COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events - Page 1361

starting strength gym
Page 1361 of 1592 FirstFirst ... 36186112611311135113591360136113621363137114111461 ... LastLast
Results 13,601 to 13,610 of 15916

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #13601
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    276

    Default

    • starting strength seminar october 2021
    • starting strength seminar december 2021
    • starting strength seminar february 2022
    Quote Originally Posted by George Christiansen View Post
    Again: How does the free market fix this?

    This yet another way that Marxists and Libertarians are the opposite sides of the same coin: Nothing they claim works will work, if at all, until you reset to year zero again.

    The libertarian's versions of the free market works fine in both pre 1800's America and Zombie Apocalypse America. Nowhere else. Same with the Marxists.

    But I can at least respect that the Marxists actually do something (pretty successfully thus far too) to achieve their ends. Not that the libertarians haven't help though with open borders and open markets, just to name a couple.
    I still admire lots about libertarianism, such as sound money, non-interventionism, Propertarian law, etc. As a patriarchal nationalist-y type, I would actually love to live in Ancapistan. Then I realised the problem - libertarianism itself will not get you to Ancapistan. This is the reality.

    There is no free market solution to the current problem. We cannot just "make our own CNN". We've been generally correct about the pandemic in this thread, and we could publish an irrefutable paper about masks being a lie - and guess what? Nobody would give a fuck because we have zero institutional power.

    In my libertarian phase, I would fantasize about abolishing these corrupt, harmful institutions and then we'd be free. If only we could abolish the IRS, the CIA, FBI, CNN, etc. there would be peace. The vast majority of the herd (I'd say 80%+) cannot exist outside of the institutions, and the protection and fear of reprisal that they offer. The problem, then, is these institutions don't just go away if you legislate them away, or wish them away or just stop using them. They are like a gun.

    Libertarians know an armed society is a polite society, but conversely a lot of libertarians don't understand that institutional power is a lot like a gun which if they themselves don't use, someone else will pick it up and use it against them - to control the normies into their thinking, and mould culture and society. You have to pick up these weapons and use them.

    The left only has one principle - power. They have no principles about lying, or non-aggression, or sound money. There's a problem when our side is generally uninterested in institutional power, or when it has some institutional power - it chooses not use it to its fullest to absolutely crush its enemies. Because, principles. The left has no problem with using institutional power to crush its enemies, and that's why its dominating.

    While the centre-right as been doing principles ("Hey, if they're not harming ME they can do what they want..."), the left has been busily (and peacefully) working away, creating peaceful little news organisations such as CNN... a peaceful little advocacy group... a peaceful NGO... peacefully importing 10 million refugees... and before you know it, they've held YOU to YOUR principles and not operated by them themselves. They have lied. They have obfuscated. And then before you know it - BOOM. They've taken over, and the conservative and libertarian right has absolutely no idea how to deal with them. Apart from moving out to the sticks, going off-grid and commenting about the hypocrisy of it all.

    While the left continues to import immigrants who overwhelmingly vote left, both the conservative centre-right and libertarian right, and their autistic adherence to their principles, only leads the nation further away their own ideals, and is ultimately speeding up its demise.

    George, one thing I've realised when talking to libertarians is that, while some aspects might madden you (and you'll have more luck red-pilling a standard college leftist than a die-hard free-market zealot), you should keep in mind they are adjacent allies. We both hate what the current system of government is doing - and realise 90% of their actions are actively harming the people. We both basically just want law and order. Talk to them and encourage them to strengthen their arguments - don't burn these bridges.

  2. #13602
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    South of France
    Posts
    2,792

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by George Christiansen View Post

    We have them NOW and there is nothing to demonstrate that the free market can remedy it. It never has before.
    This. So much this. A hundred times this.

    The answer to Rip's question is 'none', but not in the sense he thinks. I think (and I might be mistaken) Rip means' complicity' in the sense of 'rules that favour/help'. The implication being that in absence of any State intervention, or of a State at all, those rules would not be there, and a monopoly would not arise.
    The problem with this view is that a total absence of rules is in itself a way to favour and be complicit in the thriving of particular groups/sectors of society.

    To give an example, removing all rules that limit the free circulation of capital across national boundaries is not a neutral decision; it favours Capital, which is mobile by nature, to the detriment of Labour, which is far less mobile by definition. It pits workers across nations against each other, and forces nations in a race to the bottom to offer the best conditions (i.e., the worst working and social environment) for foreign investments.

    Doing away with rules, or even with the State altogether, is not a way to level the playing field and leave the best win (whatever that means); it's a way to orient and steer the result of social conflict in a very precise direction.

    Rip is right when it says that the current situation is the result of the State being captured by some specific groups of interests, and is used by them to steer away from an ideal 'free market' situation. His solution is to do away with the State, and restore the supposedly natural state of markets.
    Other people, a minority around here, would prefer instead to use the State to make sure that no such powerful group arises in the first place (if anything is too big to fail, it should not exist at all).

    IPB

  3. #13603
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,201

    Default

    A better question is, can someone provide an example of an advanced, long lived civilization that was libertarian? Of course there are no examples of pristine monopolies because there are no recent examples of such entities existing outside of government influence. If a profitable monopoly were to form outside of government influence, it just becomes a government. That's how civilizations are born. Tribes/clans are born when the only potential monopoly found to exploit is violence.

    I was an anarcho-capatilist during my twenties and early thirties. It was intellectually stimulating, but really it's mostly just mental masturbation. The biggest problem is the poison pill of libertarian incrementalism. I would not have steered as hard as I did into anti-libertarianism if it weren't for the absolutely inept practical plans of libertarians. One of the dumbest things they do (or most subversive things, depending on the "libertarian") is argue for corporate freedoms, while allowing the same corporations to remain as quasi-government entities propped up by the state. How about you get a divorce first, assholes? There are many examples of this asymmetry in practical libertarianism. A truly libertarian government is like a flying island. If you try to create it by throwing rocks at the sky, they're just going to fall back down and hit you in the head.

    Now, you can have culturally freedom-minded people who will maintain a smaller government, but this is so rare throughout the world that it's just absurd to think we can open up our borders and magically maintain one through the power of FACTS and LOGIC. You want the closest thing to libertarian government you can get? Put as many anglos steeped in common law and willing to maintain a patriarchy in the same place as you can. That might do the trick, at least until you allow it to be diluted and subverted by foreign tribes and cultures. Babel can never have a libertarian government.

  4. #13604
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    46,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IlPrincipeBrutto View Post
    Rip is right when it says that the current situation is the result of the State being captured by some specific groups of interests, and is used by them to steer away from an ideal 'free market' situation. His solution is to do away with the State, and restore the supposedly natural state of markets.
    My statement is that monopolies are creatures of the state. The state cannot be eliminated, because it is necessary for the performance of many functions that the market cannot perform. If anything, my point is that we cannot use the state for anything -- the state uses us. We are long past the point where Amazon is our biggest problem. Ask the poor bastards rotting in the DC jail about this. Amazon doesn't have guns and dungeons. The media now works for the state, and reinforces everything the state does. Look at this disgusting display of cockswallowing:

    Biden administration pushes plan to combat domestic terror

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Biden administration says it will enhance its analysis of threats from domestic terrorists, including the sharing of intelligence within law enforcement agencies, and will work with tech companies to eliminate terrorist content online as part of a nationwide strategy to combat domestic terrorism.

    The National Security Council on Tuesday released the strategy plan, which comes more than six months after a mob of insurgents loyal to President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol as Congress was voting to certify Joe Biden’s presidential win.

    “Domestic terrorism — driven by hate, bigotry, and other forms of extremism — is a stain on the soul of America,” Biden, who's traveling in Europe, said in a statement. “It goes against everything our country strives for and it poses a direct challenge to our national security, democracy, and unity."

    A report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence found that domestic violent extremists posed an increased threat in 2021, with white supremacist groups and anti-government militias posing the highest risk, officials said.
    Yes, you have to have The State. And when you get enough of it, you'll blame the market for the problems.

  5. #13605
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Garage of GainzZz
    Posts
    2,608

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Jackson View Post
    I still admire lots about libertarianism, such as sound money, non-interventionism, Propertarian law, etc. As a patriarchal nationalist-y type, I would actually love to live in Ancapistan. Then I realised the problem - libertarianism itself will not get you to Ancapistan. This is the reality.

    There is no free market solution to the current problem. We cannot just "make our own CNN". We've been generally correct about the pandemic in this thread, and we could publish an irrefutable paper about masks being a lie - and guess what? Nobody would give a fuck because we have zero institutional power.

    In my libertarian phase, I would fantasize about abolishing these corrupt, harmful institutions and then we'd be free. If only we could abolish the IRS, the CIA, FBI, CNN, etc. there would be peace. The vast majority of the herd (I'd say 80%+) cannot exist outside of the institutions, and the protection and fear of reprisal that they offer. The problem, then, is these institutions don't just go away if you legislate them away, or wish them away or just stop using them. They are like a gun.

    Libertarians know an armed society is a polite society, but conversely a lot of libertarians don't understand that institutional power is a lot like a gun which if they themselves don't use, someone else will pick it up and use it against them - to control the normies into their thinking, and mould culture and society. You have to pick up these weapons and use them.

    The left only has one principle - power. They have no principles about lying, or non-aggression, or sound money. There's a problem when our side is generally uninterested in institutional power, or when it has some institutional power - it chooses not use it to its fullest to absolutely crush its enemies. Because, principles. The left has no problem with using institutional power to crush its enemies, and that's why its dominating.

    While the centre-right as been doing principles ("Hey, if they're not harming ME they can do what they want..."), the left has been busily (and peacefully) working away, creating peaceful little news organisations such as CNN... a peaceful little advocacy group... a peaceful NGO... peacefully importing 10 million refugees... and before you know it, they've held YOU to YOUR principles and not operated by them themselves. They have lied. They have obfuscated. And then before you know it - BOOM. They've taken over, and the conservative and libertarian right has absolutely no idea how to deal with them. Apart from moving out to the sticks, going off-grid and commenting about the hypocrisy of it all.

    While the left continues to import immigrants who overwhelmingly vote left, both the conservative centre-right and libertarian right, and their autistic adherence to their principles, only leads the nation further away their own ideals, and is ultimately speeding up its demise.

    George, one thing I've realised when talking to libertarians is that, while some aspects might madden you (and you'll have more luck red-pilling a standard college leftist than a die-hard free-market zealot), you should keep in mind they are adjacent allies. We both hate what the current system of government is doing - and realise 90% of their actions are actively harming the people. We both basically just want law and order. Talk to them and encourage them to strengthen their arguments - don't burn these bridges.



  6. #13606
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    46,330

    Default

    Putin Asks Reporter If US 'Assassinated' Ashli Babbitt by Leah Barkoukis

    Maybe Laureys has a point. I mean, who told us that Putin had all these guys assassinated?

  7. #13607
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,201

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Jackson View Post
    George, one thing I've realised when talking to libertarians is that, while some aspects might madden you (and you'll have more luck red-pilling a standard college leftist than a die-hard free-market zealot), you should keep in mind they are adjacent allies. We both hate what the current system of government is doing - and realise 90% of their actions are actively harming the people. We both basically just want law and order. Talk to them and encourage them to strengthen their arguments - don't burn these bridges.
    Almost everyone who became an explicit nationalist during the last few years was previously a libertarian. It's the midwit conservatives who are the most frustrating to deal with. Libertarians are usually smart enough and open enough to eventually face the fact that their train isn't going anywhere.

  8. #13608
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    223

    Default

    It's nice to think that Russia is against all this madness, but they have still been implementing the tyrannical neasures. And it was nice to hear the analysis posted a few weeks ago that perhaps Russia has been doing Lockdown Lite because she knows these measures will hurt the West more than her, and a WEAKER West is good for Russia, because it was the only explanation that made sense to me.

    But then on Saturday, the mayor of Moscow,Sobyanin, announced a whole new round of restrictions, ridiculous enough in their contradictions that anyone who still thinks CoVid is dangerous should have their head checked (children's centers and food courts closed, but Day Care centers and summer camps remained open).

    Happy to list more of the inane restrictions if anyone cares, but here are two more that stand out: sitting on BENCHES in public parks is forbidden, and children's playgrounds have been cordoned off with police tape. Oh, and Ivanovo, hundreds of miles to the East, has decided to set up police checkpoints at it's city limits, to stop and quarantine any non-city-residents trying to enter!

    So I dunno,the lesson of all this might be that urban centers everywhere are always more looney and less liberty-tolerant than the rural areas - mask compliance seems much higher among the Muscovites on the metro and in stores than among those on trains and in stores in the suburbs.

    My summer camp's owner, incredulous that the mayor's decree did not mention summer camps, yet the mayor's office's commentary DID describe them as needing to close, said that the Russians would call this unclear, contradictory edict Schrodinger's Cat:
    The Physics Behind Schrodinger'''s Cat Paradox

    (Apologies for the random link but I refuse to give Wikipedia hits)

    The cat in the box is both dead and alive at the same time.

    Seems to apply to a lot of life lately: the injections don't stop you from getting nor spreading CoVid, yet you must get it if you want to stop putting others at risk of getting CoVid.
    The "reset" has made everything worse, yet people somehow expect that we will Build Back Better. And so on.
    What a clown world!

  9. #13609
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    309

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Putin Asks Reporter If US 'Assassinated' Ashli Babbitt by Leah Barkoukis

    Maybe Laureys has a point. I mean, who told us that Putin had all these guys assassinated?

    Putin puts more light on this than the Republicans do.


    https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status...51628569927680

    https://media.patriots.win/post/Gdz8L39K.jpeg

    https://media.patriots.win/post/84dztwDM.jpeg

  10. #13610
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Posts
    2,349

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by anticausal View Post
    Almost everyone who became an explicit nationalist during the last few years was previously a libertarian.
    Were the previous libertarians that became explicit nationalists explicitly libertarian?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •