There's an aweful lot of of free expression and anti establishment rhetoric in this thread. I'm afraid I'll have to report you all to my Republican higher ups before things get out of hand.
Soon you'll have the ability to dispatch black-bag squads to the homes of suspected dissenters. So you have that to look forward to, which is nice.
Rearden.... I'm with you... really I am. And I'll be voting this fall for the first time in a while... But... when one considers the gravity and the apparent impossibility of the situation... there is not much more we can do but SHRUG. Who is John Galt?
Thank you... and dead right. If shrugging fails, hunting DEA narcs with a sniper rifle could also make a fine hobby. Keep pushing us further and further back into a corner, and find out if I'm joking...
I completely agree; what the hell is going on - pretty soon you won't be able to log onto the internet altogether anymore because of some new law. I played online poker for a living for 3 years of my life and was very successful and I am outraged by this new legislation. Its not only the poker players from around the US that should be worried, but the common man as well, as more and more freedoms are being taken away day by day.... -TheActionKid
Well it looks like I'll never get another response to the initial question. Having participated in the hijacking of my own thread, I may as well post a serious response now. The fundamental idea behind libertarianism is flawed. People are intelligent animals, but they are still ANIMALS and thus they need rules to guide and protect them (especially the lower class) An example to illustrate my point: You see how people drive nowadays. As imperfect as they are, most are still of the time the conservative rules in place keep them from driving so wild that they kill themselves. A libertarianist set of traffic rules would be so unsafe that people would afraid to drive. Speed limits on the freeway would be set as 100 mph "or less depending on the severity of traffic flow." Stuck at a red light? libertarian rules would allow you the right to run it under the same protocols as a right on a red. And with all this, people won't be as inclined to wear seatbelts because it's no longer required taht they do so. Perhaps those uncomfortable buggers will get so unpopular that car manufacterers stop making them (and airabgs) After all, who's to say that those things saved lives anyways? I'm sure Ford could find that the old nazi government safetey measures actually killed more lives than they saved! (marketing campaign follows) You guys have more faith in man than I do if you don't see any problems with the libertarian policy. But at least there is no worry of being oppressed right?
Why are you presenting irrelevant <b>anti-anarchy</b> arguments to <b>Libertarians</b>? Do you also make anti-segregationist arguments to moderate Republicans? Wrong address, dude.
Time for "Tea Party 2" Unless the public wakes up and takes to the streets now and then we will just get more of the same. Bunch of pansies will never get attention. The middle class was driven forward because of the labor movements of a few decades ago. Today workers let their rights get stomped on and throw out the back door. Today we are seing all the sacrifice and blood, sweat and tears the labor movement suffered to help us all get washed down the sewer. Ask yourself this question. WHY is it that corps are making record profits and the middle class is getting crushed? why are ceo's etc making millions as the workers lose healthcare, pensions etc? Gee, i wonder who is the fool in that picture? Until we raise hell and dance in the streets they will always have us right where they want us. Wise up folks, the old days are gone, we are now a mature country so it is time we changed the rules in our favor. Good Luck
Nothing will stop the process of the 'corporatization' of American politics (whereby the Congress and WHite House do the bidding of big business) until middle class people are standing in soup lines. Only then will people wake up. The sheeple that is. And then it will be too late.
I'm Pulling this bit from wikipedia: If ever there was a party that could easily be confused with anarchism, it's the Libertarian party. If you disagree, please point out how I misrepresented libertarianism in my traffic law example.