| 73Q Music Videos | Vote On Clips | Submit | Login   |

Help keep poeTV running

And please consider not blocking ads here. They help pay for the server. Pennies at a time. Literally.

Comment count is 46
zerobackup - 2010-09-30

No fear-mongering or snap judgements based on little (to no) facts? This isn't politics, buddy.

godot - 2010-09-30

Another boring rant: The major flaw I find with libertarianism is they accept market prices as mostly correct, even when they don't incorporate non-financial costs like environmental externalities. Ie, one social cost of concentrated pork feeding operations is their sewage destroying the environment for neighbors, but this doesn't appear in the prices. Performing the greenhouse gas emissions experiment with the atmosphere is the cost of carbon fuels, but we don't pay for this at the pump. I'd have a lot more respect for them if they just accepted that government taxation of externalities (as with a final use carbon tax, or direct taxes on pollutants) is an excellent way to pay for a limited government, while preserving full cost information in market prices.

Old_Zircon - 2010-09-30

Me too.

StanleyPain - 2010-09-30

I think you're overthinking it. Libertarianism is basically: I want guns, don't want to pay taxes, and would prefer no legal responsibility in most of my actions.

FABIO - 2010-09-30

Even baser: Libertarians are adults still stuck in a teenage mindset.

Old_Zircon - 2010-09-30

Those stars are mostly for the last photo.

fedex - 2010-09-30

yeah, if I get one of those for going Libertarian, sign me up!

John Holmes Motherfucker - 2010-09-30

Speaking of teenage mindset, here's a delicious quote from the Daily Show forums:

"Who would have thought a rally to restore sanity is just Jon Stewart being a tool for the Democratic party to get 18-35 to vote democratic.Why should I bother,they haven't done anything for my age group except make me pay for insurance I can't afford for Parents."

So apparently, this young philosopher hasn't been told that you don't get to change age groups. I'd like to be there when he finds out. (By then, I'll be happy to be ANYWHERE.)

The issue isn't real libertarians. Anyone who REALLY believes in limited government for everybody has my respect, though not my sympathy. The problem is bullshit libertarianism. Verizion gives money to the Cato institute because of their opposition to municpal wifi, and then hires lobbyists to get them subsidies and corporate welfare. Glenn Beck calls himself a libertarian and he's not. That's the issue with libertarianism right now. It's not libertarians. It's republicans calling themselves libertarians.

John Holmes Motherfucker - 2010-09-30

Correction: So apparently, this young philosopher hasn't been told that you have to change age groups.

FABIO - 2010-09-30

Sorry, true libertarians are retarded too.

godot - 2010-09-30

FABIO: non-libertarians spent their children's future income like teenagers with credit cards. 60 trillion (or higher) in debt and unfunded liabilities. By all means have a safety net. But middle-class wealth transfers from tomorrow to today, from the young to the old, are a time bomb.

FABIO - 2010-09-30

What does people hating to pay taxes have to do with libertarians being any less retarded?

badideasinaction - 2010-09-30

Libertarianism and Communism are the two sides of the same coin - both are the perpetual-motion machines of political theory, equally elegant on paper and also equally impossible to maintain in reality.

John Holmes Motherfucker - 2010-09-30

I never said true libertarians weren't retarded, if "retarded" is a snarky way of saying "wrong". But they're not hypocrites, and they're not part of the problem. The problem, the ONE BIG PROBLEM that plagues American politics in the early 21 century, is misinformation. A majority of Republicans believe that Barak Obama is a muslim. That's not a difference of opinion. That's fantasy folklore taking the place of reality. The Daily Show caught Sean Hannity using doctored footage on his program. Hannity's on air "apology" was just another lie. He "apologized" for "using the wrong footage", but what was broadcast was not the wrong event, it was two events edited together to appear as one.

The problem isn't so much that conservatives trust Fox News, it's that they don't trust reality. Stephen Colbert described the attitude perfectly: "Reality has a proven liberal bias."

Why do the same old same old conservatives call themselves libertarians now? I think it's to disassociate themselves from the failure of George Bush, though they won't be shy about defending him when it seems convenient. These guys are all about having it both ways. They'll acknowledge climate change is real (but not man made) and then claim the whole thing is a crock, if there happens to be a big snowstorm. They'll paint themselves as oppressed victims when they've been in control of the government for most of the past 30 years. When you live in your own reality, reality is subject to change.

End of rant.

zompus - 2010-09-30

The other thing that bothers me about Libertarians, IMHO, is that they go on and on about individuals making their own choices and being their own people. That assumes that individuals will have perfect knowledge available to them to make their good decisions.

People are dumb. They can be influenced, lied to, tricked, manipulated, and easily led to make decisions that are against their own interest. Without someone out there making sure that people aren't being deceived, they can't make good decisions and they end up doing dumb things like joining the Tea Party.

FABIO - 2010-09-30

Yeah I was going to bring up the communism/libertarianism comparison.

You know what though? At least Communism's impossible ideal is total equality and sharing for everyone. Libertarianism is a core belief of "fuck the weak" survival of the fittest where subscribers jerk off to Soylent Green.

So yeah, from the bottom of my heart, fuck libertarians. Theirs is an entire movement of people who never moved on from a teenager's understanding of government and authority. Just keep glomming on a mix of objectivist crap and poorly understood theories to keep supporting the belief they never let go of when they were 13.

phalsebob - 2010-10-01

The end result of Libertarianism would be a Wrath of Khan situation where Khan wins and rewrites the rules of the game anyway he wants, rights of the individual be damned.

And yes, a Star Trek metaphor is exactly what is called for, thank you very much.

John Holmes Motherfucker - 2010-09-30

Judging by that cartoon, "the land of the free" means everybody gets a gun but the Arabs.

FABIO - 2010-09-30

By their benchmark, Afghanistan and Somalia are the freest countries on Earth.

Burnov - 2010-09-30

It's not Anarchy for rich people, it's anarchy for the fittest to survive. That sentiment is expressed by people whose fear of poverty begins to eclipse their capacity for rational thought.

And personal accountability -does- factor into the libertarian mindset, but it has a lot more to do with taking care of the ne'er do wells yourself. Or as a community, and honestly, some really fearful weak people can't fathom that. Honestly, I'm pretty disgusted with what people are allowed to get away with in society today, be they common criminals or crooked banksters.

An institutionalized system has an intrinsic dehumanizing effect, and thus "justice" becomes a thing of the past.

In a libertarian society, yeah, people would die a lot more, but it's that whole natural selection thing. Either you learn to play nice, or eventually somebody is going to put you in the ground.

That kind of chaos is preferable to a system built by humans, who are corruptible, that protects those in charge who are as mentioned corruptible, and that's clearly what we have today.

They want big-daddy police state to do that for them instead of sacking up and doing something about it yourself. Some people are just that afraid.

I can't say I believe in pragmatic libertarianism or pragmatic anything'ism. A successful society is a precarious and ever changing balancing act.

FABIO - 2010-09-30

An armed society is a polite society.

These people honestly believe Mad Max Wild West Robber Baron frontier justice is better than what we have now.

John Holmes Motherfucker - 2010-09-30

Usually, when I hear the words "survival of the fittest", its from someone brutal explaining to me why brutality is a good thing.

I too am disgusted by what some people get away with, but I'll put up with it if the alternative is to see innocent people being crushed because they are "weak".

memedumpster - 2010-09-30

I don't think it would take even the stupidest of people long to figure out, once it's actually enforced, that the first target of social darwinism should be the social darwinists.

John Holmes Motherfucker - 2010-09-30

Furthermore, I think it's pretty arguable that "survival of the fittest" has outlived its usefulness to humanity as a species. Once upon a time, it may have been essential for continuation and evolution of the race, But if you look at the world today, a willingness to destroy the earth tends to make a person "fit" to prosper in the marketplace... therefore the "fit" are more of a threat than a boon to the continuation of humanity.

I just came up with this idea, and I'm not sure I believe it, but I think it's defensible.

Burnov - 2010-09-30

Fabio, the under such a system, robber barons wouldn't live long...

FABIO - 2010-09-30

Why wouldn't they? They'd have all hired thugs.

I am glad you have your entire Mad Max gun fantasy all worked out though.

SteamPoweredKleenex - 2010-09-30

Yeah, that whole thing was kind of tried before. It was called "Feudalism."

No thanks.

TeenerTot - 2010-10-01

We don't need guns or violence for "survival of the fittest". We have TFL.

Nyms Lives! - 2010-10-01

"And personal accountability -does- factor into the libertarian mindset, but it has a lot more to do with taking care of the ne'er do wells yourself. Or as a community"

Soooo... you all die out in a year because you're all standing around spending all your time protecting yourself from ne'(er do wells|gros) until you realize your guns don't shoot out crops? Or do some people who are better at growing crops stop doing that and grow crops, while sharing those crops with those who do spend all their time protecting you from internal threats, from external threats, and those who can organize the whole system? And if it's the second, how is it any different then the system we have now with farmers, and police, army, and government (except maybe everyone is grabbing their balls and quoting Galt a lot more)?

Riskbreaker - 2010-09-30

LOL, libertarians.

Burnov - 2010-09-30

John Holmes, we're culturally living beyond our means.

That is to say, we're more "civilized" read: dehumanized than we can really afford to be.

It's veiled slavery, it's just people who have an innate fear of violence would rather be subjugated by somebody who calmly tells them that their servitude is acceptable.

Burnov - 2010-09-30

Furthermore John Holmes, you seem to only conceive social darwinisim within the construct of the society we currently have.

This is what I mean say is, you seem to be hamstrung by the idea that there will always be a political/corporate aristocracy. This ties into my understanding of how we're basically living beyond our means.

And yeah, "survival of the fittest" is obsolete in a "brave new world" scenario in which we've all reliquished self determination for intimidation and creature comforts.

As the decades pass we will be afforded fewer and fewer rights, an informal caste system is emerging, this doesn't spit in the eye of evolution, it's a full fledged cleveland steamer.

Social darwinisim has a dirty name because under the system we have enables and protects sociopaths. End of story.

What I'm saying is, under a less restricted system, you'd see decent people more inclined to take matters into their own hands or find consensus within a community to put a stop to shit before it gets out of control.

This is in essence what I espouse, however in doing so, we have to let go of creature comforts and shoulder the responsibility of not simply shaking our heads whenever egregious crimes against society occur.

Personally, I think we're swirling the drain, it's only but a few hundred years until you have two very different breed of humans.

Those who comprise 99% of the population, and those who were given complete control over it because evolutionary instincts were relinquished in the name of social advancement.

I'm glad I won't live to see it.

snothouse - 2010-09-30


FABIO - 2010-09-30

We have a new mutant strain of Cena Mark here.

Scrotum H. Vainglorious - 2010-09-30

If this isn't a copy&paste job then this guy is 10X smarter and more eloquent than troll fuck Cena Mark.

godot - 2010-09-30

OT, responding to Burnov: I suspect my future peers will be retreating from the rising seas, from the expanding deserts, from the starving global South. Migration and social flux tends to make static wealth abstractions, like those of the late 20th, irrelevant. Sometime in the 22nd century, perhaps wealth will be measured by how many neighbors arrive to support against outsiders.

Miscegenation prevents biological speciation. I'm unaware of eras before the paternity lawsuit where elites refrained from impregnating the more hungry. The infrastructure of civil law accessible to all is perhaps a side-effect of a moment of prosperity.

John Holmes Motherfucker - 2010-10-01

Seriously, what the fuck was that?

It's not that I cannot conceive of libertarianism beyond a corporate aristocracy. I'm sure that it could happen. Perhaps the Vulcans will bring it when they make contact with James Cromwell. Right now, the corporate aristocracy is using a twisted version of libertarianism to push their agenda. This is what's actually happening.

If you'd rather talk science fiction, that's your right. I was talking politics.

Fezren - 2010-09-30

I'm a libertarian. My views are that each person has the right to live his life in any way he chooses so long as he respects the equal rights of others.

I vote every opportunity I can get on the municipal, state, and federal level. Fiscally conservative, socially liberal.

Can we be friends?

Smellvin - 2010-09-30

No, because it's more important to vent my impotent rage on an internet video site against a group that never has and never will have any real political power. Plus, anyone who doesn't agree with me 100% is obviously evil and is my enemy.

Riskbreaker - 2010-09-30

Well, respecting people, and expecting them to respect you is not so much a libertarian thing as just being common sense.

John Holmes Motherfucker - 2010-10-01

I like libertarians, but I don't like this Burnov person. Burnov lost me at "In a libertarian society, yeah, people would die a lot more, but it's that whole natural selection thing. "

And he (maybe she) is not going to get me back after that.

John Holmes Motherfucker - 2010-10-01

"And personal accountability -does- factor into the libertarian mindset, but it has a lot more to do with taking care of the ne'er do wells yourself. Or as a community, and honestly, some really fearful weak people can't fathom that."

Fearful of what? Death, maybe? Pussies.

You make it sound like Nazi eugenics on a budget. I know it's not really like that, but you do make it sound like that.

potvin - 2010-09-30

I've noticed that Libertarians are much broader and diverse group than most of us would think, though the core of them and the truly politically active of them are like the former president the college Libertarians that I knew whose solution to social security was to shoot old people into the sun. So again, as has been stated above several times: adult intellect, 13 year old emotional maturity.

Libertarians usually fall under these heading:
-Atheist Republicans who oppose theocracy and distance themselves from the party for religious reasons or because in general they realize all of the fallacies of the base Republican platform.
-People with a REALLY strong attachment to one form of civil liberty (guns, anti-censorship, drugs) who are willing to work with and tolerate eachother for their pet issue.
-Objectivists and other cultural chauvinists who want to rage against something in a totally safe middle class way.

That being said, if the Libertarian Free State ever got up and running I'd move there on the condition that there are no police patrol cars: you fuckers can have all the guns you want if it means that I do not get pulled for whatever bullshit reason cops see fit. I would honestly rather live around Libertarians than Republicans (I live in a bumfuck part of AZ, just for some context) because at least, most of the time, they are most of the way there and then all you have to do is get them to stop deifying free markets. It would also be funny to see them clamoring for social services or complaining about the corruption of the private legal system or the prevalence of toll booths at random point of the private roads.

I think Libertarians are well intentioned and usually are just people with no place to really fit on the political spectrum, but they just need to lean more towards the principle that things are NOT the government's concern if they do not hurt anybody or if they are by consent, and less towards this all-out religious war on all things government, which is both irrational and does more harm than good.

Riskbreaker - 2010-10-01

Yeah but, they produce creatures like Ron Paul. Where exactly does someone like him fits in the political ecosystem?

TeenerTot - 2010-10-01

What's with the new guys posting doctorates here?

phalsebob - 2010-10-01

They are called "Mocktorates."

Register or login To Post a Comment

Video content copyright the respective clip/station owners please see hosting site for more information.
Privacy Statement