It seems we don't have any 'real libertarian' (right-wing anarchist) nuts (4th quadrant) nor Stalinist-style 'communists' (2nd quadrant) here. I know people who fit those profiles...

'real libertarian' (right-wing anarchist)

Heh. You make libertarians sound like the Montana Militia, which I don't think is terribly accurate. Funny, though.

Heh. You make libertarians sound like the Montana Militia,

When bonzi says "real" libertarians, I'm going to guess he means nutty folks like the national Libertarian Party (platform here). These purists I call "Big L" Libertarians, not "small l" libertarians like me (you?). I think of myself as not being essentially anti-government, but with libertarian political tendencies toward things like privacy, war on drugs, separation of church/state, morals/victimless crimes, etc. So, "small l".

I know. I just thought his quick definition was funny.

I hate to use the term libertarian to refer to myself, as almost all I've seen are nutty. Plus, that usually means fiscal conservatism, too, at least with your big-L'ers, which I'm not about. But I'm certainly on the bandwagon with the social libertarians (ignoring fiscal policies altogether). Then again, I've got some issues here and there where I differ. (In particular, some libertarians go so far as to ignore the impact of being free to do what you want on other's abilities to do what they want.)

Actually we had a couple in the 4th quadrant: I was at (2.25,-2.36) and Ezekiel slipped in at (0.12,-3.95). Also, FerretBoy was right on the boundary at (2.38,0.05). No Stalinists, though.

--John
right-wing anarchist nut

right-wing anarchist nut

I consider myself libertarian. I'm not nutty.

And when the revolution comes as a result of the government attempting to disarm the public, I'll be on the right side when lead starts flying. Fuck the BATF. The only way they'll get their hands on my "assault rifle" is to pry it from my cold dead hands.

The South will rise again....

National Libertarian Party (platform here)

Some of this is almost touchingly naive. I do agree, of course, with most of personal-liberties stuff...

John, right-wing anarchist nut (2.25,-2.36)

Just a hint of nuttiness...

In reply to:

---

Some of this is almost touchingly naive. I do agree, of course, with most of personal-liberties stuff...

---

Would you care to elaborate? I would love to hear different opinions on libertarians, socialism, etc.

Well, I have to say I agree with a lot of the “problems” they identify. Unfortunately, saying things like “the government has too much control and is horribly inefficient” isn’t enough to make their case. Most people know this already, the problem is it’s hard to trust anyone to fix the problems by putting them in power: “Just put me in charge, then when I’m king I promise I’ll give away my powers so we can all be equal”. Right.

Just call me the Dali Lama's kid brother. -4/-4

Cheers

Some of this is almost touchingly naive.

That's what comes of reading Atlas Shrugged 58 times!!

I do agree, of course, with most of personal-liberties stuff...

Yes....too bad it is mixed up with so much other bad juju!

At least some of the state Libertarian parties (like the one here in Washington State ) disavow elements of the national party platform. Our state party, for example, doesn't say that state universities should be abolished. This is in a state, though, where the 2 big state universities (UW and WSU) are pretty popular, so it is my conclusion that the local Libs don't necessarily disagree with the national platform -- they just know that parts of it are unelectable here.

The purists are nuts, though. Granted, national and international organizations like the CDC and WHO are far from perfect, but if you ever want some cheap entertainment, ask a pure Libertarian at a party how things like SARS and the recent monkey pox outbreak in the US would be handled in their perfectly Rand world.

OK, I'm biased. I used to work for the health department... and, to the extent that we have any democracy left in this country, I believe that public libraries and public education form its foundation.

That's what comes of reading Atlas Shrugged 58 times!!

would you believe I had this exact same thought?

but if you ever want some cheap entertainment, ask a pure Libertarian at a party how things like SARS and the recent monkey pox outbreak in the US would be handled in their perfectly Rand world.

That one is easy. In a Libertarian World, all taxes really are voluntary, so no one pays any. As a result, there are no roads. So when anyone gets ill with SARS or monkeypox, they die without any adequate medical attention because it's 5 days to the nearest hospital. Not that it really matters - since no one paid the taxes, there aren't any teachers. So that also means that no one graduated high school, or got into college. Or med. school. So there aren't any doctors anyway. Since this all means that no one ever gets diagnosed with any of these new-fangled diseases, they obviously don't exist.

Problem solved.

new-fangled diseases, they obviously don't exist

...and even if they did, the lack of a viable transport infrastructure means that nobody ever travels more than 5 miles from home, so the disease would never reach epidemic proportions, because everybody in the first village would die before it could spread.

Did you mean 215/35? If so, that's consistent with here--I computed the angle as 36 degrees.

Actually I just meant 215-135 degrees on a compass (Northwest to Southeast).

would you believe I had this exact same thought?

Why sure! That whole "Great minds" thing.

But if you tell me that you thought *exactly* 58, I may go all cosmic on you and start playing the Unsolved Mysteries theme song on my theramin!

But if you tell me that you thought *exactly* 58

Well, ok you got me. I was thinking more along the lines of 34

Actually I just meant 215-135 degrees on a compass (Northwest to Southeast).

I'm still confused. 215 is roughly southwest. 315-135?

--John

I'm still confused. 215 is roughly southwest. 315-135?

D'OH!

Mindless typo times two! Yeah, 315. Sorry!!

In that case, I really ought to check out the Phatbox BBS. Could be entertaining

--John

Well, it is really naive to think that private ownership of everything automatically solves all problems. For example, they realize that some kind of solidarily financed social security, health care, wellfare, education, environmet protection are necessary, and propose to 'encourage' people to finance them by tax deductions. But, what is that to be deduced from if they want to abolish almost all taxes?

These guys don't think that the statement that private ownership is efficient and rational, while public, cooperative or state ownership or control is automatically wasteful needs any proof. Yet, take the example of French (state-controlled) and British (private) railroads. Or government financed, universaly available health care in Costa Rica which costs ten times less par capita than in US and brings several years longer life expectancy. Or incredible waste going on in various private owned Enrons...

They are also not quite sure what they actually mean by 'private'. For example, in one place they say that private ownership of natural resources and wildlife is the solution to ecological problems, and yet complain that EPA, Forest Service etc cave in under pressure of 'corporate intersets' and allow unsustainable logging etc. Make up your mind, guys!

Also, their belief that US military presence around the world has the purpose of defending somebody other than American interests (whatever 'American' might mean in this context), and that bulk of 'foreign aid' ends up anywhere else than back in US economy is also incredibly detached from reality.

These guys should read some Dickens.

I think that Jim's, Genixia's and Roger's description of LP replacement of CDC and WHO is quite illuminating