I was observing yet another strange discussion conducted seriously on serious subjects by serious people.
Serious philosophical arguments based on painfully obvious fallacies:
About two months ago I received a forward from a friend with the subject: “Science needs your voice.”
Of course it was baloney. They didn’t need my voice, they were asking for my money. The implied assumption is that their voice is my voice, and what science needs is their political advocacy. Both assumptions are questionable.
I don’t think they would give a lab-rat’s ass for my voice, but I will make it heard anyway.
Now that we made the point that more democracy is not desirable, let’s look at the opposite suggestion: no democracy at all. Continue reading →
“….the barrier to radical reform of social policy is not the pain it would cause the intended beneficiaries of the present system, but the pain it would cause the donors. The real contest about the direction of social policy is not between the people who want to cut budgets and people who want to help. When reforms finally do occur, they will happen not because stingy people have won, but because generous people have stopped kidding themselves. “
The above quote is the closing sentence of Charles Murray’s “Losing Ground” the book that led me to libertarianism. It is a perfect encapsulation of the content of the book describing the abysmal failure of socialist policies.
I do not like socialists. I have a hard time trying to keep myself from using stronger language to describe my dislike. I feel nothing but contempt for socialist ideas. I consider them dishonest, stupid and immoral. My dislike of actual socialists is in direct proportion with their level of embrace of the socialist ideals; with the degree of their willingness to advocate coercion implementing them.
Now, this may be clear, but it isn’t exactly true. Unfortunately, the majority of my friends, family, neighbours and acquaintances are some sort of socialists. My relationships with them is far from being as simple as I wish it was, but trying to make sense of that should be a different topic.
You can read it here.
When I finished my second post about abortion, I promised two more on the subject.
Libertarians won’t like this, but I must declare that I do not believe in natural rights. There is absolutely nothing “natural” about rights. What we get from nature is an imperative, a drive to survive. Since we are both social and thinking animals, over a very, very long time of social and intellectual evolution we rose above the biological imperative and came to a general agreement on some basic rules to help the survival of our species.
I watched an excellent lecture of Bradley Thompson on Marxism
The lecture provides a clear introduction into the stupid & twisted mind of Karl Marx.
Definitely worth watching.
Since the title is open, it ended up with a surprising number of left leaning viewers. I could not resist commenting on one which got a response from the most prolific commenter on the subject.
Following is the exchange, my response to it and in the end, my thoughts about the lecture itself.
My first letter to ‘A’ received a lengthy response (that I am not able to locate). This was my response to his. I am planning for a long time to write him a third piece which will pull it altogether revealing the nature of absolute truth then tying truth to feelings (absolutely).
