. |
On second thought, I agree. I guess what I meant was that most libertarians would consider communities having indecent exposure laws to be reasonable (instead of just having everyone run around nude anywhere, even with children around). At the same time I also have no problem with nudist communities doing their thing, if that's what they want. But beyond that, people should be allowed to wear whatever they want. Anything like Burqa bans I'm against.
| Quote: |
| As for banning booze in a town/county, yes its constitutional, but its terrible policy. As a practical matter it corrupts law enforcement and often makes them the primary dealer of alcohol. |
I assumed he just meant banning consumption of alcohol in public places (which I'm not necessarily for, but I could see how some communities would be). If he meant banning it altogether, including sale or even possession, then yeah I'm completely against that.
| Quote: |
| Libertarianism is not exactly the same as Constitutionalism. |
True. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifter2009
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Location: wisconsin
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| There is no "refuting" VistorQ. The guy will go on forever no matter how much evidence is stacked on in front of him. Check out the birther thread for evidence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
