Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
Libertarian's Forum
 
 
Home Help Search Login Register

Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.

Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
Joe Stack through the eyes of a libertarian. (Read 234 times)
Angus
Libertarian Full Member
***
Offline


Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 161
St. Louis, Mo
Joe Stack through the eyes of a libertarian.
Feb 19th, 2010 at 12:40pm
 
In my eyes, Joe Stacks is simply a domestic terrorist. Today, I have heard some people sympathizing with him despite the fact that his actions created harm upon others.

After examining his rant [not even a manifesto] I was left totally baffled as some parts mentioned were anti-tax, while other parts were supporting communism.

Obviously I do not know heads from tails about Mr Stack's ideology since his thoroughly prepared statement was all over the place with anti-IRS rants [conservative]  while also railing against businesses for collecting bonuses and bailouts [liberal/progressive].

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2010/0218102stack1.html

Stacks comes across as an angry man because of his business and marital failures, while ideology is taking a backseat as opposed to Timothy McVeigh, a "libertarian", who  wore a t-shirt with a Thomas Jefferson quote.

http://www.bluehampshire.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=8027

The connection between these two terrorists is that they both reeked havoc upon people's freedoms. It does not matter if you disagree with McVeigh's and Stack's actions. By taking away life, you go against the spirit of liberty as you take away freedom when a life is physically taken away.


An interesting take by Chuck Baldwin

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/chuckwagon.php
Back to top
 

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Ben Franklin

http://freespchdre.blogspot.com/
WWW http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=name&id= atm1963  
IP Logged
 
BlackSand
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Offline


Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 367
Arizona
Re: Joe Stack through the eyes of a libertarian.
Reply #1 - Feb 19th, 2010 at 7:19pm
 
He was most likely communist in the way Marx himself described it.


Some time after socialism is established society leaps forward, and everyone has plenty of personal possessions, but no one can exploit another person for private gain through the ownership of vast monopolies, and so forth. Classes are thus abolished, and class society ended. Communism will have spread across the world and be worldwide. Eventually the state will "wither away" and become obsolete, as people administer their own lives without the need for governments or laws. Thus, stateless communism or pure communism, which may be considered the Sixth Stage, is established, which has the following features:
Statelessness: there are no governments, laws, or nations any more.
Classlessness: all social classes disappear, everyone works for everyone else.
Propertylessness: there is no money or private property, all goods are free to be consumed by anyone that needs them.
In The Communist Manifesto Marx describes communism as:
“      When, in the course of development, class distinctions have disappeared, and all production has been concentrated in the hands of a vast association of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organized power of one class for oppressing another. If the proletariat during its contest with the bourgeoisie is compelled, by the force of circumstances, to organize itself as a class; if, by means of a revolution, it makes itself the ruling class, and, as such, sweeps away by force the old conditions of production, then it will, along with these conditions, have swept away the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms and of classes generally, and will thereby have abolished its own supremacy as a class. In place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all. [5]      ”
Few applications of historical materialism, the philosophical system used by Marxism to explain the past progressions of human society and predict the nature of communism, account for a stage beyond communism, but Marx suggests that what has ended is only the "prehistory" [8] of human society; now, for the first time, humankind will be no longer be at the mercy of productive forces (e.g. the free market) which act independently of their control. Instead human beings can plan for the needs of society and the preservation of planet, inclusively, democratically, by the vast majority, who now own and control the means of production collectively. By implication, then, only now does the real history of human society begin.

-Wikipedia. Smiley


"True communism" is basically an ideal anarchist society.


But Slack was a "nut job". Maybe his reasons for action were just. But his actions clearly label him as someone who was "off his rocker."

Same with Mcveigh. I dont know his reasons. And maybe they were legitimate. But his actions cannot be justified.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Angus
Libertarian Full Member
***
Offline


Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 161
St. Louis, Mo
Re: Joe Stack through the eyes of a libertarian.
Reply #2 - Feb 19th, 2010 at 7:37pm
 
BlackSand wrote on Feb 19th, 2010 at 7:19pm:
He was most likely communist in the way Marx himself described it.


Some time after socialism is established society leaps forward, and everyone has plenty of personal possessions, but no one can exploit another person for private gain through the ownership of vast monopolies, and so forth. Classes are thus abolished, and class society ended. Communism will have spread across the world and be worldwide. Eventually the state will "wither away" and become obsolete, as people administer their own lives without the need for governments or laws. Thus, stateless communism or pure communism, which may be considered the Sixth Stage, is established, which has the following features:
Statelessness: there are no governments, laws, or nations any more.
Classlessness: all social classes disappear, everyone works for everyone else.
Propertylessness: there is no money or private property, all goods are free to be consumed by anyone that needs them.
In The Communist Manifesto Marx describes communism as:
“      When, in the course of development, class distinctions have disappeared, and all production has been concentrated in the hands of a vast association of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organized power of one class for oppressing another. If the proletariat during its contest with the bourgeoisie is compelled, by the force of circumstances, to organize itself as a class; if, by means of a revolution, it makes itself the ruling class, and, as such, sweeps away by force the old conditions of production, then it will, along with these conditions, have swept away the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms and of classes generally, and will thereby have abolished its own supremacy as a class. In place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all. [5]      ”
Few applications of historical materialism, the philosophical system used by Marxism to explain the past progressions of human society and predict the nature of communism, account for a stage beyond communism, but Marx suggests that what has ended is only the "prehistory" [8] of human society; now, for the first time, humankind will be no longer be at the mercy of productive forces (e.g. the free market) which act independently of their control. Instead human beings can plan for the needs of society and the preservation of planet, inclusively, democratically, by the vast majority, who now own and control the means of production collectively. By implication, then, only now does the real history of human society begin.

-Wikipedia. Smiley


"True communism" is basically an ideal anarchist society.


But Slack was a "nut job". Maybe his reasons for action were just. But his actions clearly label him as someone who was "off his rocker."

Same with McVeigh. I dont know his reasons. And maybe they were legitimate. But his actions cannot be justified.


McVeigh's action was revenge on the first anniversary of the ending of the Waco standoff.
Back to top
 

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Ben Franklin

http://freespchdre.blogspot.com/
WWW http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=name&id= atm1963  
IP Logged
 
meric
Libertarian Full Member
***
Offline


Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 96
Re: Joe Stack through the eyes of a libertarian.
Reply #3 - Feb 20th, 2010 at 7:45am
 
He was angry that the government bailed out the well-off using his taxes, then he sees the heads of corporations getting such big bonuses.

He thought that these people got the best benefits of socialism and capitalism at the same time, and he himself for the worst of each.

I think... Anyway, he's an example of someone who was, well insane, after repeating the same thought processes again and again. (I still think the red tape did it)
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Richard Enderle
Libertarian Full Member
***
Offline


Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 50
Re: Joe Stack through the eyes of a libertarian.
Reply #4 - Feb 20th, 2010 at 3:28pm
 
The problem with our corporations today is not that we don't have enough government and welfare, but that we have too much of it.

Corporations are the biggest welfare queens, and that's why they continue to walk all over the public. But as much blame they deserve, we should probably blame the same people, who although hate the corporations, feel the need to bail them out because they're "too big to fail". Guess what? If everyone decides that they're "too big to fail", then it's true. They will be too big to fail, and they'll take full advantage of that, regardless of how much corporate bailouts and welfare you give them.

Reagan did it, Bush did it, Obama did it, everyone does it.

And of course, we somehow pretend that it's capitalism that allows the "gap between the rich and the poor" to take place.

As for the guy that did this: he was an angry person. He was delusional, he was certainly not "poor" nor locked out of jobs. He certainly can't be described as a libertarian or anti-establishment, seeing as how he portrays communism in a much better light than capitalism.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
meric
Libertarian Full Member
***
Offline


Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 96
Re: Joe Stack through the eyes of a libertarian.
Reply #5 - Feb 21st, 2010 at 1:44am
 
Richard Enderle wrote on Feb 20th, 2010 at 3:28pm:
He certainly can't be described as a libertarian or anti-establishment, seeing as how he portrays communism in a much better light than capitalism.

But he was complaining about RED TAPE!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Angus
Libertarian Full Member
***
Offline


Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 161
St. Louis, Mo
Re: Joe Stack through the eyes of a libertarian.
Reply #6 - Feb 21st, 2010 at 4:11pm
 
meric wrote on Feb 21st, 2010 at 1:44am:
But he was complaining about RED TAPE!


I think he was so mad that being angry was his ideology. His statement was full of a lot of anger, while also appearing to be directionless. Ultimately, Stack chose not take personal responsibility and had the "blame it on everybody else" mentality. People like this does not help their cause, no matter what their ideology is.
Back to top
 

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Ben Franklin

http://freespchdre.blogspot.com/
WWW http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=name&id= atm1963  
IP Logged
 
BlackSand
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Offline


Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 367
Arizona
Re: Joe Stack through the eyes of a libertarian.
Reply #7 - Feb 21st, 2010 at 7:28pm
 
Like I said, he was most likely communist as Marx described it. No government what so ever.

Some of the anarchist in the party might even agree with him on a lot of things.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Richard Enderle
Libertarian Full Member
***
Offline


Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 50
Re: Joe Stack through the eyes of a libertarian.
Reply #8 - Feb 21st, 2010 at 10:41pm
 
It was mostly this part:

"In communism, to each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

In capitalism, to each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed."

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Angus
Libertarian Full Member
***
Offline


Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 161
St. Louis, Mo
Re: Joe Stack through the eyes of a libertarian.
Reply #9 - Feb 22nd, 2010 at 10:41pm
 
Richard Enderle wrote on Feb 21st, 2010 at 10:41pm:
It was mostly this part:

"In communism, to each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

In capitalism, to each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed."



I do think he was mostly influenced by communism, but not fully.
Back to top
 

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Ben Franklin

http://freespchdre.blogspot.com/
WWW http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=name&id= atm1963  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print

Twitter LF
Libertarians Chat Room
Mises.org
Right to work Foundation
Walter E. Williams
Libertarian Party
Wikipedia Libertarian
Libertarian News




Libertarian's Forum



Libertarian's Forum Information, Privacy Policy