Fav quotes

[Travis Retriever]

http://www.cracked.com/blog/9-words-youre-confusing-with-other-words/

[MrBogosity]

[yt]0PsxvGzwBfA[/yt]

[yt]mOqADhSW2gY[/yt]

I stopped watching when I got to the nudity=porn bogosity. The ONLY reason people are titillated (no pun intended) by that imagery is BECAUSE of the very same prudish attitudes he takes when talking about women going top-free or images in sex education books.

Sorry, but FAIL.

[Travis Retriever]

I stopped watching when I got to the nudity=porn bogosity. The ONLY reason people are titillated (no pun intended) by that imagery is BECAUSE of the very same prudish attitudes he takes when talking about women going top-free or images in sex education books.

Sorry, but FAIL.

Reminds me of this:


(Source:  http://archive.freecapitalists.org/forums/t/8551.aspx?PageIndex=3 )

[ArtemisVale]

Kinda reminds me of this episode

[yt]b9t52svVnvM&list=PLA3wwk2xV3UjCmRWs3JzZcE_K5yWSvHoz[/yt]

[Travis Retriever]

So looking back at old fail quotes, I found this post: https://www.bogosity.tv/forum/index.php?topic=315.msg5354#msg5354 and thought of some other things.

Makes me wonder if he'd say that to the abolitionists.  Or to the folks who via physics showed that yes, heavier than air aircraft is possible?  Kinda comes off as a slight rehashing of Salon's infamous "question that libertarians can't answer."  Yeah, we can.  You just don't like the answer.

But this brings me to le win quote shared by Lord T Hawkeye by barelylegal:  "Some people say what I'm hoping for is no different than the communists hoping for 'true' communism to come about.*  I think the main difference is I'm not asking people to invest in some wealth sharing scheme and eat the losses if it doesn't work out.  I'm just asking people to do what they've always done in their everyday lives, just apply it consistently"
*nevermind the fallacy of acting like two opposite things are the same thing that many pillocks accept as truth.
And yeah, if the person can't understand--even after being repeatedly explained that yes, anarchy is merely the way most of us already live our lives--voluntarily then he isn't in a position to even be debating this.  Just like the person using the original sin argument implicitly admitting they don't know what the fuck they're talking about, or are just special pleading.  And more often than not, both.

And while I'm at it, we *do* have a method.  It's called better parenting and educating/talking to people; And the other basic strategy: The problem right now is conformity is too comfortable.  make it uncomfortable.  Basically, trying to change the Zeitgeist, just like the abolition movement did in the 1800s and even 1700s did.

I'm reminded of this piece of epic win from the Mises Institute:  https://mises.org/daily/5076

Ten Reasons Not to Abolish Slavery

[This article originally appeared in the Freeman, December 2009.]

Slavery existed for thousands of years, in all sorts of societies and all parts of the world. To imagine human social life without it required an extraordinary effort. Yet, from time to time, eccentrics emerged to oppose it, most of them arguing that slavery is a moral monstrosity and therefore people should get rid of it. Such advocates generally elicited reactions ranging from gentle amusement to harsh scorn and even violent assault.

When people bothered to give reasons for opposing the proposed abolition, they advanced various ideas. Here are ten such ideas I have encountered in my reading.

1.  Slavery is natural. People differ, and we must expect that those who are superior in a certain way — for example, in intelligence, morality, knowledge, technological prowess, or capacity for fighting — will make themselves the masters of those who are inferior in this regard. Abraham Lincoln expressed this idea in one of his famous 1858 debates with Senator Stephen Douglas:

There is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.

2.  Slavery has always existed. This reason exemplifies the logical fallacy argumentum ad antiquitatem (the argument to antiquity or tradition). Nevertheless, it often persuaded people, especially those of conservative bent. Even nonconservatives might give it weight on the quasi-Hayekian ground that although we do not understand why a social institution persists, its persistence may nonetheless be well grounded in a logic we have yet to understand.

3.  Every society on earth has slavery. The unspoken corollary is that every society must have slavery. The pervasiveness of an institution seems to many people to constitute compelling proof of its necessity. Perhaps, as one variant maintains, every society has slavery because certain kinds of work are so difficult or degrading that no free person will do them, and therefore unless we have slaves to do these jobs, they will not get done. Someone, as the saying went in the Old South, has to be the mud sill, and free people will not tolerate serving in this capacity.

4.  The slaves are not capable of taking care of themselves. This idea was popular in the United States in the late 18th and early 19th centuries among people, such as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, who regarded slavery as morally reprehensible yet continued to hold slaves and to obtain personal services from them and income from the products these "servants" (as they preferred to call them) were compelled to produce. It would be cruel to set free people who would then, at best, fall into destitution and suffering.

5.  Without masters, the slaves will die off. This idea is the preceding one pushed to its extreme. Even after slavery was abolished in the United States in 1865, many people continued to voice this idea. Northern journalists traveling in the South immediately after the war reported that, indeed, the blacks were in the process of becoming extinct because of their high death rate, low birth rate, and miserable economic condition. Sad but true, some observers declared, the freed people really were too incompetent, lazy, or immoral to behave in ways consistent with their own group survival. (See my 1977 book Competition and Coercion: Blacks in the American Economy, 1865–1914.)

6.  Where the common people are free, they are even worse off than slaves. This argument became popular in the South in the decades before the War between the States. Its leading exponent was the proslavery writer George Fitzhugh, whose book titles speak for themselves: Sociology for the South, or, the Failure of Free Society (1854) and Cannibals All!, or, Slaves Without Masters (1857). Fitzhugh seems to have taken many of his ideas from the reactionary, racist, Scottish writer Thomas Carlyle. The expression "wage slave" still echoes this antebellum outlook. True to his sociological theories, Fitzhugh wanted to extend slavery in the United States to working-class white people, for their own good!

7.  Getting rid of slavery would occasion great bloodshed and other evils. In the United States many people assumed that the slaveholders would never permit the termination of the slave system without an all-out fight to preserve it. Sure enough, when the Confederacy and the Union went to war — set aside that the immediate issue was not the abolition of slavery but the secession of eleven Southern states — great bloodshed and other evils did ensue. These tragic events seemed, in many people's minds, to validate the reason they had given for opposing abolition. (They evidently overlooked that, except in Haiti, slavery was abolished everywhere else in the Western Hemisphere without large-scale violence.)

8.  Without slavery the former slaves would run amuck, stealing, raping, killing, and generally causing mayhem. Preservation of social order therefore rules out the abolition of slavery. Southerners lived in dread of slave uprisings. Northerners in the mid-19th century found the situation in their own region already sufficiently intolerable, owing to the massive influx of drunken, brawling Irishmen into the country in the 1840s and 1850s. Throwing free blacks, whom the Irish generally disliked, into the mix would well-nigh guarantee social chaos.

9.  Trying to get rid of slavery is foolishly utopian and impractical; only a fuzzy-headed dreamer would advance such a cockamamie proposal. Serious people cannot afford to waste their time considering such farfetched ideas.

10.  Forget abolition. A far better plan is to keep the slaves sufficiently well fed, clothed, housed, and occasionally entertained and to take their minds off their exploitation by encouraging them to focus on the better life that awaits them in the hereafter. We cannot expect fairness or justice in this life, but all of us, including the slaves, can aspire to a life of ease and joy in Paradise.

[dallen68]

The problem right now is conformity is too comfortable.  make it uncomfortable

That might be more difficult as it sounds, as we are essentially pack animals, and basically conform=survive. It is easier in actuality to change what the conformity is to, than to change conformity. That's what the abolitionist and civil rights movement actually did (or are doing depending on what specifically is being talked about).

[Travis Retriever]

That might be more difficult as it sounds, as we are essentially pack animals, and basically conform=survive. It is easier in actuality to change what the conformity is to, than to change conformity. That's what the abolitionist and civil rights movement actually did (or are doing depending on what specifically is being talked about).

That's actually what I meant.  Sorry for not being more clear.

[Travis Retriever]

"There was a bill proposed, it was only a page long and all it said was that congress would be subject to every law they passed.
It was shot down immediately.

The only flaw in politics is that it exists."--Lord T Hawkeye

[Skm1091]

"There was a bill proposed, it was only a page long and all it said was that congress would be subject to every law they passed.
It was shot down immediately.

The only flaw in politics is that it exists."--Lord T Hawkeye

I wonder what it will be like if they literally said out loud that they were exempt from the laws against murder? If they did not sugarcoat it with words like war and other bullshit?

[dallen68]

I wonder what it will be like if they literally said out loud that they were exempt from the laws against murder? If they did not sugarcoat it with words like war and other bullshit?

Well, first every fifth grader in the country, realizing that congressional immunity does not apply to class A felonies, will roll on the floor laughing. Then every talk show host will be having "how stupid can they be shows", then a bunch of congressmen will be looking for new jobs.

[Travis Retriever]

"The agnostic/atheist debate is the equivalent of the minarchist/anarchist debate: Self congratulating semantical circle jerks full of obnoxious verbosity that is a complete waste of time." —The Skeptical Libertarian

Reminds me of a vid you posted before about libertarians arguing among each other a bit...too much.  Something like we agree with 99% of things, but spend 99% of our time arguing about the 1% we disagree with.
I thought this might have to do with two things.  1) You don't get into liberty (or atheism/skepticism for that matter. ) without some serious heated arguments.  So the people drawn to it (or at least staying in it) are going to be the ones who love a good argument/debate.  2)  Maybe many of us are aware (if only on the subconscience level) that those 1% of things we do argue about/disagree with really do matter.  I mean, just look at the USA government.  It started so small--like 99% or so free.  Yet the state grew.  And now it's the biggest government in the history of the world.  I think those of us that are that...hair splitty...just don't want to see something like this happen yet again.

Also:  You mean like that comment itself is?  Sounds like he's just butthurt because a bunch of anarcho-capitalists called him out on his bs of minimal force/initiation of force and equivocating it with self defense, much like the socialists conflate state healthcare to ALL healthcare.  Our description/definition IS descriptive.  Name me one government in the history of the world that wasn't a monopoly on the INITIATION of force.  Folks, the USA was the acid test.  You had the smallest, most restricted government ever with a constitution that was CLEAR AS DAY, and bam, in a few hundred years it's now the biggest government in world history. Minarchy is a failure.  Deal with it.  We tried 'holding them in check/accountable.' It was called the Whiskey Rebellion.  Go look up how well that worked out.  Hell, not like Hawkeye didn't address all these excuses.  I mean, really? "You know what the difference between a descriptive and prescriptive claim is right?" Um, yes, I do.  Do you? Bit hypocritical when you yourself are always making moral lambasting in your video comments "LIAR!" "YOU DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT THE POOR/BUSINESS OWNERS OR THEIR CHILDREN!" etc; or about the morality of state violence to tar and feather/call/single out the statists in the comments. I mean, come on!  If you are without belief in the morality/legitimacy/necessity of the state--an institution that is by every DESCRIPTIVE honest definition is just institutionalized initiation of force--you are an anarcho-capitalist.  Otherwise, you're just another statist tool.  Man up and admit it.
Similar logic with the agnostics, really. If believe in the existence of a deity or deities, you are a theist.  If you don't, you are an atheist and seriously need to man up, grow a pair and admit it.  Just like the liberals who defend socialized healthcare to which you said, "Because it IS socialism! I'm getting sick and tired of these people crying like we're name-calling.  If that's what your for, man up and defend socialism." in that one healthcare video of yours.

[nilecroc]

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304387805000738

This is a fail for making me pay 40$ to view 1 fucking article.

[evensgrey]

Well, first every fifth grader in the country, realizing that congressional immunity does not apply to class A felonies, will roll on the floor laughing. Then every talk show host will be having "how stupid can they be shows", then a bunch of congressmen will be looking for new jobs.

To be specific, it does not apply to felonies, any crime of violence, or treason, and it only applies when Congress is sitting anyway.

[Travis Retriever]

"This is what I hate about you new atheists.  You support an authoritarian, paternalistic nanny state and yet you bitch and complain that your rights are being violated because a nativity scene is put up in the city park come Christmas time."--Raymond Dundas being a boss.

This one's for you, BlameThe1st.  And for those of us who've had to deal with the statheists around:

"So yeah, if there's anything *this* little debaucle reminded me is that yes, a nation of fundamentalist Christians (or of any religion) who are all an-caps would be infinitely superior and preferable to an entire nation of boot licking statheists."--Me, referring to the freethoughtblog bullshit a few hours ago.

[Skm1091]

"This is what I hate about you new atheists.  You support an authoritarian, paternalistic nanny state and yet you bitch and complain that your rights are being violated because a nativity scene is put up in the city park come Christmas time."--Raymond Dundas being a boss.

This one's for you, BlameThe1st.  And for those of us who've had to deal with the statheists around:

"So yeah, if there's anything *this* little debaucle reminded me is that yes, a nation of fundamentalist Christians (or of any religion) who are all an-caps would be infinitely superior and preferable to an entire nation of boot licking statheists."--Me, referring to the freethoughtblog bullshit a few hours ago.

That last statement.

My reaction

[yt]DhrZxSoLmgA[/yt]