About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

November 10, 2010 8:24am by David Farrar

Libertarians

You can click on the image for a larger version. Quite clever, even if I don’t agree with it.

Hat Tip: Half Done

Share this:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
WhatsApp
More

Pinterest
Print
Tumblr

Like this:

Like Loading...

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment113

Humour
International Politics
libertarianism

Comments (113)

Login to comment or vote

James

Matt: James: Well, no doubt when he was master of the rest of the world Hitler would have turned on the Swiss. But until then they had their uses, and as you say their military was (and is) very organised.

This has no bearing on the issue of firearms in private ownership.

Aside from the Nazis planned assult against the Swiss being planned from the outset the crux of the whole matter is that the state is our servant…not our master.The state has no rights that we ourselves as individuals do not have.The state is a creation of all of us to administer law and order in the protection of the individual rights of us all in an objective manner.Its not our leader,parent or friend…its our servant.

The only reason and right the state has to bear arms in our defence is that we already had that prior right as individuals…thats what a right is…a moral sanction to freedom of action in a social context.We all entrust the state to administer that right OBJECTIVELY so that we don’t have tit fot tat shootouts and chaos.The referee in a rugby match exists for the same purpose…to enforce the rules BUT NOT to play in the game himself.

If I,you or anyone else whos a non objective threat to peaceful people choose to own a firearm then tough cheese….no one else has the right to stop us doing so.

I can make several points about guns in Switzerland, for your convenience:

* Yes, many households in Switzerland have a gun, issued by the army.
* 300 people per year (according to wikipedia) die because of them.
* There are around 30 murders or attempted murders per year where guns are involved.

That’s 10 people who die, for every murder even *attempted* with a gun. Is it really worth it?

Irrelavent…..same argument applies to cars,planes,plastic buckets etc etc…theres always a cost,the law of cause and effect…but would we ban planes,cars and plastic buckets to prevent the odd death? In the US far more children are injured or killed by mishaps with plastic buckets than guns….if its a cost/benefit question then goodbye buckets before we even look at guns.

So, let’s recap the discussion:

* Given historical evidence, a disarmed populace in no way protects those in power from the displeasure of the people. So the protecting our freedoms from the government is out.

Matt…the pieces I posted above disprove that straight away.If private guns aren’t an issue for tyrants then why the confiscations under penalty of death? The Warsaw Getto uprising shows exactly why private guns are a good thing in the face of tryannical state power…it was the only time the Jews were able to strike back and resist the Nazis….if they had all been as well armed do you think the Holocaust would have hummed along as nicely as it did? Thats why Hitler had them disarmed quick smart…he was brighter than you it seems.

In Switzerland guns kill far more people in a non-criminal context (accidents, suicude etc) than there are even attempted murders with guns. Protecting ourselves from criminals is out.

No…that some people die is as discribed is a shame..but that changes nothing re individual rights and self defence.Many Swiss will die in car crashs too….do we ban cars for Swiss people?

We’re left with the (rather weak) argument that private ownership of guns deters foreign invaders.

Case already proved …see above.

Perhaps to deal with this, we can go back to the Native Americans. Now, as you equated bows with guns in a previous post, perhaps we can consider how they (a society where most men owned a bow) resisted the foreign invader. Here’s a convenient link to get the discussion started, although I think we all know the ending…

The quote about bows was in regard to Indian wisdom accquired from their long history of fighting other tribes.They knew full well that disarmed is one step from dead.To lose to another tribe bought slavery and the oblitaration of their people and culture.Had the Indians possesed better weapons to battle the whites with the story of the US may have been very different.It was the private weapons of the colonialists that defeated the tyrant King George and his stronger British army during the revolution….and from that fact the constitutionally protected right to bear arms is embraced by every real American….and freedom lovers everywhere else.

If you don’t want a gun Matt then don’t have one…thats your right.But Stay out of my,and everyones elses choice to own one if we so want…thats our right.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 11, 2010 1:48pm
James

Mad maggie: Kimble. your response is pathetic. If it were a racehorse, it would have to be shot. ”Smart” in your parlance means “agrees with me”.

Libertarianism panders to selfishness because it makes a god of the individual, rather than seeking a more balanced approach. Under libertarianism people are encouraged to think only of themselves.

And why not? Thats our survival mechanism and indeed our nature.But you confuse self interest with “selfishness’.

Libertarianism makes no headway in the world because people see through it. And, finally, we humans are social animals, who care about oneanother.

Theres no conflict between self interest and caring for others Maggie…in fact its ONLY from ones self interest that one can really care for others. Every act of kindness or charity ever preformed was done in the pursuit of self interested values….from Mother Teresa to giving Xmas presents to people…its all done for the reward of a value to ones self…and theres nothing wrong with that…in fact its unavoidable.

Libertarianism actually already exists and is working all about us…we are soaking in it…for about 90% of our lives…the other 10% is the attack on us from the state and others who want to force us to their way of thinking or living…people like you Maggie.Remove the 10% and we have arrived at the Libertarian utopia….a society of consent…not initiated violence.

Kimble the word ‘dole’ seldom appears in Kiwiblog without the attached ‘bludger’. And the hatred of unions is endemic.

The hatred of forcemongers and parasites is endemic…and so it should be…if you are to have a moral and civily society.Unions have a right to exist…they are after all just people engaged in collective action which is in accord with Capitalism and Libertarianism.Whats wrong is the use of “fpr hire”state force to threaten and bully others into giving into your demands.

Remove the hairy arm of the state from all trading interactions and people would sort issues so out far quicker and with less agro than we currently see.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 11, 2010 2:05pm
Matt

“Aside from the Nazis planned assult against the Swiss being planned from the outset the crux of the whole matter is that the state is our servant…not our master.The state has no rights that we ourselves as individuals do not have.The state is a creation of all of us to administer law and order in the protection of the individual rights of us all in an objective manner.Its not our leader,parent or friend…its our servant.”

Indeed, and some responsibilities, such as security, we delegate to the state.

“The only reason and right the state has to bear arms in our defence is that we already had that prior right as individuals…thats what a right is…a moral sanction to freedom of action in a social context.We all entrust the state to administer that right OBJECTIVELY so that we don’t have tit fot tat shootouts and chaos.The referee in a rugby match exists for the same purpose…to enforce the rules BUT NOT to play in the game himself.”

So if Johnny shoots Tommy with a sawn off shotgun rather than a pistol, does that mean Tommy gets to kick a penalty for 3 points?

“Irrelavent…..same argument applies to cars,planes,plastic buckets etc etc…theres always a cost,the law of cause and effect…but would we ban planes,cars and plastic buckets to prevent the odd death? In the US far more children are injured or killed by mishaps with plastic buckets than guns….if its a cost/benefit question then goodbye buckets before we even look at guns.”

As I said before, it’s not a valid comparison. Cars, planes and plastic buckets all have primary purposes other than for killing people.

“Matt…the pieces I posted above disprove that straight away.If private guns aren’t an issue for tyrants then why the confiscations under penalty of death? The Warsaw Getto uprising shows exactly why private guns are a good thing in the face of tryannical state power…it was the only time the Jews were able to strike back and resist the Nazis….if they had all been as well armed do you think the Holocaust would have hummed along as nicely as it did? Thats why Hitler had them disarmed quick smart…he was brighter than you it seems.”

Tyrants disarm the population (still want to see evidence for this) because they are insecure. We can see from history (French Revolution, Russian Revolution amongst others) that an unarmed mob is perfectly capable of topling a government.

“No…that some people die is as discribed is a shame..but that changes nothing re individual rights and self defence.Many Swiss will die in car crashs too….do we ban cars for Swiss people?”

Already answered this, above.

“The quote about bows was in regard to Indian wisdom accquired from their long history of fighting other tribes.They knew full well that disarmed is one step from dead.To lose to another tribe bought slavery and the oblitaration of their people and culture.”

“Had the Indians possesed better weapons to battle the whites with the story of the US may have been very different.It was the private weapons of the colonialists that defeated the tyrant King George and his stronger British army during the revolution….and from that fact the constitutionally protected right to bear arms is embraced by every real American….and freedom lovers everywhere else.”

The Indian’s bows compared to guns are analogous to weapons most commonly owned by private citizens compared to modern military weapons. They are inferior. As for the American Revolution…American Militias were armed with the same guns as King George’s troops, having used them in the wars with the French. The French, incidentally, who intervened in the war and forced the King to give up fighting the colonists.

“If you don’t want a gun Matt then don’t have one…thats your right.But Stay out of my,and everyones elses choice to own one if we so want…thats our right.”

I also have the right not to be shot while I’m brushing my teeth. Personally, I think this right trumps your right to ride around on a pick-up shooting stuff with your guns.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 11, 2010 2:15pm
Kimble

Maggie thinks that people are simultaneously too smart for libertarianism and too dumb to make some other of the most basic choices in their life (like whether to join a student union).

And notice how he didnt address the fact that he proved my case with his rebuttal? Anyone on the fence on this issue should look at his stupidity and realise which side is likely to be right.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 11, 2010 2:42pm
Kimble

You DO realise that that is exactly what you did, right? You can at least see it now that it has been pointed out to you, right?

No? Thats because you arent very smart.

There are lots of intelligent people who disagree with me for intelligent reasons. Maggie, you are not one of those people.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 11, 2010 2:45pm
Kimble

Let me spell it out for you. I cant literally draw you a picture but lets see if you can follow this.

Me: people like maggie only see their opponents position as black or white

Maggie: No I dont! its your arguments that are black and white

Me: Maggie, you are an idiot

Maggie: that’s selfish!

Maggie is retarded. QED.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 11, 2010 2:56pm
James

Matt: Indeed, and some responsibilities, such as security, we delegate to the state.

Haven’t I been yelling that from the rooftops? But that doesn’t mean we SURRENDER our right to self defence to the state…what we are doing is “leasing it”….but we still retain full ownership.The state is like a sub contractor we hire to work on our behalf…but we don’t make them the boss of us or the delegator of our rights….get it now?

Skipping your silly nonsense that I,ve already dealt with….we get to this..

I also have the right not to be shot while I’m brushing my teeth. Personally, I think this right trumps your right to ride around on a pick-up shooting stuff with your guns.

Theres no rights conflict there.My riding about violates your right to brush in peace not a jot. If Im out on land with the owners consent shooting away with my gun just how is that an issue for you? If I was to start shooting at you house you would have a case…until then you don’t.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 11, 2010 7:42pm
Maggie

Kimble. calling someone retarded reflects far more on you than it does on me. Have you always been a rude, offensive name-caller when roused or does your medication need increasing?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 11, 2010 8:24pm
Falafulu Fisi

Maggie, I think that your opponents on this thread are correct and you’re wrong (in terms of reasoning & philosophies). Going thru your posts here, it is obvious that you’re arguing from a position of ignorant. I’ll give you an example:

Maggie said…
Libertarianism panders to selfishness because it makes a god of the individual, rather than seeking a more balanced approach. Under libertarianism people are encouraged to think only of themselves.

What is wrong with selfishness? What is wrong with individualism? Can you put forward your argument based on solid philosophical grounds? Because if it is not, then you have no foundations to stand on. Your reasoning is susceptible to being attack from wherever the wind is blowing from. James has given you lots of hints and short answers and you still don’t get it. Go on, give some examples (in real life) of why selfishness and being individualism are bad?

You should get this straight, because you seem not to get it. When individuals think for themselves, then there will be emergence properties being observed in societies (as a result) that are not deductible from selfishness of the individuals. Sum of the whole is larger than sum of the parts. Your argument is typical leftist nonsense.

May I recommend you go to Not PC blog and read some of his various summaries on libertarianisms? Here it is:

Cue Card Libertarianism

I can guarantee you that once you read those, you will come back here very well informed (and more smarter), because Mr Peter Creswell will dice you upside down, inside out with philosophies, epistemologies (knowledge/logic/reason), ethics, politics, economics, etc,… (all related to libertarianism). As I said, you will come out better after reading that link above.

Please do some readings on the topic, because I can understand the frustrations of your opponents on this thread. Your reasoning doesn’t stand on any philosophical grounds.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 11, 2010 9:15pm
Jeremy Harris

@Matt, the right to own weapons, and in particular guns, is important for two reasons:

1). Self defence of you and your property
2). As a method of last resort for the people to overthrow an unjust, immoral totalitarian government

The term should also be changed from Libertarian to Small Government Liberal…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 11, 2010 10:21pm
Kimble

Why Jeremy? What is so offensive about liberty? People have sacrificed their lives for it throughout history. Some have murdered and oppressed to take it from others.

Maggie, you still havent admitted that you fucked up badly and proved my point. CAN YOU SEE IT NOW? Huh?

Fisi, anti-libertarians would gain nothing from reading PC’s stuff, because they will never be able to read it with an open mind.

It takes an open mind to find libertarianism, especially in New Zealand.

You are surrounded by lefty thinking your entire life, it naturally becomes the way you see the world. Making it even harder, the lefty way of thinking is naturally immature. Young people think like leftists because they dont know any better; they havent had enough life experience. They can think only at a basic level. See a problem, fix a problem. They can instantly think of A solution, and then feel smart for figuring it out. They fail to question that easy answer, it rarely occurs to them to even try. They think the answer is so obvious, everyone else must be stupid for not seeing it. Or they must be evil and hate poor people etc.

It takes an open mind to break from that way of thinking. It really takes an open mind to realise that the simple answer is not always right, and that it is not always better to “do something” rather than nothing.

The lefties closed mind means they cant accept new ideas. One of the best explanations of the truth of open mindedness can be found here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 12, 2010 1:06am
Kimble

Here is another video from the same creator as the first which explains to some extent why maggie views our arguments as black and white.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OLPL5p0fMg&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL

It comes down to a fear of ambiguity and an incapability to deal with complexity. He sees these arguments as black and white to simply feel comfortable, or rather, the avoid the discomfort of not understanding us. He cant handle our real argument, so he constructs one he can deal with. This is why it always seems as if we are talking at cross purposes with him and people like him. We aren’t arguing the same thing. While we deal with his points, he deals with the points he has invented and ascribed to us.

We simply aren’t dealing with an adult who is capable of critical thinking.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 14, 2010 1:47am
libertariancitizen

…for information on Libertarians at work worldwide, please see: http://www.Libertarian-International.org
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 23, 2010 2:27pm

More comments:

‹
1
2

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« General Debate 10 November 2010

Labour’s smoking gun »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.3K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Top Stories

General Debate 02 November 2024
Guest Post: Thoughts on New Zealands Power Supply
Keep them away from GST
You can target men's issues, without it being at the expense of women
Save Kiwis, not feathers
General Debate 01 November 2024
Bezos on endorsements
Meet a peace activist
ERO on chronically absent students
Has Biden lost Harris the election?

Recent Posts

You can target men’s issues, without it being at the expense of women 2 November 2024
Guest Post: Thoughts on New Zealands Power Supply 2 November 2024
General Debate 02 November 2024 2 November 2024
Keep them away from GST 2 November 2024
Save Kiwis, not feathers 1 November 2024
Bezos on endorsements 1 November 2024
Meet a peace activist 1 November 2024
General Debate 01 November 2024 1 November 2024
ERO on chronically absent students 1 November 2024
No we shouldn’t ban Candace Owens 31 October 2024
Has Biden lost Harris the election? 31 October 2024
C&R win again 31 October 2024

Recent Comments

Keep them away from GST
Fentex
Guest Post: Thoughts on New Zealands Power Supply
Fentex
Keep them away from GST
fredonas
You can target men’s issues, without it being at the expense of women
NZer In Exile
General Debate 02 November 2024
Steve Todd
General Debate 02 November 2024
Ghost
General Debate 02 November 2024
NZer In Exile
You can target men’s issues, without it being at the expense of women
alwyn.a
Keep them away from GST
NZer In Exile
You can target men’s issues, without it being at the expense of women
NZer In Exile
You can target men’s issues, without it being at the expense of women
Rumblestrip
General Debate 02 November 2024
G the giant from Dunedin
You can target men’s issues, without it being at the expense of women
RichardX
General Debate 02 November 2024
G the giant from Dunedin
General Debate 02 November 2024
G the giant from Dunedin

Links

Roger Partridge: Can the Dead Own Property? Our Supreme Court Just Said Yes in Nikora v Kruger
Breaking Views
"The paradox of 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' is that the phrase is used only by the very people who are suffering from it."
Not PC
Word of the day
Hompaddock
Dumpster Fire: White House Press Office Faced Internal Criticism Over the Rewriting of President Biden’s Garbage Comments
Utopia
SEEMS HOW EXPENSIVE DOES NOT MATTER.
No Minister
Some sporting reflections
Point of Order
American Election Predictions: It’s Apocalypse in the USA
The Daily Blog
Open mike 02/11/2024
The Standard
The High Court says "Land Back"
No Right Turn
Why you should reject the term “Christian nationalism”
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
US military-industrial-sports complex.
Kiwipolitico
MILLION DOLLAR REWARD
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
United Rugby Championship Predictions for Week 7
Stats Chat
The Battle for Democracy
NZCPR
Pretty (il)legal
Croaking Cassandra
Where are the food carts?
Offsetting Behaviour
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

© 2003-2024 David Farrar

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d

%d