Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Is Noise Aggression?
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Is Noise Aggression? (Read 996 times)
Don_G
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 9158
Location: British Columbia
Joined: May 8th, 2017
Re: Is Noise Aggression?
Reply #100 - Dec 31st, 2017 at 1:50pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Dec 31st, 2017 at 1:44pm:
My self awareness is funny and sad?

You said I'm wrong about NAP, yet you can't come up with a single specific thing you disagreed with even though I keep asking you.

How exactly are we to have a discussion if you can't get more specific than no kaz, that's wrong.  What is wrong?

I said a lot of specifics of what exactly only anarchists support.  You can't find any of them I said that you disagree with while you tell me I'm wrong?

Start by picking one.


Lose your hate kaz, it's destroying you and it's also destroying any hope of a rational arguement coming out of you.

The latter is important to us!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Crystallas
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2119
Location: R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution
Joined: May 4th, 2011
Re: Is Noise Aggression?
Reply #101 - Dec 31st, 2017 at 1:51pm
Print Post  
Crystallas wrote on Dec 31st, 2017 at 12:04pm:
This is funny. #1, you don't understand NAP and apply it based on perception of how it has been explained to you.
#2, you ignore that it is the framework for libertarianism.
#3, you think saying anarchy somehow changes the point if it were applicable. That is ad hominem.
#4 Anarchocapitalism and libertarianism share principles. If you just want to brush off the parts that are shared, you are just fooling yourself and running to libertarians for support when your previous affiliation was hijacked. Understand universes of discourse. The NAP is simply the legal framework supported by most creed of liberty loving people.
#5 Did you seriously call Objectivists anarchy? LOL Why, because they share the laissez faire principle? Anarchists mostly do not support laissez faire, really it's mainly ancaps.


You can keep yapping all you like, and probably will. But as far as showing how much you know about libertarianism(and a whole lot of other terms you like to toss around), it's laughable. You are both wrong and stubborn. Read some books, don't let the ad hominem prevent you from possible learning something.


This is the cycle.

BTW. Ad hominem is when you dismiss information based on a characterization of a person, or based on the person it is coming from.  I would ask for a refund from kaz publishing on that dictionary you bought.

For example, if Rothbard makes a point, whether you want to brush him off based on a label or not, whether that label is applicable or not, does not change his point. If Karl Marx says gravity does exist, only a retard would say, buh buh he's a marxist, and skip the point.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Billie
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 28153
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Is Noise Aggression?
Reply #102 - Dec 31st, 2017 at 1:56pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Dec 31st, 2017 at 10:13am:
You don't know what you're talking about.  You can make up whatever definitions you want, but they are violations of NAP.  NAP is for anarchists.  My point all along.  You're all caught up now Jeff
As we talked about extensively in this forum, the idea that it's wrong to initiate aggression long predates the NAP.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 5533
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Is Noise Aggression?
Reply #103 - Dec 31st, 2017 at 2:00pm
Print Post  
Crystallas wrote on Dec 31st, 2017 at 1:51pm:
This is the cycle.

BTW. Ad hominem is when you dismiss information based on a characterization of a person, or based on the person it is coming from.  I would ask for a refund from kaz publishing on that dictionary you bought

For example, if Rothbard makes a point, whether you want to brush him off based on a label or not, whether that label is applicable or not, does not change his point. If Karl Marx says gravity does exist, only a retard would say, buh buh he's a marxist, and skip the point.


1)  Ad Hominem means attacking the person you are debating, not the authority.  Nothing I say about Rothbard is ad hominem unless he's personally here debating me.

2)  I didn't attack Rothbard.  I'll type this slow for you (see, that was ad hominem).

I'm arguing NAP is believed only by anarchists.  You keep quoting Rothbard in arguing NAP.  I'm pointing out that doesn't contradict me since I'm saying NAP is believed by anarchists and Rothbard is an anarchist.  You didn't get that?  Seriously?

And I gave you another list of things that are NAP that no one believes but anarchists and you still can't pick any of them to defend, sweets.  Pick those and explain how they can be done without violating NAP.  It's impossible
  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Billie
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 28153
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Is Noise Aggression?
Reply #104 - Dec 31st, 2017 at 2:07pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Dec 31st, 2017 at 2:00pm:
I'm arguing NAP is believed only by anarchists. 
And you are wrong. The common law is essentially established on the principle of the NAP, but the common law existed long before the NAP was formulated and one of the salutatory benefits of the common law is to inhibit anarchy.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 5533
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Is Noise Aggression?
Reply #105 - Dec 31st, 2017 at 2:18pm
Print Post  
Billie wrote on Dec 31st, 2017 at 2:07pm:
And you are wrong. The common law is essentially established on the principle of the NAP, but the common law existed long before the NAP was formulated and one of the salutatory benefits of the common law is to inhibit anarchy.


Same as Crystallis, I have listed things over and over.  Pick one and argue specifics, don't make sweeping statements like she is
  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Billie
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 28153
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Is Noise Aggression?
Reply #106 - Dec 31st, 2017 at 2:41pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Dec 31st, 2017 at 2:18pm:
Same as Crystallis, I have listed things over and over.  Pick one and argue specifics, don't make sweeping statements like she is
If your dam breaks and floods my property, ruining my crops, you will be required to compensate me for the damage.
Whether it was that your dam was poorly constructed or poorly maintained, by having it at all, you became responsible for the water it contained and the damage it might cause. Your negligence is a form of aggression.

That's more complex and subtle than if you punch me in the nose, but both are forms of aggression. You can punch me in the nose if I initiate some form of aggression against you, but you must keep things proportionate.

If I punch you in the nose because your dam broke and destroyed my crops, you are still liable for the crop damage, but I will be liable for punching you in the nose.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 5533
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Is Noise Aggression?
Reply #107 - Dec 31st, 2017 at 2:48pm
Print Post  
Billie wrote on Dec 31st, 2017 at 2:41pm:
If your dam breaks and floods my property, ruining my crops, you will be required to compensate me for the damage.
Whether it was that your dam was poorly constructed or poorly maintained, by having it at all, you became responsible for the water it contained and the damage it might cause. Your negligence is a form of aggression


And how are you going to collect under NAP when I say I won't pay?

The NAP answer BTW would be that you need to figure out how to pressure me to pay.  Like convincing everyone in our community that I got a fair hearing and I am guilty but I won't pay you and convince them to shun me.

Of all people, you know how useless shunning anyone is when most of the people in the community are like you.

And that's a small community obviously.  Imagine forcing your neighbor to pay in a big city when you can't use aggression against them or their property to compel them to pay

Billie wrote on Dec 31st, 2017 at 2:41pm:
That's more complex and subtle than if you punch me in the nose, but both are forms of aggression. You can punch me in the nose if I initiate some form of aggression against you, but you must keep things proportionate


You can defend yourself and your property under NAP from direct threats.  I'm not aware of any "proportionate" rule

Billie wrote on Dec 31st, 2017 at 2:41pm:
If I punch you in the nose because your dam broke and destroyed my crops, you are still liable for the crop damage, but I will be liable for punching you in the nose.


When you punched me in the nose, you violated NAP.  It was retaliation, not protection of your property.  You could have punched me in the nose to stop me from blowing up my dam and flooding your property, but you can't come later and do it.  Fail, you violated NAP
  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Billie
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 28153
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Is Noise Aggression?
Reply #108 - Dec 31st, 2017 at 4:21pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Dec 31st, 2017 at 2:48pm:
And how are you going to collect under NAP when I say I won't pay?

Since the theory says you did wrong, you did damage or violated the rights of others, the court will collect for me. Won't that be swell? I won't have to shoot you. That's a much better idea, having courts collect damages for you. It  prevents blood feuds from erupting.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 5533
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Is Noise Aggression?
Reply #109 - Dec 31st, 2017 at 4:40pm
Print Post  
Billie wrote on Dec 31st, 2017 at 4:21pm:
Since the theory says you did wrong, you did damage or violated the rights of others, the court will collect for me


Wrong.  According to NAP, government can't do anything that you can't do.  So they won't collect for you.  BTW, what "court" are you going to use?  Government courts have no ability to compel me to come to court or even recognize its authority.  That's up to you.

You don't believe in NAP, Jeff, not at all.  You just like the way it sounds
  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Is Noise Aggression?
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy