Steve G.

Restore04: Private WMD

In Libertarian Party-US on May 20, 2008 at 11:00 pm

(6th in a series of images found in the curbside recycling bin outside Restore04 HQ. Reliable sources claim that this slide will be distributed on the floor in Denver, but are not sure by which side.)

  1. Yes. Let’s trust the government instead of our neighbors.

    Who is dropping that bomb there? My neighbor?

    I think not.

    Having the statist caucus in the LP is as sensible as having the white-power contingent within the NAACP.

  2. Anger is building against this series in the comments; is censorship imminent?

    I have to admit, that statement actually made me roll my eyes; and I also have to say that I’m offended by that completely unnecessary and totally unsubstantiated jab directed both at LFV, and at me since I run the site.

    You asked me if you could put this series here, and I said ‘sure’ without a second thought; I even defended you in another thread. As I said, I trust our contributors to post responsibly, but this completely unsubstantiated suggestion that you may be censored on LFV, when no one has ever been censored here and I certainly have given you no indication that you may be censored, is extremely irresponsible.

  3. I apologize, and deleted that remark. I’ve been censored off of three radical-leaning Libertarian forums so far this year, and it’s usually preceded by the sort of insults and hostility I’m receiving here.

  4. If I ran the site, you would be “censored.”

    There’s no reason to open a libertarian blog to hardcore statist postings mocking libertarian principles.

    ENM owns the blog, and she can carry out the editorial policy she wants. Kicking you off the staff would not be “censorship” but an exercise in quality control.

  5. Brian,
    How can you expect not to get insults and hostility when you are outright insulting a good percentage of the audience? It’s one think to make a point or make a joke but this most recent post is in fact, HARDCORE STATIST. I mean, General Mao comes to mind.

  6. You know, I scoffed at the idea 2 years ago of starting a splinter party (BTP). 2 years later, I’m starting to think that wasn’t a bad idea.

  7. G.E., if being firm in my minarchist disagreement with anarchism makes me a “hardcore statist”, then you just became another poster child for purity/exclusivism disease that afflicts the LP. And if disagreeing with anarchism makes me akin to Mao, then you’re approaching the elite status of the anarchist PlatCom member who compared my positions to those of Pol Pot.

    I’ll make you a deal. You can come to my blog and post 14 graphics mocking the parts of PlatCom’s recommended Platform that violate your zero-government principles.

    Oh wait. There AREN”T any.

  8. brianholz – I’m not an anarchist, and YOU most certainly are NOT a minarchist.

  9. Richard Viguerie IS the anti-Christ, his angel is Bob Barr, and his sword is the Libertarian Party

    http://delawarelibertarian.blogspot.com/2008/05/richard-viguerie-is-anti-christ-his.html

  10. Is Richard Viguerie Trying to Buy the Libertarian Party?

    http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/eg/nolan-vig.html

  11. Richard Viguerie IS the anti-Christ, his angel is Bob Barr, and his sword is the Libertarian Party

    delawarelibertarian.blogspot.com/2008/05/richard-viguerie-is-anti-christ-his.html

  12. I’d challenge you to coherently distinguish your views from anarchism and my views from minarchism, but with PlatCom convening in less than 48 hours I just don’t have the time to, um, gently correct you in the unlikely event that you actually tried to do so.

    But if you write such an analysis and get it posted as a toplevel article here, I’d be happy to make an exception.

  13. Is Richard Viguerie Trying to Buy the Libertarian Party?

    fairuse.100webcustomers.com/eg/nolan-vig.html

  14. Holtz is very, very good at the power of suggestion.

    However, if Holtz thinks that libertarians are buying into his “only government is safe and competent”, then I think Holtz ought get his head examined, and re-learn that libertarians actually DISTRUST THE GOVERNMENT, and not necessarily voluntary/private interests.

    Factor in the “sovereign immunity” of government, and it becomes clear that Holtz’s “suggestions” are ludicrous at best, and slanderous at worst.

  15. brianholtz Says:
    May 21, 2008 at 3:12 am

    G.E., if being firm in my minarchist disagreement with anarchism . . .

    Sure Holtz, if you define minarchism as “minimizing aggression”.

    You have yet to sustantiate how “minimizing aggression” isn’t really maximizing it.

    I maintain that minimum aggression is a myth. Only through a threat of “maximum” aggression can the state do anything it has legally been entitled to do.

    Minarchism, is in my and most (IMHO) other minarchists view would mean upholding the role of government, but without coercing anyone to pay for it. If you wanted to use the government’s services, THAT is how you’d pay for it.

    Read Rand, (very definitely a minarchist!) and others who called for voluntary financing of government.

    I guess Holtz has, in his infinite dementia, I mean wisdom has REDEFINED minarchism to mean minimizing aggression. Impossible to accomplish.

  16. brianholtz Says:
    May 21, 2008 at 3:12 am

    G.E., if being firm in my minarchist disagreement with anarchism . . .

    Sure Holtz, if you define minarchism as “minimizing aggression”.

    You have yet to sustantiate how “minimizing aggression” isn’t really maximizing it.

    I maintain that minimum aggression is a myth. Only through a threat of “maximum” aggression can the state do anything it has legally been entitled to do.

    Minarchism, is in my and most (IMHO) minarchists view would mean upholding the role of government, but without coercing anyone to pay for it. If you wanted to use the government’s services, THAT is how you’d pay for it.

    Read Rand, (very definitely a minarchist!) and others who called for voluntary financing of government.

    I guess Holtz has, in his infinite dementia, I mean wisdom has REDEFINED minarchism to mean minimizing aggression. Impossible to accomplish.

  17. I’m surprised that the terrace-ist responsible for that photo-op couldn’t build a ramp to that warehouse.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: